We are committed to ending all forms of forced non-therapeutic genital cutting.
This includes female genital mutilation (FGM) and ritual circumcision of boys.
A child's right to bodily autonomy must not be overridden by other people's religious or cultural beliefs.
The National Secular Society supports a person's most fundamental right to grow up with an intact body and to make their own choices about permanent bodily modifications.
All forms of forced cutting on children's genitals breach basic child rights and safeguarding guidance.
Several communities have genital cutting traditions, often rooted in religious beliefs. But children, and particularly babies and young infants, are incapable of giving consent to such medically unnecessary, harmful, painful and permanent procedures.
Sometimes health benefits for non-therapeutic genital cutting are claimed despite the evidence to the contrary. All forms of forced genital cutting risk serious emotional, sexual, and physical harm – including death.
Child safeguarding must always be prioritised above the desire of adults to express their belief through forced cutting of children's genitals.
Female genital mutilation (FGM)
"It is irrelevant whether or not a person believed the operation to be necessary in the child's best interests as a matter of custom or ritual."
We are committed to the eradication of forced genital cutting of girls and women known as Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) in all its forms.
There are thought to be well over 100,000 women and girls affected by FGM living in the UK. We work with like-minded organisations to protect girls from the harm of forced genital cutting.
FGM practices vary. Some forms involve a pinprick or the removal of a small amount of tissue from the clitoris. Other forms include complete removal of the clitoris and labia, and stitching the vulva closed. Communities which practice FGM often cite religion as a motivation.
All forms of FGM are child abuse and are rightly illegal in the UK. But some British girls are still unprotected. Some have been sent abroad to undergo the procedure and others are having it performed secretly in this country.
There has been only one successful prosecution for FGM since it was banned in 1985. We are concerned that fear of upsetting cultural and religious sensitivities is preventing authorities from tackling FGM effectively.
"...a right specifically for African families who want to carry on their tradition whilst living in this country"
As with all forms of forced genital cutting, those who speak out against FGM are often accused of disrespecting their parents or cultural heritage, and of over-dramatising a 'minor' procedure that others 'don't complain about'. Together with the perceived humiliation of speaking about one's own genitals, these factors combine to ensure that many sufferers are reluctant to speak out.
Ending FGM requires sustained civil society action to change attitudes and inform girls of their rights.
Male circumcision
While all forms of FGM are rightfully banned, non-therapeutic circumcision of boys is permitted in UK law.
The foreskin is a normal body part with physical, sexual and immunological functions. Removing it from non-consenting children has been associated with various physical and psychological difficulties. These are likely to be greatly under-reported because people who have experienced sexual harm are often reluctant to reveal it as societal dismissal or stigmatisation may compound the harm.
Circumcision is excruciatingly painful. When performed on babies, little to no anaesthesia is used. Even when performed under anaesthesia on older children, the recovery entails weeks of pain and discomfort.
The procedure is also dangerous. Between 1988 and 2014, there were 22,000 harms recorded by the NHS resulting circumcision. They included scarring and full penis amputation. In 2011, nearly a dozen infant boys were treated for life-threatening haemorrhage, shock or sepsis as a result of non-therapeutic circumcision at a single children's hospital in Birmingham. In 2007, a newborn baby went into cardiac arrest minutes after he was circumcised in a London synagogue, and subsequently died.
Any claims of marginal health benefits of circumcision are extremely contested. No national medical, paediatric, surgical or urological society recommends routine circumcision of all boys as a health intervention. There is now growing concern among doctors that existing ethical principles of non-therapeutic childhood surgery should no longer include an exception for non-therapeutic circumcision.
62% of Brits would support a law prohibiting the circumcision of children for non-medical reasons. Only 13% would oppose it.
There is very limited regulation of non-therapeutic circumcision in the UK. We do not know how many such procedures are performed annually or the degree of harm, as there is no requirement for any follow up or audit and the boys themselves are too young to complain.
It is now being recognised more widely that non-therapeutic religious and cultural circumcision is a breach of children's rights. We want to see the same protections for girls' bodily autonomy extended to boys.
Take action!
