Showing posts with label consent. Show all posts
Showing posts with label consent. Show all posts

Monday, January 23, 2017

CHILE: Officials oppose 'normalisation' surgery of intersex children

Washington Blade
January 11, 2016

Chilean officials oppose intersex children ‘normalization’ surgery

by Michael K. Lavers

The Chilean government has urged doctors in the South American country to no longer perform surgeries that “normalize” the sex of intersex children.

Undersecretary of Health Jaime Burrows and Undersecretary of Assistance Networks Gisela Alarcón in a document the Chilean Ministry of Health released last week expressed its opposition to “unnecessary ‘normalization’ treatments of intersex children” that include “irreversible genital surgeries until they are of a sufficient age to make decisions about their bodies.”

Camilo Godoy Peña, a Chilean LGBT rights advocate, on Jan. 8 noted on his Facebook page that the document, which is dated Dec. 22, also contains a series of recommendations for each branch of the country’s public health system. These include the creation of a round table of endocrinologists, gynecologists, psychiatrists and other specialists to determine “which action to take in each case” of an intersex child.

Godoy said this document is the first time the Chilean government has provided “clear instruction” on the treatment of intersex children.

“From this point forward there is a concrete tool to use to enforce the human rights of a group of people who have ‘been made invisible,’” he wrote on his Facebook page. “For decades they have been victims of violence, torture and ignorance.”

The Chilean government released its recommendations less than three months after Godoy presented a letter to President Michelle Bachelet that urged her government to do more to protect the rights of intersex people.

U.N. report critical of ‘involuntary genital normalizing surgery’
Opposition to what advocates have described as Intersex Genital Mutilation has increased in recent years.

The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture in 2013 issued a report that notes intersex children who undergo “involuntary genital normalizing surgery” face “permanent, irreversible infertility” and “severe mental suffering.” The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights are among the other international bodies that have expressed concern over the treatment of intersex people.

Lawmakers in Malta last year approved a bill that bans doctors from performing “surgical intervention on the sex characteristics of a minor” until he or she can provide “informed consent.”

A Maryland law that allows intersex people to legally change the gender on their birth certificates without surgery took effect last October. German parents since 2013 have been able to designate the gender on their children’s birth certificates as “indeterminate.”

An Irish law that allows transgender people to legally change their gender without medical intervention took effect last September. Advocates have criticized the statute because it does not include intersex people.

LONDON: 2 doctors face FGC charges over consented "designer vagina" ops

the Evening Standard
November 22, 2016

Doctors face prosecution over genital cosmetic surgery in London clinics

by Martin Bentham
Two London doctors face prosection over 'designer vagina' procedure.

Two London doctors are facing prosecution for allegedly carrying out illegal cosmetic surgery on women at clinics in the capital.

The women who had the “designer vagina” procedures were adults who paid for the surgery in the belief that it would make them more attractive.

But Scotland Yard detectives are now carrying out a criminal investigation after being alerted to the cases and deciding that the doctors’ actions involved a potential breach of legislation outlawing female genital mutilation.

Files on both doctors have now been submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service for charging decisions. A file has also been sent to prosecutors on a third case in Cheshire.

The news will raise hopes that a first conviction under anti-FGM legislation could be secured after the failure last year of the only prosecution so far.

The police investigations will also prompt renewed debate about cosmetic genital surgery, which includes labia reduction and vaginal tightening.

It comes after the pop star Sinitta revealed plans to have her own “vaginoplasty” filmed and broadcast online.

The singer, 53, has already put footage of a friend having a “designer vagina” operation on the Periscope site.

Such procedures — which critics say are wrongly promoted as enhancing sexual pleasure and attractiveness — are carried out widely at clinics in Harley Street and elsewhere.

The Home Office warned two years ago, however, in evidence to Parliament, that the operations may be illegal unless there was a medical or psychological reason for them.

That prompted renewed attention on the issue from police and prosecutors, resulting in the criminal investigation into the two London doctors.

It is understood that in both cases prosecutors believe the evidential test which they apply before bringing charges has been met.

Prosecutors are assessing whether bringing charges is in the public interest. Sources say that since the application of law to “designer vagina” surgery has not been tested in court, government departments are being consulted.

