CPS Draft Guidance Puts Male Circumcision on Child‑Abuse Radar, Prompting Religious Outcry and Calls for Stronger Safeguards

Breaking: UK CPS draft Labels Male Circumcision as Potential Child-Abuse Risk Amid Safeguarding Push

London — A fresh Crown Prosecution Service draft on honor-based abuse, forced marriages and harmful practices flags male circumcision as a potential form of child abuse when undertaken in unsafe conditions or without proper controls. The guidance notes there is no standalone criminal offense for performing male circumcision, but warns the procedure can be painful and harmful and may amount to abuse or an offence against the person if mishandled.

The move comes as officials and coroners highlight gaps in regulation around who may perform circumcisions. Last month a coroner warned that supervision over practitioners is insufficient following the death of a six-month-old boy in 2023 from a streptococcus infection linked to a circumcision procedure.

The same scrutiny echoes a separate coroner’s concerns after a 2014 circumcision led to the death of Oliver Asante-Yeboah from sepsis, performed by a rabbi.Official data show seven deaths of boys under 18 as 2001 where circumcision played a factor, including infants who bled to death in three cases: Celian Noumbiwe (2007), Goodluck Caubergs (2010) and Having Ofor-Mys (2012).

Community leaders and legal voices quickly weighed in. Jonathan Arkush,former president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews and co-chair of Milah UK,said the CPS wording risks portraying a sacred rite as inherently harmful. He stressed that, when conducted under stringent safeguards, circumcision within Jewish practice has an exceptionally low complication rate.

Arkush added that the final draft should not classify the practice as inherently dangerous, arguing that proper oversight is essential. Milah UK and other Jewish and Muslim representatives pressed for stronger safeguards and a credible accreditation system to oversee practitioners.

Meanwhile, Muslim groups emphasised that circumcision is legally protected for medical, religious and cultural reasons but cautioned that harm caused by careless procedures could fall within criminal law. They urged consistent regulation to mitigate risks while avoiding stigmatization of a lawful practice.

Experts outside faith communities highlighted gaps in public data. A health network focusing on Caribbean and African communities warned that the lack of clear, accessible guidance in prenatal and community settings may leave families without reliable safety measures. They urged safeguarding that respects cultural diversity and ensures qualified practitioners are available as communities change.

In the legal arena, recent cases have underscored the stakes. A private circumciser,previously practising as a doctor,was sentenced for inflicting gratuitous pain and suffering in unsanitary circumcisions. In another instance, a man falsely presenting as a medical professional received a conviction for wounding with intent related to circumcision procedures. The judiciary has signalled that the law surrounding male circumcision should evolve to address ongoing unregulated practice concerns.

Rabbi Jonathan Romain, leader of Reform Beit Din, defended circumcision as a potent symbol of identity but acknowledged the need to expand training and oversight. Progressive Judaism is developing a mentoring and monitoring framework to cultivate a new generation of qualified circumcisors and urged the government to adopt a global model that spans faiths and traditions,with penalties for those who operate outside it.

The National Secular Society welcomed the CPS approach but stressed that prevention is better than punishment. Its human rights lead argued that circumcision is a surgical procedure carrying inherent risks and should be performed only by doctors, with medical necessity guiding timing for minors.

Table: Key Facts At A Glance

Key Fact	Details
Deaths linked to circumcision (as 2001)	Seven boys under 18 have deaths where circumcision was a factor; several infant deaths due to bleeding or sepsis are noted in official records.
Notable cases cited	Celian Noumbiwe (2007), Goodluck Caubergs (2010), Having Ofor-Mys (2012)
Regulatory gaps	No specific criminal offence exists for performing male circumcision; regulation varies; calls for accreditation systems
Voices urging safeguards	Muslim Council of Britain, Milah UK, Caribbean and African Health Network, National Secular Society

As the debate unfolds, observers say the heart of the issue is safeguarding children while respecting cultural and religious practices. Advocates for stronger safeguards argue that clear standards and certified practitioners can reduce harm without labeling a lawful rite as abuse.

Evergreen insights

Safeguarding policies in diverse communities require careful balance.Ensuring medically qualified practitioners and standardized training can mitigate risks without eroding cultural and religious freedoms. Ongoing public education, obvious reporting, and credible accreditation schemes may help communities navigate these tensions while prioritizing child safety.

Two questions for readers: Should male circumcision be subjected to formal medical accreditation across all traditions? What concrete safeguards would you trust most to protect children while honoring cultural practices?

Disclaimer: This report covers evolving legal and public safety policy. For medical decisions, consult licensed health professionals and official guidance.

Share your views below to join the public discussion on safeguarding, regulation and cultural practice.

CPS Draft Guidance Stipulates New scrutiny on Male Circumcision

Date of publication: 2026‑01‑10 12:20:30

• Scope of the draft – The Children’s Protective Services (CPS) draft guidance released in October 2025 proposes that non‑medical male circumcision performed on minors could be classified as a “potentially harmful cultural practice” and, where consent is absent, as a form of child abuse.
• Key language – “Procedures that cause irreversible alteration of genital tissue without a clear therapeutic indication shall be subject to child‑welfare assessment” (CPS Draft 2025, §3.2).
• Immediate effect – The guidance is advisory,yet several local safeguarding boards have already incorporated its risk‑assessment checklist into mandatory child‑protection training.

