Social Work and Male Circumcision

Boys' and Men's Right to Intact Genitals

Childhood male circumcision is a very contentious topic in American culture, yet social work literature rarely, if ever, addresses it. Social work’s disinclination to examine circumcision is incongruent with the profession’s role as child welfare experts and advocates.

Discussing the circumcision of boys touches on several topics, each of which is emotionally charged. Circumcision has implications about human sexuality, body sovereignty, religious minority rights, medical ethics, childhood trauma, rights of men and intersex people, amongst others. These subjects elicit passionate opinions and emotions and social workers are as prone to those responses as the general American population.  Even with so many different opinions and so much passion on the topic, social work can provide a unique and useful perspective congruent with our role as child welfare advocates.

Social work values and ethics provide an entry point into a possible professional social work examination of childhood circumcisions. The values that follow are from the NASW Code of Ethics.

The value of Social Justice deals with discrimination and other forms of social injustice. Is it just to advocate for the preservation of every girl’s right to an intact sexual body, while failing to do so for boys? Social work values and advocates for a girl’s inviolable right to her intact body and genitals. Social work does not value or advocate the identical inviolability of boys’ bodies. This is unjust and discriminatory.

The value of Dignity and Worth of the Person directs social workers to respect the inherent dignity and worth of the person. Respecting a person’s right to their natural healthy body promotes her/his inherent dignity and worth. Social workers should take reasonable steps to safeguard the interest of clients who lack the capacity to make informed consent- including children and infants. A man should be able to self determine whether he wants skin, mucosa and nerve endings removed from his penis.

This is certainly not an exhaustive discussion of ethical considerations in play when discussing circumcision. There are other values that must be addressed. This brief treatment of the topic above is included to demonstrate ethical considerations can and should provide the starting point for a professional examination and discussion of male circumcision in America. Social workers should address these ethical issues directly and immediately.

The issue of religiously motivated circumcision, though extremely important, is not addressed in this website for two reasons. 

  1) The vast majority of male circumcisions in this country are motivated by secular, not religious reasons. Religious demands have no bearing on most circumcisions in America.

  2) The author of this website has no expertise in Islam, Judaism or other religions which have a religious requirement or preference for circumcision. Social work values are not central to religious practices and decision making.

This website is not meant to be an exhaustive study of childhood circumcision. It is intended to be a stimulus to prod social work to address the issue. While American social work seems unlikely in the short-run to advocate for boys’ and men’s rights to self determination about their bodies, it is incumbent on the profession, in our organizations, workshops, literature and classrooms to examine the issue.

Please examine the links below: