Litigation involving pediatric surgical conditions.

PURPOSE: Malpractice litigation among pediatric surgeons is a subject of concern and interest, but minimal factual data are known. Our goal was to investigate national litigation trends regarding pediatric surgical conditions. METHODS: We queried WestlawNext database for malpractice cases involving pediatric (age ≤ 18) surgical conditions. Cases were included if they named a care provider or health center. We gathered data on diagnoses, procedures, care providers, allegations, location, and outcomes. RESULTS: Our search revealed 4754 cases, and 170 met inclusion criteria. These ranged from 1965 to 2017 and represented 40 states. 110 cases involved a surgeon (41% pediatric surgeons). Appendicitis was the most common diagnosis identified. Cases frequently involved delayed/missed diagnoses or interventions (45.9%), technical concerns (35.9%), mortalities (26.5%), negligent perioperative care (23.6%), and informed consent concerns (4.7%). Technical complication was the most common allegation against surgeons (49.1%), and nonsurgeon cases typically involved a delayed/missed diagnosis (78.3%). 39% of cases resulted in favor of the defendant, 35% plaintiff, and 14% had a split verdict. CONCLUSION: Litigation involving pediatric surgical conditions is diverse, but appendicitis and circumcision comprise almost a third of cases. A greater understanding of these trends can help steer efforts in quality and safety as well as guide improved communication with families. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.

Non-therapeutic infant male circumcision. Evidence, ethics, and international law perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: To review the evidence of the benefits and harms of infant male circumcision, and the legal and ethical perspectives of infant male circumcision. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of the literature using PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library up to June 2015. We searched the medical law literature using the Westlaw and Lexis Library law literature resources up to June 2015. RESULTS: Male circumcision significantly reduced the risk of urinary tract infections by 87%. It also significantly reduced transmission of human immunodeficiency virus among circumcised men by 70%. Childhood and adolescent circumcision is associated with a 66% reduction in the risk of penile cancer. Circumcision was associated with 43% reduction of human papilloma virus infection, and 58% reduction in the risk of cervical cancer among women with circumcised partners compared with women with uncircumcised partners. Male infant circumcision reduced the risk of foreskin inflammation by 68%.  CONCLUSION: Infant male circumcision should continue to be allowed all over the world, as long as it is approved by both parents, and performed in facilities that can provide appropriate sterilization, wound care, and anesthesia. Under these conditions, the benefits of infant male circumcision outweigh the rare and generally minor potential harms of the procedure.

Circumcision Is Unethical and Unlawful.

The foreskin is a complex structure that protects and moisturizes the head of the penis, and, being the most densely innervated and sensitive portion of the penis, is essential to providing the complete sexual response. Circumcision-the removal of this structure-is non-therapeutic, painful, irreversible surgery that also risks serious physical injury, psychological sequelae, and death. Men rarely volunteer for it, and increasingly circumcised men are expressing their resentment about it.Circumcision is usually performed for religious, cultural and personal reasons. Early claims about its medical benefits have been proven false. The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Prevention and Control have made many scientifically untenable claims promoting circumcision that run counter to the consensus of Western medical organizations.Circumcision violates the cardinal principles of medical ethics, to respect autonomy (self-determination), to do good, to do no harm, and to be just. Without a clear medical indication, circumcision must be deferred until the child can provide his own fully informed consent.In 2012, a German court held that circumcision constitutes criminal assault. Under existing United States law and international human rights declarations as well, circumcision already violates boys> absolute rights to equal protection, bodily integrity, autonomy, and freedom to choose their own religion. A physician has a legal duty to protect children from unnecessary interventions. Physicians who obtain parental permission through spurious claims or omissions, or rely on the American Academy of Pediatrics' position, also risk liability for misleading parents about circumcision.

Circumcision of male infants as a human rights violation.