The views of royal medical colleges and anti-FGM campaign groups will also be considered as prosecutors prepare guidance to determine their approach. This is expected to be completed by the end of the year. Decisions over bringing charges will follow.

“So-called designer vagina surgery is classed as FGM when it comes to rules on mandatory reporting,” said a source. “The question [here] is whether it is in the public interest to prosecute.”

There are no official figures on the number of cosmetic genital operations carried out, since many are conducted privately, but doctors believe the surgery is becoming more common.

A study by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has blamed the trend on “marketing by the private sector” and images online.

Doctors warn that women are being pressured by “unrealistic representations of vulval appearance in popular culture” and the advertising of the surgery as an “unproblematic lifestyle choice”.

A report by the British Society for Paediatric and Adolescent Gynaecology on labia reduction has warned that there is “no scientific evidence” to support the practice and that the health risks, particularly to girls under 18, include infection and a loss of sensitivity.

There are similar concerns about surgery designed to increase the size of the “g-spot” and tighten the vagina.

Campaign groups against FGM have complained that a “double standard” is applied under which ethnic minority communities, which have traditionally practised mutilation, are being targeted by law enforcers while identical surgery carried out on white women for cosmetic reasons is tolerated.

The Commons Home Affairs Committee raised the same concern in a 2014 report and asked Theresa May, then the home secretary, to consider whether legislation was needed to close this potential “loophole”. Mrs May replied that the 2003 Female Genital Mutilation Act covered cosmetic surgery.

In a submission to Parliament, she added: “The 2003 Act does not contain any exemption for cosmetic surgery. If a procedure ... is unnecessary for physical or mental health ... then it is an offence  [making MGC an offence]... it would be for a court to decide if cosmetic surgery constitutes mutilation and is therefore illegal.”

The Crown Prosecution Service confirmed that it was assessing three files on suspected FGM offences, but declined to comment further.

The Met also declined to comment.
[No mention of the elephant in the room, informed consent.]

Wednesday, August 19, 2015

NOTTINGHAM: Mother furious at baby cut without her consent



Daily Mail (UK)
August 2, 2015

Mother's fury after doctor circumcises three-month-old baby boy at request of Muslim father WITHOUT her consent

by Ross Slater
Father asked for his boy to stay the night and secretly took him to doctor
Dr Balvinder Mehat carried out the private procedure on request
Baby's mother said: 'I knew this was something my baby's father wanted, but I didn't agree with it at all'

 
A doctor faces a police inquiry after he performed a circumcision on a three-month-old baby without the mother's consent in Nottingham.

Dr Balvinder Mehat was asked by the child's father's family to carry out the private procedure in accordance with their Islamic faith, but the boy's mother was horrified when she found out.

The unmarried 26-year-old, who did not want to be named, said: 'I knew this was something my baby's father wanted, but I didn't agree with it at all.

'I spoke to my health worker and GP about it, and they said that if it was only my name on the birth certificate there was no way it could happen.'

The parents, who both live in Nottingham, were in a casual relationship when the baby was conceived. After the birth, the father visited his son every week.

When the boy was three months old, the father, whose family originate from Pakistan, asked if his son could stay the night to mark Eid, the end of Ramadan. 'I agreed because it seemed fair,' said the boy's mother.

'The next day I was woken up by a phone call from his grandmother asking me for his GP's details for the circumcision appointment.

'I didn't know what she was on about and gave them to her to avoid a row. I then started ringing and texting them to say that no way should they do anything to my son. I got no response. Then a couple of hours later I got a text saying, 'It's done.' I couldn't believe it.'

The child had been taken to the Bakersfield Medical Centre in Nottingham and given a 'Plastibell circumcision', which is a ten-minute surgical procedure. The mother was horrified by the sight of the wound when she went to collect her child.

She was given a post-operative care sheet warning her that 'common complications can be bleeding and infection'. The furious mother told her health visitor, who in turn informed social services.

'A social worker came to see me,' said the mother, 'but she was only interested in my emotional state and in arranging contact for the father's family as I wouldn't allow them access.

