This page incorporates relevant legal reference material from the several English-speaking nations. Botched circumcision and wrongful circumcision constitute malpractice. There were, however, a number of circumcision malpractice cases that succeeded on these grounds. Starting in 1984, academics began to apply general principles of health care law and medical ethics to examine the legality of male circumcision. Children are legally regarded as incompetent persons who are unable to give consent.
All persons enjoy a general right to bodily integrity.
Male circumcision removes healthy functional tissue and is viewed by many as an infringement upon the right to bodily integrity. Somerville discussed the legal distinction between therapeutic and non-therapeutic procedures and between operations on competent and incompetent people in a 1980 paper. William E. Brigman used new medical evidence to argue that circumcision is child abuse, and discussed possible legal remedies. 7 Recent medical articles have documented the actual injury of circumcision, making it possible for a knowledgable attorney to win damages for wrongful circumcision. Recent legal commentary in the several nations has pointed out numerous legal problems with the practice of circumcision of male children in general, even when done with parental consent and not botched.