The story below appeared in The Times 9th June 2018.
A son threatened to slit his mother’s throat because she had him circumcised when he was five, a court was told. H******** had been left traumatised and wanted to know why his parents had agreed to the procedure.
H********, 30, bombarded his mother with more than 100 emails and voicemails between Christmas Day last year and January 5, Kwok Wan, for the prosecution, told Leicester magistrates. In one he said: “I will slit your throats where you stand. Happy new year.”
Mr Wan added that H******** went to his mother’s house on New Year’s Eve and threw paint over the front of the house and on the path.
Kim Lee, for the defence, said that only a handful of the messages had been threatening and were “a cry for help”. He added: “He suffers from body dysmorphia and has other mental health issues. There was no intent to cause harm to his parents.”
H********, of Loughborough, was found guilty of aggravated harassment, which he had denied. He admitted criminal damage. He was given an eight-week prison sentence suspended for a year and ordered to attend 20 rehabilitation days.
The Child Rights International Network has released the 2018 edition of their report, “What Lies Beneath”. The current version of this report, quoted below, outlines CRIN’s views on non-therapeutic male circumcision:
Male circumcision is an irreversible procedure to surgically remove the foreskin from the human penis. It’s routinely carried out on newborns and adolescents within Jewish and Muslim communities, respectively; on infants out of social convention among nonreligious communities in some Western countries, most notably the United States; and on teenage boys as a rite of passage within some ethnic groups in parts of Africa.
When performed for religious or cultural – not medical – reasons, it flatly designates routine circumcision as medically unjustifiable. In fact, there’s growing support within the medical community against male circumcision as a routine practice since its non-therapeutic basis means it does not comply with medical ethics.
In sum, routine male circumcision involves the removal of healthy tissue for no medical reason from one of the most sensitive body parts, unnecessarily exposing a child to the risks of surgery, and usually at an age when they lack the capacity to consent or refuse consent. Recorded complications include bleeding, panic attacks, infection, disfigurement, necrosis and amputation, and even death.
Exposing a child to such risks without curative or rehabilitative justification goes against medical ethics, as well as parental responsibilities to protect a child from injury and harm.
Advocates say the decision to circumcise should not rest with anyone except a boy himself when he’s old enough to give his free and informed consent, or refuse it.
This is the link to the BBC Radio 5 Live show that was transmitted yesterday to listen to via the BBC iPlayer Radio click here.
On Tuesday 20th February the ban on non-therapeutic male circumcision proposed by some of Iceland’s politicians will be discussed on the Emma Barnett show at 12:30 GMT.
Richard from MDC will be one of the people in the studio and there will be input from an Icelandic politician, a victim of MGM and at least one representative from a community that continues to practice circumcision.
The charity Genital Autonomy’s January 16th workshop at Keele University, “Understanding the psychological harm of male circumcision,” resulted in four professional therapists taking on the treatment of men suffering the mental health consequences of non-therapeutic male circumcision.
The attention these qualified therapists have given the issue marks an important step forward in recognising the harm caused by male circumcision, and providing sympathetic treatment for the problems that some men subsequently experience.