'I rang the medical centre and Dr Mehat later rang me back. He was very aggressive.'

According to General Medical Council guidance, doctors should 'get consent from all those with parental responsibility.

If you cannot get consent for a procedure, for example because the parents cannot agree, you should inform the child's parents that you cannot provide the service unless you have authorisation from the court'.

Dr Mehat qualified as a medic in 1984 and became a GP in 2006. When contacted by The Mail on Sunday, he issued a statement through the Medical Protection Society, saying:
'I am sorry to hear of the concerns that have been raised, but it would be inappropriate for me to comment further due to patient confidentiality. I would like to reassure my patients that I always strive to provide the best possible care.'

A spokesman for Nottingham Police said: 'We can confirm that the matter has been reported to us and that inquiries are ongoing.'

MEXICO: Students cut baby penis as "umbilical cord"



Stuff (New Zealand)
July 18, 2015

Medical students chop off baby's penis by accident

A newborn's penis has reportedly been mistaken for his umbilical cord.

Medical students have reportedly mistaken a newborn's penis for his umbilical cord and chopped it off.

The undergraduates made the shocking blunder in the delivery room in the City of Saltillo in the state of Coahuila, north-eastern Mexico, The Sun reported, and then tried to hide the boy from his parents.

The child's father Diego Rangel Izaguirre grew suspicious when he was denied access to his son for more than two hours after his birth. He was told that his son had suffered a minor injury and would need surgery.

"When my child was born and they cut his umbilical cord they injured his penis.

"And unfortunately when the surgeon started sewing it, he made other two new injuries, almost two centimetres deep."

The baby's mother, Zulem Contreras, said: "This shouldn't have happened, they should have assigned a gynaecologist to take care of him, not students."

The couple have made an official complaint but hospital officials claim the newborn is healthy and that the operation was both minor and the baby's parents gave their consent.

"According to the information available at the moment, during the labour, when cutting the umbilical cord, incidentally the foreskin was injured and was corrected with the usual procedure of circumcision to the minor," the Mexican Institute of Social Security said.

[Circumcision does not of course "correct" an injury to the foreskin, but causes one.]

FLORIDA: Spite-circumcision looming; doctor threatens to file complaint

the Broward Palm Beach New Times (Florida)
June 10, 2015

Hironimus Circumcision Case: Doctor Threatens to File Complaint Against Hospital

by Deirdra Funcheon
John Trainer, M.D., is a family doctor in Jacksonville. He has circumcised children and taught other doctors how to perform circumcisions. His own son is circumcised.

But during the past few months, as he's followed the case of 4-year-old Chase Hironimus — whose father won a highly publicized legal battle against his mother regarding whether the boy should be circumcised — Trainer reexamined his own position on the surgery and has come to believe that routine infant circumcision is a violation of medical ethics and that Chase's case is particularly egregious because the mother's consent was forced under duress.

Now, he is threatening Joe DiMaggio Children's Hospital, where a doctor is rumored to be circumcising Chase this week, saying that if the surgery proceeds, he will file a complaint with the state Department of Health, which would then have to consider the matter. So far, the matter has been treated in state court as a contract dispute, but this could force a different set of authorities — medical administrators — to look at it in a new light.

Hironimus, in a contract signed years ago, agreed to the circumcision but changed her mind as the boy aged and she learned more about the procedure. A judge ruled that the circumcision could proceed, and she fled with the child and was caught months later and jailed. She was forced to sign a consent form for the procedure or else remain in jail indefinitely. She signed it, crying hysterically in a courtroom.

From a physician's point of view, Trainer told New Times, "it's absolutely mind-boggling this would be considered as real consent." Of the doctor rumored to be scheduled to perform a circumcision on Chase — Gary Birken — Trainer said, "it is incumbent on him" to be "aware that this is a dramatic case, an unusual case.

"Where this this galls me the most," Trainer says, "is that if we are physicians and ethical and called on to police our profession," and the doctor here "either knew or should have known" — that's the phrasing commonly used in ethical standards — "that consent was tainted," and if he proceeds in this particular case, "at the very least his ethics need to be challenged."

