Crisis or Opportunity?
Time will tell how human rights and our legal arguments against circumcision will be affected by the UK’s Brexit plans. Our ethical argument for protecting children is currently justified by The Human Rights Act (1998):
Article 5: Right to liberty and security
The right to make our own choices about our own body is a central to our arguments. This decision is irreversible, so the decision should always lie with the end user.
Men who have suffered psychological after-effects from neonatal and childhood circumcisions often regret losing their own right to choose for themselves.
Article 9: Freedom of thought, belief and religion
A forced identity marker on a child is the antithesis of religious freedom and belief. The desires of the child may not be the same as the beliefs of the parent, therefore it is the individual which must make the decision. It is up to each of us to decide whether or not we identify with a particular religion at a responsible age.
Circumcision: Consent and Autonomy
–
Human rights are there to protect the rights of the individual in mind. Rights for parents to choose irreversible decisions that may cause harm are not the purpose of this act. As one Jewish man expressed in an open letter to his Mohel:
“The Jewish cultural practices I’ve chosen to keep remind me of the goodness and greatness that comes from some aspects of Judaism. The physical modification I cannot change reminds me of all of the bad that helped lead me to reject it as a whole.”
-Shea Levy (read the full article written by Beyond The Bris)
Repeal or Replace?
The desire to repeal the Human Rights Act is strong within parliament. Many Brexiteers have already said that they will be replacing the act with a “British Bill of Rights”. Discussion surrounding the content of this document has been left out of the public eye. We hope that the essence of liberty and autonomy will be preserved, but this remains to be seen and it is far from certain.
“Human Rights Act not safe after Brexit”
We agree with The Human Rights Act in principle, but it is also important to remember that it has often been ignored. When it comes to the rights of children and the issue of circumcision there is a lack of implementation.
Will this provide opportunity to lobby government for progressive recognition for children’s rights? We hope it will enshrine their autonomy and liberty over decisions affecting their body, identity, and sexual development, but there is still uncertainty around this subject with little concrete reassurance or solid commitment from the UK Government.
For those who would use the rights of parents as justification for circumcision rituals, we would remind them of article 14 in the UN rights of the child.
The UN Act For the Rights of the Child
Article 14
- States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
- States Parties shall respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child.
- Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
This UN act protects girls from FGM. All we advocate is the fair treatment and protections granted to boys too. In the name of equality, fairness, liberty and human rights we hope that the decisions made by the UK Government will reflect these virtues.
With the uncertainty surrounding human rights and Brexit, it is anyone’s guess where the issue of male circumcision will land.
Be the first to comment