Children's Ombudsman calls for circumcision ban in Sweden

The Ombudsman for Children in Sweden called Saturday for the country to ban circumcision, a practice he said contravened the basic rights of boys.

"Circumcising a child without medical justification nor his consent contravenes this child's human rights," wrote Fredrik Malmberg in a text co-signed with and published in the daily newspaper Dagens Nyheter.

"The operation is painful, irreversible and can lead to dangerous complications," Malmberg said.

In 2001 Sweden passed a law authorising circumcision, which allows a religious authority to perform the operation if the child is under two months old. If the child is older than this, only a physician can carry it out.

The law also requires the consent of the parents and demands they are fully informed about the operation and its implications.

The law has widespread support in Sweden and a proposal last October to ban circumcision from the far right party Sweden Democrats was rejected.

According to Malmberg the law contravenes the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The government estimates that some 3,000 boys are circumcised every year in Sweden.

In 2012, a court in Cologne, Germany said the rite amounted to grievous bodily harm in a ruling that caused international uproar.

The German parliament later decided to pass a law authorising the practice for religious reasons.

Studies have shown there is compelling evidence that reduces the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men by approximately 60 percent.

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Germany approves bill to protect male circumcision

Dec 12, 2012

(AP)—German lawmakers approved a bill Wednesday that explicitly permits male infant circumcision, ending months of legal uncertainty after a court ruling that the practice amounts to bodily harm led to ...

German ethics committee tackles circumcision row

Aug 23, 2012

A senior member of Germany's ethics committee Thursday called for a compromise in a heated debate over religious circumcision after a court ruled the practice was tantamount to grievous bodily harm.

Recommended for you

Tooth loss linked to slowing mind and body

8 hours ago

The memory and walking speeds of adults who have lost all of their teeth decline more rapidly than in those who still have some of their own teeth, finds new UCL research.

Hot flashes linked to increased risk of hip fracture

12 hours ago

Women who experience moderate to severe hot flashes and night sweats during menopause tend to have lower bone mineral density and higher rates of hip fracture than peers who do not have menopausal symptoms, according to a ...

Core hospital care team members may surprise you

13 hours ago

Doctors and nurses are traditionally thought to be the primary caretakers of patients in a typical hospital setting. But according to a study at the burn center intensive care unit at Loyola University Health System, three ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

jsdarkdestruction
1 / 5 (7) Sep 28, 2013
pffff, im a boy and im glad im circumcised and am not jewish. pretty much 90% of American boys are circumcised.
freethinking
1.3 / 5 (10) Sep 28, 2013
I disagree with circumcision, HOWEVER, the government should stay out of this. If a parent wants to circumcise their boy it's their choice.

There are pro's and con's to circumcision, this is one area Progressives should keep their noses out of.
JessicaH
5 / 5 (1) Sep 29, 2013
Sewing up a vagina and cutting off the clitoris dramatically reduces STDs as well. It is mutilation and should never be done without unless it is a medical necessity, which is rare.
ShotmanMaslo
1 / 5 (8) Sep 29, 2013
"Sewing up a vagina and cutting off the clitoris dramatically reduces STDs as well. It is mutilation and should never be done without unless it is a medical necessity, which is rare. "


Removing the clitorial hood is analogous to male circumcision in women.
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (10) Sep 30, 2013
Remember I'm against circumcision, however stating that Removing the clitorial hood is analogous to male circumcision in women, is plain stupid.

Simple way of finding this out is asking the majority of men who have been circumcised if they feel violated or demeaned by being circumcised.

Many/most men who are circumcised feel their sons should be (and I would agree and say incorrectly) circumcised as well. If you think men would allow their boys to be circumcised if they felt violated by circumcision, you don't know men very well.
Egleton
2 / 5 (8) Oct 03, 2013
Whose penis is it anyway?
If you are happy to give permission to other people to cut off someone elses foreskin, then I would be happy to give myself permission to cut off yours.
freethinking
1 / 5 (9) Oct 03, 2013
Egleton, problem is there is pro's and con's to the medical procedure. In Africa the UN's medical community is encouraging men/boys to get circumcised.

When it comes to medical procedures like this, it falls on parents doing what they think is best for their child. If you don't want to circumcise yourself or your boys is your choice and one which I'll agree with. If you want to circumcise your boys, I'll disagree with you but give you the right.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.