1. Write to your MP
Ask your MP to support an end to non-consensual religious genital cutting
2. Share your story
Tell us why you support this campaign, and how you are personally affected by the issue. You can also let us know if you would like assistance with a particular issue.
3. Join the National Secular Society
Become a member of the National Secular Society today! Together, we can separate religion and state for greater freedom and fairness.
Latest updates
Ritual genital cutting kills boy in Italy
Posted: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 10:50
A two-year-old boy has died and his twin brother has been hospitalised after their genitals were cut for religious reasons at a migrant centre in Italy.
The boys were circumcised at the request of their mother, who wanted to mark Nigeria's Islamic traditions, according to local media reports.
An American man of Libyan origin has been charged with murder.
National Secular Society chief executive Stephen Evans said the death was "a reminder of the risks and harm associated with the ritual circumcision of baby boys".
The NSS campaigns for an end to non-consensual, non-therapeutic circumcision.
In recent years several other babies' deaths from circumcision have come to public attention. In 2010 a boy in Manchester died from circumcision wounds at the age of four weeks. A nurse was found guilty of manslaughter by gross negligence and given a suspended prison sentence.
In 2012 a boy from north London bled to death as a result of circumcision, as did a baby in the Canadian province of Ontario in 2013.
In 2009, 105 boys were treated at A&E at one hospital in Birmingham for complications after circumcisions. One per month had life-threatening injuries.
Traditional genital cutting ceremonies in sub-Saharan Africa are thought to have claimed hundreds of lives and hospitalised hundreds of thousands between 2008 and 2014 alone.
There is increasing medical scrutiny of the practice of male circumcision. In 2017 a Belgian federal government committee ruled against the circumcision of infant boys for reasons other than medical necessity.
In 2010 the Royal Dutch Medical Society (KNMG) advised doctors to discourage parents from having their sons circumcised, urging "a strong policy of deterrence". KNMG said any medical advantages of circumcision were significantly outnumbered by the risks and other disadvantages, such as the loss of up to 30% of erogenous tissue.
And in 2016 the Danish Medical Association said circumcision should only be performed with "informed consent".
Studies have shown that male circumcision causes excruciating pain for the boys involved. The procedure also causes bleeding and infections. Its long-term health complications can include scarring, denuding of the skin of the penis, urinary difficulties, erection problems and psychological problems.
In 2018 lawmakers in both Denmark and Iceland considered bills to outlaw the cutting of healthy children's genitals, but faced strong opposition from religious groups.
Forced genital cutting has also been criticised on children's rights grounds. Last year the Child Rights International Network (CRIN), an international advocacy organisation, said the practice "goes against medical ethics". CRIN called the ritual circumcision of infant males for non-medical reasons a "violation of bodily integrity" which "unnecessarily" exposes children to risks.
The local mayor in the Italian case, Antonino Lupi of the town of Monterondo, described the death as "an absurd tragedy".
Some local groups have claimed the death illustrates the need for public institutions to offer genital cutting services to parents in Italy.
Individual rights and autonomy key themes at NSS healthcare event
Posted: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 14:31
Speakers have called for individual rights and bodily autonomy to take priority over religious concerns in healthcare policy at a major National Secular Society conference on the issue.
The one-day Healthcare & Secularism Conference, which took place on Saturday at the Radisson Blu Hotel in Birmingham, gave participants the opportunity to discuss secularism's role in healthcare and medicine.
Academics and experts in medicine, law and ethics addressed the conference, which tackled issues including conscientious objection, 'gay conversion therapy', ritual genital cutting, sexual health rights and assisted dying.
Dr Antony Lempert, chair of the Secular Medical Forum and one of the event's chief organisers, opened the conference by saying secularism empowers informed patients to make decisions that are right for them. He added that the "harmful imposition" of other people's beliefs in healthcare is causing "far too many" people to suffer.
Michael Thomson, a professor of health law, spoke about reclaiming conscience in healthcare. He said the narrative on religious freedom has been oversimplified, especially in the field of medicine.
Michael talked about the development of abortion law in particular. He said it was "quite wrong" for any doctor to put personal views before the care of a patient, and personal objections should be "overruled by professional obligation". He warned that a bill on conscientious objection tabled in January would expand the scope of practices that clinicians can refuse to provide, reducing patients' access to certain treatments.
