My point is that it in no way is genital mutilation. Disagree with it all you want. don't circumcise your kids. I am 100% for parents making that decision. I just think comparing it to female GM--which is done for no health benefits, is scientifically proven to damage/harm and scientifically proven to provide no health benefits, which is done because of an absurd amount of social sexism--is not only inaccurate but inappropriate.
Anyway, I'll leave this debate back to abortion (and apparently euthanasia according to the OP?) rather than penis talk.
You're comparing apples to oranges. There is a clear difference between already having cancer and the potential to get cancer.
That isn't true. Paternalism is still rife in medicine. Contraceptives, hysterectomies at early ages, pain management for chronic pain, use of medical marijuana, forced institutionalization for mental health, etc are all aspects of paternalism.
I actually find older doctors are far more receptive to allowing me, as a chronically ill patient, in my care. But that's purely anecdotal.
The pain stuff/marijuana etc is not paternalism, that is not wanting to get your license taken away from the DEA. Or the fear of your patient accidentally overdosing. And I think you are confused about what paternalism is. Doctors can refuse any form of procedure/service/medicine they are uncomfortable prescribing (as long as they give appropriate referrals to MDs who aren't uncomfortable with such practices). That is in no way paternalism. Paternalism (in the sense of an MD) is telling your patient what to do, assuming you know everything and their decisions about their life aren't important (in an overly simplified way).
Edited by Kaddict, 03 April 2016 - 05:04 PM.