1
|
Earp BD, Bruce L. Medical necessity and consent for intimate procedures. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2023; 49:591-593. [PMID: 37648289 DOI: 10.1136/jme-2023-109465] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2023] [Accepted: 07/31/2023] [Indexed: 09/01/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Brian D Earp
- Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Oxford, UK
| | - Lori Bruce
- Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Earp BD, Abdulcadir J, Liao LM. Child genital cutting and surgery across cultures, sex, and gender. Part 2: assessing consent and medical necessity in "endosex" modifications. Int J Impot Res 2023; 35:1-6. [PMID: 37085735 DOI: 10.1038/s41443-023-00698-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/23/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Brian D Earp
- Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
| | - Jasmine Abdulcadir
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals of Geneva (UHG), Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Buckler M. The ethics of child genital cutting. When does a violation occur? Comments on "Defending an inclusive right to genital and bodily integrity for children" by Dr. Kate Goldie Townsend. Int J Impot Res 2023; 35:31-34. [PMID: 36068327 DOI: 10.1038/s41443-022-00611-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2022] [Revised: 08/23/2022] [Accepted: 08/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Max Buckler
- Independent Author, International Journal of Impotence Research, .
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Child genital cutting and surgery across cultures, sex, and gender. Part 1: female, male, intersex-and trans? The difficulty of drawing distinctions. Int J Impot Res 2023; 35:1-5. [PMID: 36460787 DOI: 10.1038/s41443-022-00639-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2022] [Revised: 10/19/2022] [Accepted: 10/21/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
|
5
|
Earp BD. Genital Cutting as Gender Oppression: Time to Revisit the WHO Paradigm. FRONTIERS IN HUMAN DYNAMICS 2022. [DOI: 10.3389/fhumd.2022.778592] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/12/2023]
Abstract
The World Health Organization (WHO) condemns all medically unnecessary female genital cutting (FGC) that is primarily associated with people of color and the Global South, claiming that such FGC violates the human right to bodily integrity regardless of harm-level, degree of medicalization, or consent. However, the WHO does not condemn medically unnecessary FGC that is primarily associated with Western culture, such as elective labiaplasty or genital piercing, even when performed by non-medical practitioners (e.g., body artists) or on adolescent girls. Nor does it campaign against any form of medically unnecessary intersex genital cutting (IGC) or male genital cutting (MGC), including forms that are non-consensual or comparably harmful to some types of FGC. These and other apparent inconsistencies risk undermining the perceived authority of the WHO to pronounce on human rights. This paper considers whether the WHO could justify its selective condemnation of non-Western-associated FGC by appealing to the distinctive role of such practices in upholding patriarchal gender systems and furthering sex-based discrimination against women and girls. The paper argues that such a justification would not succeed. To the contrary, dismantling patriarchal power structures and reducing sex-based discrimination in FGC-practicing societies requires principled opposition to medically unnecessary, non-consensual genital cutting of all vulnerable persons, including insufficiently autonomous children, irrespective of their sex traits or socially assigned gender. This conclusion is based, in part, on an assessment of the overlapping and often mutually reinforcing roles of different types of child genital cutting—FGC, MGC, and IGC—in reproducing oppressive gender systems. These systems, in turn, tend to subordinate women and girls as well as non-dominant males and sexual and gender minorities. The selective efforts of the WHO to eliminate only non-Western-associated FGC exposes the organization to credible accusations of racism and cultural imperialism and paradoxically undermines its own stated goals: namely, securing the long-term interests and equal rights of women and girls in FGC-practicing societies.
Collapse
|