On the impermissibility of infant male circumcision: a response to Mazor (2013)
Share this article
Click the icon of the social media platform on which you would like to share this article.
Email this article to a friend
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Other content recommended for you
- The child's interests and the case for the permissibility of male infant circumcision
- Infant circumcision: the last stand for the dead dogma of parental (sovereignal) rights
- Veracity and rhetoric in paediatric medicine: a critique of Svoboda and Van Howe's response to the AAP policy on infant male circumcision
- After Cologne: male circumcision and the law. Parental right, religious liberty or criminal assault?
- What philosophers can contribute in the face of fundamental empirical disagreement: a response to Benatar and Lang
- Circumcision of male infants as a human rights violation
- Value judgment, harm, and religious liberty
- Is infant male circumcision an abuse of the rights of the child? Yes
- Is infant male circumcision an abuse of the rights of the child? No
- Claimed by culture: circumcision, cochlear implants and the ‘intact’ body