A new study from Oxford University is challenging long-standing practices of performing non-voluntary genital modifications and surgeries on young children. The research strongly argues that all non-voluntary surgical procedures on children before puberty, regardless of their sex or gender, should be stopped, even if doctors and parents have good intentions. Instead, it encourages parents who consider these surgeries to explore non-surgical alternatives.
The study emphasises that surgery should only be an option when a child’s physical health is in immediate danger. Even in those cases, the study insists that the definition of a health emergency should be very specific to prevent this exception from being misused as a reason to carry out invasive, non-voluntary procedures.
Importantly, the study makes a few key points. First, it focuses only on the rights of children who haven’t yet reached puberty, making it clear that teenagers and adults are not the subject of this research. Second, it distinguishes between surgeries that a person chooses for themselves and those that are forced upon them. The study concludes that to promote fairness, inclusivity, and equality, doctors should not be allowed to perform any genital surgery on young children without their consent unless it’s absolutely necessary for their physical health. However, when it comes to older individuals, the study suggests that voluntary surgeries may be appropriate, especially when they reflect the person’s own values, identity, and emotional well-being.
Current Global Consensus: Protecting Some Children, But Not All
The study highlights that there is a strong global agreement, especially in the Global North, to ban and criminalise surgeries on young non-intersex (endosex) children assigned female at birth. These procedures, often categorised as female genital mutilation (FGM), are recognised as serious violations of bodily rights, causing lasting physical and mental harm. However, this concern is largely limited to this group and does not extend to protecting intersex children. Only a few states have taken the step to outright ban intersex genital mutilation, leaving many intersex children vulnerable to invasive non-consensual surgeries.
Expanding the Scope of Protection
The study argues that these protections should be broadened to include all children, regardless of sex characteristics or the sex assigned to them at birth. The central idea is to protect all children's bodily integrity, ensuring they have the right to make decisions about their bodies and genitals while safeguarding their privacy, sexual boundaries, and future autonomy over their own bodies. The study emphasises that decisions about a child's body should not be influenced by the subjective views of healthcare professionals or parents, nor by questionable risk versus benefit calculations. Instead, it is vital to respect each child’s autonomy to prevent a lifetime of violated rights and long-term physical, psychological, and social harm, which often arise from rigid, binary gender norms.
The Importance of Defining Medical Necessity
The study highlights the critical need to clearly define what truly qualifies as a medical necessity. The authors argue that this term should be strictly limited to urgent, life-saving procedures with clearly established criteria, to prevent it from being misused as a reason for non-consensual surgeries that could continue to harm children, especially intersex children. They suggest that only serious, immediate threats to physical health should be grounds for non-voluntary surgeries, while broader personal needs and preferences should justify voluntary surgeries that an individual chooses for themselves.
For those interested in exploring the findings in more detail, the full scholarly article can be accessed here, along with the official press release here.
Dive into our ever-growing resources library for insightful publications, articles, learning modules, and audiovisual content from IGLYO, our Members, and the global LGBTQI community.