Jayne Ozanne, a member of the Church of England's general synod who works with religious organisations around the world to eliminate discrimination based on sexuality or gender, spoke about 'gay conversion therapy' (GCT). Jayne, a gay Evangelical, referred to her own experiences of GCT and the subsequent campaigning she has done to end the practice.
Jayne said many religious people may undergo GCT because they believe being LGBT is sinful and individuals who come out as LGBT in religious communities put themselves in a position of "great vulnerability".
She added that GCT does not just involve psychological abuse but can include physical and sexual violence. Studies have found that GCT can result in self-harm, suicide attempts and problems with relationships and sexual functioning, and is ineffective in changing same-sex attraction.
The conference also focused on the issue of religiously-motivated genital cutting of children, beginning with a talk on male circumcision and the law with James Chegwidden, an Old Square Chambers barrister. He said infant ritual circumcision remains an "anomaly" with no legal justification in any field of law, even though society no longer tends to regard children as the property of their parents.
James argued that non-consensual circumcision violates article nine of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. He said "imposing one's religion on another is precisely what the article is designed to prevent".
Brian Earp, a cross-disciplinary research fellow at Yale and Oxford, warned of an "imminent collision course" in law and policy regarding different ethical standards for female, male and intersex forms of genital cutting.
He said proponents of male infant circumcision have found support among those promoting female genital mutilation (FGM). All forms of FGM are banned under UK and US laws but male circumcision is not, despite the fact relatively 'minor' forms of FGM are less invasive than male circumcision.
Brian argued that biological sex should not determine the level of protection children have to intact genitalia and that all children should be entitled to genital autonomy.
Ann Furedi, chief executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, spoke on standing up to opponents of abortion. She said it was wrong to criminalise women for seeking abortions or doctors for performing them, adding that recent changes to abortion law have been "phenomenal". She encouraged advocates of choice to embrace free speech to persuade the public of their position.
She argued that abortion clinic 'buffer zones' are justified because they prevent anti-abortionists stopping women from accessing abortion services. But she added that it is worth engaging with protestors outside these zones, because "the best way we can stand up to our opponents is to engage them and defeat them in argument".
The final two talks examined assisted dying. Dr Jacky Davis of Healthcare Professionals for Assisted Dying (HPAD) told the audience that 100m people now have access to assisted dying and asked why people in the UK do not.
She advocated the "Oregon law", which allows terminally ill people of sound mind and fixed purpose to receive lethal medication, as a good model for assisted dying in the UK.
Jacky said those opposing assisted dying are often influential leaders of various religious groups, but their views often don't match many of those they claim to represent. She said a group called the Christian Medical Fellowship has been particularly influential in persuading the British Medical Association (BMA) to resist the legalisation of assisted dying. HPAD has called for BMA members to be surveyed on their views on assisted dying.
The final speaker, NSS honorary associate and former chairman of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society Dr Michael Irwin, agreed with many of Jacky's points but offered alternative approaches. He said there would be a better chance of changing the law surrounding assisted dying if we were not limited to the Oregon model and the right to die were extended to others, such as those with serious degenerative diseases.
Michael argued that assisted dying is simply another way of saying "good palliative care" and is not an alternative to palliative care as opponents often argue.
The speakers also responded to audience questions after their talks.
After the event Dr Lempert thanked those who attended and described the quality of the speakers as "outstanding".
"Coming from different disciplines, backgrounds and beliefs, all speakers shared a common understanding of the central importance of caring properly for patients and for allowing patients to make their own decisions in healthcare. The theme of autonomy – a patient's right to choose for themselves what happens to their own body – ran through each of the talks.
"In an environment of shared values, this conference explored some of the major difficulties faced by some people when other people's beliefs, values and treatments are imposed on them in a variety of ways from birth through to death.
"The shared understanding of autonomy helps to show the way towards a truly secular healthcare system which would protect all patients by championing their rights to be fully informed of the available treatment options and to choose the one that's right for them."
Discuss this story on Facebook
Photo © Stephen Knight.
