Cut it ... off?

An 8-year-old Chicago boy is in the middle of a legal battle between his divorced parents. You might say, "This happens all the time." \nNot exactly like it's happening now.\nSpecifically, his parents are standing in front of a judge, arguing as to whether or not he should be circumcised. To add insult to injury, his parents aren't allowed, by judicial order, to talk to him about it.\nThis is not about a post-breakup culture clash. The boy's mother claims two separate doctors recommended the procedure simply for health reasons. Meanwhile, the father says the surgery is akin to "unnecessary amputation" and could cause his son physical and emotional harm.\nProponents argue that circumcision has health benefits, although many studies seem to contradict these claims. Opponents argue that it is the same as female genital mutilation, which many Westerners oppose. While it's less brutal than the FGM, which is often undertaken to prevent women from feeling sexual pleasure, the principle seems pretty similar. \nNeither the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics nor similar organizations in Great Britain or Australia recommend routine circumcision for medical reasons. Even more brutal, less than half of practitioners in this country use anesthesia during the procedure.\nNonetheless, it persists. Many doctors recommend circumcision to their patients despite the evidence of its superfluity. Institutions, however, are generally highly resistant to change. In this case, the resistance is two-fold, as this change highlights the over-medicalization of childhood sexuality, and doctors, like many others, don't want to reduce their business.\nAbove all, it seems that when there is no cultural consideration, the decision is largely aesthetic (from the doctor's perspective as well as the parents'). No one in their right mind would, however, give a rhinoplasty to a newborn whose nose wasn't perfect. Unnecessarily surgically altering the genitals seems just as \nperverted.\nCircumcision is, after all, surgery, and all surgeries have risks. Perhaps the most shocking case is that of Dr. John Money's patient, David Reimer, whose circumcision went awry and forced the amputation of his penis. He spent his youth being raised as a girl and took his own life in 2004.\nOver-arching ideological aspects aside, this boy is 8 years old. He is no longer a newborn, and he should be allowed some say about his own body and how it is to be treated. He might not be able to make a wholly informed decision yet, but by the time he's 14 or so, that shouldn't be a problem. In the meantime, it's not like his penis is going to get gangrene and fall off. The foreskin exists naturally; it isn't a foreign invader to be fought off.\nChildren's bodies are not their parents' property to manipulate as they see fit. In this case, hopefully the judge will decide that the best interest of the boy is to let him decide his own best interests. He's the one who will have to live with the decision.