Every infant has a right to bodily integrity. Removing healthy tissue from an infant is only permissible if there is an immediate medical indication. In the case of infant male circumcision there is no evidence of an immediate need to perform the procedure. As a German court recently held, any benefit to circumcision can be obtained by delaying the procedure until the male is old enough to give his own fully informed consent. With the option of delaying circumcision providing all of the purported benefits, circumcising an infant is an unnecessary violation of his bodily integrity as well as an ethically invalid form of medical violence. Parental proxy 'consent' for newborn circumcision is invalid. Male circumcision also violates four core human rights documents-the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Convention Against Torture. Social norm theory predicts that once the circumcision rate falls below a critical value, the social norms that currently distort our perception of the practice will dissolve and rates will quickly fall.

[Circumcision in male newborns--update].

Recently, there have been efforts in a number of countries to forbid the circumcision of infants and children. This position, which is based on alleged violation of autonomy and on serious harm to the infant or child, is not supported by the medical literature. Controlled studies have accumulated showing the major health benefits of circumcision of infants; there is a decrease in urinary tract infections, a virtual elimination of cancer of the penis, a reduction in HIV and HPV infections, as well as other sexually transmitted diseases, and perhaps, reductions in prostatic cancer and in uterine cervical cancer. The complications of the procedure are minimal, especially when performed in infancy. Recent studies have not confirmed the alleged reduction in sexual pleasure as a result of circumcision. Therefore, there is no justification, whatsoever, for attempts to forbid circumcision of infants. On the contrary, there seem to be good reasons to encourage such practices.

Voluntary medical male circumcision: a framework analysis of policy and program implementation in eastern and southern Africa.

BACKGROUND: Following confirmation of the effectiveness of voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) for HIV prevention, the World Health Organization and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS issued recommendations in 2007. Less than 5 y later, priority countries are at different stages of program scale-up. This paper analyzes the progress towards the scale-up of VMMC programs. It analyzes the adoption of VMMC as an additional HIV prevention strategy and explores the factors may have expedited or hindered the adoption of policies and initial program implementation in priority countries to date. METHODS AND FINDINGS: VMMCs performed in priority countries between 2008 and 2010 were recorded and used to classify countries into five adopter categories according to the Diffusion of Innovations framework. The main predictors of VMMC program adoption were determined and factors influencing subsequent scale-up explored. By the end of 2010, over 550,000 VMMCs had been performed, representing approximately 3% of the target coverage level in priority countries. The "early adopter" countries developed national VMMC policies and initiated VMMC program implementation soon after the release of the WHO recommendations. However, based on modeling using the Decision Makers' Program Planning Tool (DMPPT), only Kenya appears to be on track towards achievement of the DMPPT-estimated 80% coverage goal by 2015, having already achieved 61.5% of the DMPPT target. None of the other countries appear to be on track to achieve their targets. Potential predicators of early adoption of male circumcision programs include having a VMMC focal person, establishing a national policy, having an operational strategy, and the establishment of a pilot program. CONCLUSIONS: Early adoption of VMMC policies did not necessarily result in rapid program scale-up. A key lesson is the importance of not only being ready to adopt a new intervention but also ensuring that factors critical to supporting and accelerating scale-up are incorporated into the program. The most successful program had country ownership and sustained leadership to translate research into a national policy and program. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

[Circumcision: history, religion and law]. / La circoncisione tra storia, religione e giurisdizione.

