...(l) the need to protect the child from any physical or psychological harm that may be caused by-

(i) subjecting the child to maltreatment, abuse, neglect, exploitation or degradation or exposing the child to violence or exploitation or other harmful behaviour; ...

(8) Circumcision of male children under the age of 16 is prohibited, except when-

The Associated Press
January 6, 2004

California court rules some inmates can refuse medication

SAN FRANCISCO - California's highest court has ruled that the state cannot force some mentally ill prisoners to take anti-psychotic drugs, a decision that could let hundreds of inmates refuse treatment in limited circumstances.

The California Supreme Court's ruling said a judge - not the state - can authorize the use of drugs only after determining that the inmate is incompetent to refuse treatment and is an immediate danger to himself or others.

The ruling concerns California inmates who have done their time for criminal convictions but have been found to be mentally unfit for release to the community. Those inmates are housed at state mental institutions until they are deemed fit for return to the community.

Justice Carlos Moreno, writing for the 6-1 majority, said the 1985 law authorizing the retention of mentally disordered inmates past their release dates allows the state to administer anti-psychotics against a patient's wishes only when there is a medical emergency or when safety and lives are at risk.

While the court acknowledged the drugs can work wonders for the mentally ill, the medicine also can produce intolerable side effects, including muscle spasms, blurred vision, dry mouth, sexual dysfunction, body rigidity and tremors, among others.

"The basic constitutional and common law right to privacy and bodily integrity is therefore especially implicated by the forced administration of medications with such potential adverse consequences," Moreno wrote.

In dissent, Justice Janice Rogers Brown wrote the ruling goes against the legislative purpose of the 1985 law, which was designed to rehabilitate the mentally ill and safeguard the public. ...

PITTSBURGH (August 5, 2002) -- At a ceremony in Pittsburgh attended by N[ational ]R[ight to ]L[ife ]C[ommittee] officials and other pro-life advocates, President Bush signed into law the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, a bill strongly backed by NRLC.

The law guarantees that every infant born alive enjoys full legal rights under federal law, regardless of his or her stage of development or whether the live birth occurred during an abortion.

“This important legislation ensures that every infant born alive -- including an infant who survives an abortion procedure -- is considered a person under federal law,” the President said before signing the bill. ...

MEDIA RELEASE

DECEMBER 6, 2007

---

MALE CIRCUMCISION & HUMAN RIGHTS

---

This week is Human Rights Week and Monday the 10th December is Human Rights Day. The Tasmanian Commissioner for Children, Mr Paul Mason, today called on the community to address directly the delicate human rights subject of male circumcision on babies and boys too young to give their own consent.

Other than for medica! reasons the Commissioner argues that to inflict permanent, irreversible, painfui and disfiguring surgery on the most private part of a boy's body when he is too srnai! to resist or understand is a pure and simple breach of his most basic human rights.

"Everyone is entitled to bodily integrity, to protection of their own body from injury by another without their consent," he said. "Everybody is entitled to choose their own religion and that can only be done when they are old enough to explore their spirituality. Everybody is entitled to equal protection before the law without discrimination on the basis of gender, culture or race. One person's human rights cannot be used to deny another person's human rights."

Parents do not have absolute rights to do whatever they like with their chfldren. The High Court of Australia has said in 1992 and since that parental authority is at a/I times subject to the best interests of the child and society reserves the right to say what that welfare requires.

We love our children, but the law requires us to educate, clothe and feed them and prohibits us from abusing, neglecting and injuring them. Recent changes to the law in Tasmania prohibit us from smoking tobacco in cars with our own children and this restriction on "parental rights" is widely accepted Parents are not allowed to cut off any other part of their children's bodies.

Mr Mason says he cannot understand why abuse and wounding children rs illegal but people are reluctant to protect babies and boys from circumcision

"Leave babies and young boys alone. If a boy grows up wanting to change his appearance for whatever reason, knowing all the risks of the surgery and the possible consequences such as desensitisation, then he has the rest of his life to do it when he is old enough. I would be the first to support him in that. It is a question of choice.'

Paul Mason
Commissioner

For further Information, contact the Commissioner for Children's office on 6233 4520.

Cruelty to children must stop. FULL STOP.

National Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Children

Weston House
42 Curtain Road
London EC2A 3NH

Telephone: 020 7825 2500
Fax: 020 7825 2525

Dear Supporter

Thank you for your letter regarding the NSPCC's positions in relation to infant/child circumcision in the UK and martial disputes.

Please find our position statement to on infant/child circumcision below:

The NSPCC recognises that there are sometimes compelling medical reasons for circumcising male children, although in very many cases conservative therapeutic practices are effective, carry fewer risks and are less intrusive.

When the decision has been made to circumcise an infant, we recommend that the procedure should be performed under anaesthetic in hygienic conditions, by a paediatric surgeon, a urologist or other experienced and specially trained doctor. All surgical operations carry a slight risk, associated both with the procedure and with the use of anaesthetic, which should be clearly explained to the parents.

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child established the following rights and obligations in relation to children:

• Children should be protected from 'all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse' (Article 19.2)
• States that 'Parties shall take all effective and appropriate measures with a view to abolishing traditional practices prejudicial to the health of children.'(Article 24.3)

The NSPCC recognises that the circumcision of male children has deep religious and cultural significance for many people and communities all over the world. It is, however, a practice capable of causing injury and suffering to infants and children unable to consent to such a procedure. We therefore urge parents and practising communities to take all necessary steps to reduce children's suffering and to consider whether circumcision is desirable or necessary. We would suggest that it may be preferable for young adult males to make an informed choice to be circumcised for cultural, religious or other reasons, rather than be operated on as a non-consenting infant.

I hope this has clarified our positions of these issues and thank you for your continued support.

Yours sincerely

[signed}

Duncan Moore
Publications and Information Officer