Furthermore, he said, pediatric surgery ethics require that a doctor make the child aware of what is happening and consider the child's opinion in elective surgeries. Court documents asserted that Chase was scared of and does not want the procedure.

Trainer says he has no personal connection to the case, but as he followed it and engaged with anticircumcision activists, it was like the "allegorical scales falling off my eyes."

Circumcision in America was popularized by John Harvey Kellogg in the 1800s to prevent masturbation. Trainer says it's absurd that "the cereal magnate could still have impact on human anatomy 100 years later — I think it's barbaric and cruel." In a circumcision, he says, irrespective of the pain to the child, "you have an open wound in a soiled diaper with urine and feces. If we were asking any other surgeon to do this under these circumstances, it would be 'reductio ad absurdum.'"
It's also, he says, "the only procedure an obstetrician will do on a man — and with absolutely no follow-up. They'll never see that penis again — no follow-up. This is unheard-of with any other procedure."

Asked if he faced any career risks by preemptively speaking out against a doctor or hospital, Trainer said, "I am on the Board of Directors of Baptist Primary Care, a leader in a consortium of 150 providers — the largest and most trusted health-care system in Northeast Florida. If I suffer backlash for speaking out, I am OK with that. Actually, my Facebook page is blowing up with people commending me for being courageous. I don't really feel that brave."

Activists have launched a letter-writing and social media campaign to warn doctors not to circumcise Chase. Joe DiMaggio Children's Hospital has acknowledged on Facebook that it is aware of the objections, writing:
We have heard your concerns loud and clear. We recognize this is an emotionally charged topic and case, evident by the number of posts to this page from people in and outside our community. Joe DiMaggio Children's Hospital has been a pillar in the South Florida community and an advocate for many causes, always working for the benefit of its patients while providing quality service and care. We ask that you respect the confidentiality of all our patients as cases evolve. Please understand that we can't and will not discuss specifics in this forum due to HIPAA guidelines. A protest at the hospital was scheduled for today at 11 a.m.

[The story is progressing rapidly. A further statement from the hospital says -

...the child in question is not a patient at Joe DiMaggio Children’s Hospital or any Memorial Healthcare System facility or of Dr. Gary Birken. - yet leaked medical records show him as one. An emergency legal threat from another lawyer appears to have at least postponed the operation.]


Earlier story

Friday, March 20, 2015

LONDON: Consented female genital piercing is mutilation

The elephant in the room is now trumpetting loudly, while the Double Standard flies high.


BBC News
March 18, 2015

Vagina piercings count as FGM, even if you're a consenting adult

by Amelia Butterly
All women who have a pierced vagina will be classified as having suffered female genital mutilation (FGM), the Department of Health says.

Even if an adult consents to having it done, she will still be said to have undergone a "harmful procedure".

The Department of Health says it'll take "every precaution" to record "abusive" genital piercings.

But the Tattoo and Piercing Industry Union (TPIU) has told Newsbeat body piercing is "in no way related" to FGM.

"It undermines the serious nature of FGM to in any way compare it to a consensual body piercing. FGM is often carried out on minors by force and clearly without consent," says spokesman Marcus Henderson.

More than 200 FGM-related cases were investigated by the police nationally in the past five years.
The government advises you to contact the NSPCC if you or someone you know is worried about FGM - and if there is immediate risk you should tell the police.

"Most responsible piercers won't do any intimate piercings on anyone under the age of 18," says Mr Henderson.

"Now we're faced with a situation where men are able to make up their mind and consent to an intimate piercing where women are not."

One London-based professional piercer, who wanted to remain anonymous, says his customers do not consider genital piercings to be at all similar to FGM.

"It's nothing to do with mutilation," he says. "I think [piercing] is more to do with adornment of the body or the discovery of new sensations."
...

A Department of Health spokeswoman said: "While there are challenges in this area and adult women may have genital piercings, in some communities girls are forced to have them.
"The World Health Organisation has quite rightly defined this as a form of FGM.
...

The government has said it has no plans to amend the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 to specifically include cosmetic surgery on the genitals.

In its report the Home Affairs Select Committee of MPs said the Act should be changed to make it clear these procedures would be a criminal offence if done on girls under 18, unless for mental or physical health reasons.

Earlier story