The aim of this article is to describe the circumcision procedure during history, its therapeutic and preventive goals, with focus on bioethical, economic and law issues. The origins of this practice are lost in antiquity. It was performed since 3000 BC by the Egyptians for hygienic and religious reasons. Moreover, male circumcision is a religious commandment in Judaism and Islam, and it is customary in some Oriental Orthodox and other Christian churches of Africa. Nowadays, circumcision is performed as a routine procedure by the Jews and the Muslims for religious reasons. The world prevalence of men with circumcision is 12.5-33%, especially in USA, Canada, Islamic people and Africa; in Europe the prevalence rate is low (in Great Britain it is 1.5%). Currently, male circumcision is being highly debated because of ethical, law and scientific issues and the different roles of this procedure: therapeutic, prophylactic (but there is no universal consensus) and ritualistic role. Nowadays, in Italy there is a strong debate about the consensus for this practice and its indications. The Italian law does not allow performing ritualistic circumcision, as a free of charge procedure in public hospitals, at the government's expenses, because the Italian law must protect different religious cultures, in name of the laity of the State. Thus, national bioethical committee (CNB) has established that ritualistic circumcision may only be performed on a paying basis in public hospitals. As a protective practice, circumcision has decreased in the entire world because of the improvement of hygienical conditions and, above all, the lack of unanimous consent on the real usefulness of protective circumcision, even if several studies have recently demonstrated the protecting role of male circumcision against HIV infection.

Consent for non-therapeutic male circumcision on religious grounds.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to assess whether surgeons are conforming to guidance laid down by professional organisations and the courts in obtaining dual parental consent for non-therapeutic circumcision. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective case-note review over a 12-month period (April 2005 to April 2006) of circumcisions in boys under the age of 16 years in a tertiary paediatric surgical unit was undertaken. RESULTS: A total of 62 boys aged 1-14 years (median age, 4 years) underwent non-therapeutic circumcision. Written consent from both parents was obtained in only 4 cases (6.4%). In no case was written consent obtained from the patient or their views documented. In 58 cases, the written consent was provided by only one parent; the mother in 34 (55%), the father in 24 (45%). Of these 58 cases, in 25 (43%) both parents attended with the child on the day of surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The data reveal a consistent non-conformity with recommended practice and the common law. It seems unlikely that the doctors involved are deliberate and inveterate law-breakers. The reason for this non-compliance may be ignorance of the rules, or due to the impracticality of their implementation. There is evidence that doctors are ignorant of the legal rules pertaining to their patients, and the results may reflect this ignorance. However, there are also practical difficulties in obtaining dual consent that may be partially responsible for the variance. Inevitably, investment will be required to overcome these difficulties. Cost may tempt service providers to abandon the provision, leaving parents to their own devices.

RACP's policy statement on infant male circumcision is ill-conceived.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a critical peer-review of the 2004 Policy Statement on routine male circumcision produced by the Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP). METHOD: Comprehensive evaluation in the context of the research field. RESULTS: We find that the current Statement downplays the wide-ranging life-long benefits of circumcision in prevention of urinary tract infections (UTIs), penile and cervical cancer, genital herpes and chlamydia in women, HIV infection, phimosis, and various penile dermatoses, and at the same time overstates the complication rate. We highlight the many errors in the RACP Statement and note that it sidesteps making a conclusion based on circumcision's well-documented prophylactic health benefits by instead referring to the status of the foreskin at birth. In the era of preventative medicine we view this as irresponsible. CONCLUSION: The RACP's Statement on routine male circumcision is not evidence-based and should be retracted. IMPLICATIONS: In the interests of public health and individual well-being an extensive, comprehensive, evidence-based revision should be conducted so as to provide scientifically accurate, balanced information on the advantages, and also the low rate of mostly minor complications, associated with this simple procedure, which for maximum benefits and minimal risk should ideally be performed in the neonatal period.

Exorcising excision: medico-legal issues arising from male and female genital surgery in Australia.

Genital surgery is one of the most controversial and contested practices, yet it is frequently described and referred to with little or no attention to cultural and social context. This article examines the practice, performed on both men and women, and the extent to which it clashes with issues of consent and capacity, as well as multicultural concepts of toleration for minority group practices. It then questions why female genital surgery, unlike male genital surgery, is legally prohibited in Australia. It argues that such legal gender bias stems from a liberal conception of "tolerance" and the limits of consent in Australia, placing female genital surgery in an "unacceptable" category and male genital surgery in an "acceptable" category.