Tuesday, July 23, 2013

King of the UK uncut?

Working as a press office in my day job, I well know the desperation of journalists faced with the problem of coming up with a new angle on a story that has been running for days.

So well done, I think, to the Evening Standard for this take on the royal baby story:
Forget about the name of our future king. There is another delicate question that hasn’t been answered. Will the young Prince of Cambridge be circumcised?
This reminds me of a story I read the other day on Castle News - "Independent news for Bishop's Castle, Shropshire" - about Antony Lempert, a doctor who lives in the town and campaigns against the circumcision of baby boys for religious reasons.

He told the website:
“Research from Birmingham for example found that last year eleven baby boys under one were admitted to the paediatric intensive care unit of Birmingham Children’s Hospital with life-threatening complications such as infection or bleeding as a direct result of circumcision.”
I am pleased that the campaign against female genital mutilation now has such prominence, but it seems we should be concerned about the circumcision of boys too.

1 comment:

Andy JS said...

I'm British and I was circumcised for no reason at all when I was about four years old, so I'm really hoping the new royal baby won't be circumcised.