2/4 So what WHO & everyone else calls Type IV (piercing as in the recent Detroit case) is "Category 1" for them. Clitoral hood removal is Type I, but "Category 2" for Jacobs & Arora. "Type III" & "Category 3" & "Type IV" & "Category 4" are also different from one another. #i2
I think it's more basic than that. This is about requiring physicians to comply with a minimal ethical standard. Physicians who promote removing clitoral hoods from healthy girls fall below that standard in a way that threatens public health. It's about ethics, not competence #i2
-
-
But they are not competent to make the necessary judgment call to know that a procedure cutting into a child genital area which has no medical benefit at all, it's actually a crime. It's an assault. Its beyond ethics, it's a moral violation.
-
Yes, you & I are in agreement on that.
#i2
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.