Yale Law and Policy Review examines surgical liability
From the article's conclusion: "Surgeons who perform genetic normalizing surgery, whether on an emergency basis or at the behest of the intersexed infant's parents, should be aware that, because genital-normalizing surgery is not necessary nor proven beneficial for the infant with clitoromegaly or micropenis, the required elements of legal informed consent are likely to have not been met. In light of the questionable scientific basis behind its use, the lack of follow-up data on its benefits, and the overwhelming evidence of its negative physical and psychological results for many intersexuals, a moratorium should be declared on the use of defenseless infants as the experimental subjects of genital-normalizing surgery."
Ford, Kishka-Kamari. 2001. "First, Do No Harm" - The Fiction of Legal Parental Consent to Genital-Normalizing Surgery on Intersexed Infants. Yale Law and Policy Review 19 (469).
Copyright © ISNA 1993-2008