TY  - CHAP
AB  - The question of ethics has accompanied all discussion of male circumcision and HIV: How can trials be run ethically? How could circumcision be promoted and provided ethically? Is it ethical to provide medical circumcision and payment to under-resourced test subjects? Would it be ethical to not do so? Two comprehensive and widely read papers (“Circumcision and HIV prevention research: An ethical analysis,” Lancet, 2006, and “The first randomised trial of male circumcision for preventing HIV: What were the ethical issues?,” PLoS Medicine, 2005) addressed the ethical issues of these investigations from the perspective of scientific liability, and many of the opponents of male circumcision, for this or other reasons, call their viewpoint a human rights matter. In this paper, I draw from social science and from the harm reduction movement to propose an ethic of wellness, built on causing the least harm and contributing to the most knowledge. This approach to the ethical question is linked to, but distinct from and sometimes at odds with, the traditional canon of medical ethics or bioethics.
VL  - 9
SN  - 978-0-7623-1438-6, 978-1-84950-501-7/1057-6290
DO  - 10.1016/S1057-6290(07)09009-2
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1016/S1057-6290(07)09009-2
AU  - Mukherjea Ananya
ED  - Barbara Katz Rothman
ED  - Elizabeth Mitchell Armstrong
ED  - Rebecca Tiger
PY  - 2007
Y1  - 2007/01/01
TI  - Cutting Risk: The Ethics of Male Circumcision, HIV Prevention, and Wellness
T2  - Bioethical Issues, Sociological Perspectives
T3  - Advances in Medical Sociology
PB  - Emerald Group Publishing Limited
SP  - 225
EP  - 243
Y2  - 2024/04/25
ER  -