Harmful traditional practices, (male circumcision - Electronic Thesis ...

58
submitted that the practice should be discouraged. It can be further argued,
judging from the decisions in the Pillay, Prince and Christian Education cases that
virginity testing will not pass constitutional scrutiny.
In the case of traditional male circumcisions it is submitted that when the
practice is carried out in unhygienic conditions, coupled with other hardships
such as starvation, frostbite, gangrene and other health related hazards, the
potential for harm to the male child far outweighs the benefits put forward by
those who support the practice. Under these conditions, traditional male
circumcisions has the potential to infringe the right to bodily integrity and in
severe cases such as death, the right to life is also infringed. It is therefore
submitted, that under these conditions, traditional male circumcisions will not
pass constitutional scrutiny.
Although each and every circumcision carried out on a male child carries the risk
of physical injury, there is a difference between circumcisions carried out for
cultural reasons and religious reasons. Recent reports in the media indicate that
many traditional circumcisions are carried out in unhygienic conditions and by
untrained personnel. Religious circumcisions are for the most part carried out by
a medical practitioner, in the case of Muslims and a mohel in the case of Jews.
As such, the cases of botched circumcisions in Jews and Muslims are not as
widespread as is the case with traditional male circumcisions. It is therefore
submitted that male circumcisions carried out for religious purposes should be
carried out strictly according to the requirements of the particular religion, in
order to protect children from botched circumcisions and other health related
injuries accompanied by unhygienic circumcisions.