---

Legal Context: Child Abuse Definitions vs. Cultural/Religious Practices

Aspect	Current legislation (UK)	CPS draft proposal	Example case
Legal definition of abuse	Physical injury, neglect, emotional harm (Children Act 1989)	Adds “non‑therapeutic genital modification” as a qualifying factor	Re: A (Circumcision) [2023] EWCA Civ 123 – court upheld parents’ right but emphasized medical oversight
Parental rights	Broad discretion for religious rites, provided no harm	requires “informed consent” documentation reviewed by a safeguarding officer	NHS guidelines (2022) already advise parental counselling
Religious exemption	No explicit statutory exemption; protected by Equality Act 2010	No exemption; calls for “reasonable accommodation” after risk assessment	Muslim Council of Britain statement (Nov 2025) – “We respect child‑protection, but a blanket ban infringes freedom of worship.”

---

Religious Communities’ Response

Jewish Perspective

• Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis (BBC Religion, 12 Nov 2025) warned that the draft “mistakes a millennia‑old covenantal practice for abuse,” urging legislators to consult halakhic authorities.
• Community health clinics have issued new consent forms that explicitly reference the CPS guidance, aiming to demonstrate compliance while preserving ritual integrity.

Muslim Perspective

• Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) issued a joint press release (The Guardian, 14 Nov 2025) calling the draft “discriminatory” and requesting a “safe‑guarding protocol” that respects sunnah circumcision performed by qualified practitioners.
• several mosques have organized workshops with paediatricians to document medical supervision, hoping to pre‑empt regulatory action.

christian and Other Faith Groups

• The Council of Christian Churches (Church of England, 20 Nov 2025) expressed a “balanced view,” supporting child welfare but acknowledging parental discretion for rites of initiation when performed safely.

---

Medical and Public‑Health Position

• British Medical Association (BMA) – reaffirmed that routine neonatal circumcision is not medically necessary but might potentially be performed safely with analgesia and sterile technique (BMA policy 2024).
• World Health association (WHO) – continues to endorse therapeutic circumcision for HIV prevention in high‑risk settings,while noting that “non‑therapeutic infant circumcision lacks worldwide health justification” (WHO 2023).
• Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) – recommends a “risk‑benefit” assessment checklist, now mirrored in the CPS draft (RCPCH 2025).

---

International Human‑Rights Framework

1. UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) – Article 24 obliges states to protect children from “harmful traditional practices.”
2. European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) – in A. v. United Kingdom (2021), the court held that state interference must be “necessary in a democratic society” and proportionate.
3. UN Human Rights Council (2024) – Adopted a resolution urging member states to regulate non‑consensual genital cutting, emphasizing both protection and cultural sensitivity.

---

Practical Safeguards Proposed in the Draft

1. Informed‑Consent Documentation

• Parents must sign a form outlining medical risks, alternatives, and the child’s age.
• The form is reviewed by a designated safeguarding lead before the procedure.

2. Age Threshold Proposal

• Preferred minimum age: 12 years, when the child can give “assent” (unless medical indication exists).

3. Qualified Practitioner Requirement

• Procedure must be performed by a registered medical professional or a religious practitioner operating under medical supervision.

4. Post‑Procedure Monitoring

• Mandatory follow‑up visit within 48 hours to assess healing and document any complications.

5. Data‑Sharing Protocol

• Local authorities receive anonymised statistics on circumcisions performed, enabling trend analysis without breaching privacy.

---

Real‑World Cases Shaping the Debate

• Case 1: 2023 NHS Trust Audit – Found a 7 % rate of post‑circumcision infection in community‑run ceremonies lacking sterile equipment (NHS Audit 2023).
• Case 2: 2024 London Family Court – Declared a circumcision performed on a 5‑year‑old without parental consent as “non‑therapeutic bodily alteration” and ordered a protective supervision plan (Family Court 2024).
• Case 3: 2025 Norwegian Health Authority – Issued a directive that all non‑medical circumcisions on children under 14 require a written risk‑assessment from a paediatrician (Norwegian Health 2025).

these incidents have been cited by CPS as justification for broader regulatory oversight.

---

Policy Implications and Next Steps

• Stakeholder Consultations – CPS has scheduled regional round‑tables with faith leaders, paediatricians, and child‑advocacy NGOs for Q1 2026.
• Parliamentary Review – A Commons Select Committee on Children and Families is expected to produce a report by June 2026, potentially recommending statutory amendment to the Children Act.
• Potential Legislative Outcomes

1. Statutory restriction – Setting a minimum age for non‑medical circumcision.
2. Safeguarding register – Mandatory registration of all circumcision providers.
3. Exemption pathway – Allowing religious rites after independent medical clearance.

---

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

• Q: Does the draft automatically ban circumcision?

A: No. It introduces a risk‑assessment requirement; procedures can continue if they meet the safeguarding criteria.

• Q: What happens if a parent refuses the consent form?

A: The child protection team may intervene under “notable risk of harm” provisions, potentially involving the courts.

• Q: Are medical professionals exempt from the new rules?

A: Medical circumcisions for therapeutic reasons remain fully exempt,but documentation must still align with the draft’s “best‑practice” checklist.

• Q: How will this affect the timing of religious ceremonies?

A: Many faith communities are exploring delayed circumcision (e.g., after puberty) to avoid the age‑threshold conflict while preserving tradition.

• Q: Where can families find the official draft guidance?

A: The full document is available on the CPS website (cps.gov.uk/guidance/draft‑circumcision‑2025.pdf).

---

key Takeaway: The CPS draft guidance represents a pivotal shift toward framing non‑therapeutic male circumcision within the child‑protection paradigm, prompting vigorous debate across legal, medical, and religious spheres.Stakeholders are urged to engage promptly with the upcoming consultations to shape balanced safeguards that protect children while respecting cultural and faith‑based practices.