Meanwhile, considering the absence of demonstrated medical benefits,
and where such practices lack any therapeutic justification and are thus
neither necessary nor urgent, they should be postponed at least until the
children could be personally involved, express their views, and finally grant
their informed consent. Such postponement would not be only in line with
art. 12 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child as it would allow to
the involved children to express their views but even the approach with
the minimum of risk, in that it avoids both the risks of the surgery and
that a third party limits the range of choices available to them when they
become adults through an irreversible intervention in order to secure an
upbringing in accordance with certain religious, cultural, or social beliefs.
The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has indeed already affirmed
that ‘cultural identity cannot excuse or justify the perpetuation by decision-
makers and authorities of traditions and cultural values that deny the child
or children the rights guaranteed by the Convention’ (Committee on the
Rights of the Children 2013, 14).It is indeed of great importance to protect the child’s right to an open
future by sheltering those ‘rights in trust’ that, as Feinberg stated, should be
saved for when the child will reach adulthood (Feinberg 1992).
Ino Kehrer: Cuts into Children’s Future: a Comparative Analysis between FGM, Male Circumcision and Intersex Genital Surgeries
Jetzt mitmachen!
Sie haben noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registrieren Sie sich kostenlos und nehmen Sie an unserer Community teil!