Male Infant Ritual Genital Mutilation Soft Name 'Circumcision' Violates Physician's Fiduciary Duty To The Child

Bonobo3D: The physician-patient relationship is based on trust. Accordingly, courts impose upon physicians a strict fiduciary duty, the highest duty in the law, to act in the best interest of pediatric patients in matters involving their health, keeping their welfare paramount. It is suggested that circumcision violates the physicians' fiduciary duty to boys and the men they become. First, boys are usually circumcised because their parents have a religious, cultural, or personal preference for the circumcised penis. To circumcise for such reasons is to make the interests of the parents paramount, and to ignore the health of boys and men. The physicians duty is to render competent care to children based on their medical needs, independent of their parent's desires, and also to obtain the consent of children and adolescents whenever possible.
In that regard, second, circumcision is unnecessary, irreversible surgery, with no meaningful potential medical benefits in childhood. If men want to be circumcised, they can choose it for themselves, although they rarely do in the Western world. It is suggested that it is a breach of fiduciary duty or trust for physicians to circumcise boy when it is unnecessary, irreversible surgery that men in the Western world rarely choose for themselves. Peter W. Adler holds a BA degree in philosophy from Dartmouth College; a MA degree in philosophy from Cambridge University with Honours; and a JD from University of Virgina School of law, where he was senior editor of the Virginia Law Review. He is a full time Adjunct Professor of International Law and International Business at the University of Massachusetts, Wellesley Massachusetts, USA. Recorded May 5th, 2018 in San Francisco at the 15th International Symposium on Genital Autonomy and Children's Rights,