At the time of writing in mid-2021, policy on child genital cutting and modification is inconsistent in the UK, US, and most European states, and there is growing consensus that this inconsistency should end [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]. The question addressed here, is whether Western liberal democracies ought to discourage, if not legally prohibit, all forms of medically unnecessary child genital cutting and modification, or permit some relatively minor forms. Given the core political values of Western liberal democracies, including a commitment to human rights, this piece takes a liberal normative approach and argues that individual rights to bodily – and especially genital – integrity should take priority over group rights if they come into conflict.

The position I advocate is fairly simple: children should be protected from medically unnecessary genital cutting and/or modification until they are adults; once they become adults, they should be permitted to have their genitalia modified should they so choose.

Duivenbode argues that female and male child prepuce removal should be permitted in liberal democracies within an account of value pluralism whereby groups should be free to practise traditions that cohere with their internal value structures.