In a first, the medical regulator has taken a doctor to tribunal after he circumcised a seven year old boy but allegedly “failed to involve the child in the decision-making process”.

Nottingham GP Dr Balvinder Mehat is accused of misconduct after he allegedly also failed to obtain the father’s consent before the procedure.

The National Secular Society, which campaigns to protect all children from forced genital cutting, welcomed the move. It said doctors “should defer all decisions about non-therapeutic circumcision until the individual is old enough to provide informed consent, based on his own values”.

Boy left “in agony” following circumcision

The boy’s mother asked Mehat to circumcise the boy for “spiritual and cultural reasons” in 2022. The parents were married but separated, and the father did not want the boy to be circumcised.

Guidance on religious circumcision from the medical regulator, the General Medical Council (GMC), says doctors “should get the child’s consent if they have the maturity and understanding to give it.

“If not, you should get consent from all those with parental responsibility.”

A GMC lawyer said the boy was later taken to A&E “in agony” after an infection developed at the circumcision site. The boy’s father said Mehat should have been “more concerned with the child’s welfare and safeguarding”.

It is also alleged Mehat “asked the mother to sign a backdated disclaimer form after the boy’s father complained about the circumcision”.

In 2019, Mehat was suspended for one month after he circumcised another boy without his mother’s consent. At the time, the medical tribunal said there was a “very low risk of repetition” and “no risk to patients”.

He was also arrested on suspicion of grievous bodily harm following the circumcision, but not prosecuted. A leading human rights lawyer, Saimo Chahal KC, said the failure to prosecute was “flawed and irrational”.

‘Children are individuals with rights that should be respected’

A report into Mehat’s actions compiled for the GMC by a paediatric surgeon said children should be involved “as much as possible in decisions around their care”.

Many elements of GMC guidance on treating children strongly suggest doctors should not perform medically unnecessary circumcisions on boys too young to given consent, including:

• “Children and young people are individuals with rights that should be respected. This means listening to them and taking into account what they have to say about things that affect them”
• “When treating children and young people, you must also consider parents and others close to them; but the patient must be the your first concern”
• “Children and young people may be particularly vulnerable and need to be protected from harm”

Earlier this year, a draft update to GMC guidance on medical procedures performed for religious or cultural reasons removed explicit permissions for doctors to perform medically unnecessary circumcision on children. The NSS was consulted on the draft guidance and welcomed the change.

Guidance on non-therapeutic male circumcision from the British Medical Association, a professional body for doctors, says it “cannot envisage a situation in which it is ethically acceptable to circumcise a child who refuses the procedure, irrespective of the parents’ wishes.”

It als notes the “the harm of a person not having the opportunity to choose not to be circumcised or choose not to follow the traditions of his parents”.

It says doctors should discuss with parents “the irreversibility of the procedure” and “whether circumcision can be deferred until the child can make his own decision”.

Deaths and serious harm following circumcision

At least five babies have died since 2007 following medically unnecessary circumcisions, including Celian Noumbiwe, Goodluck Caubergs, Angelo Ofori-Mintah, Oliver Asante-Yeboah and Mohamed Abdisamad.

In September, NSS research revealed 17 baby boys were treated for “life threatening haemorrhage, shock or sepsis which relates to a circumcision” at just one NHS trust last year.

Under UK law, anyone can legally circumcise a boy, even if they have no medical training or “proven expertise”. Anaesthesia does not have to be used, and doctors struck off the medical register for dangerous circumcisions can continue to legally circumcise boys as laypeople.

Two unregulated circumcisers, Mohammed Siddiqui and Mohammad Alazawi, were jailed last year for serious circumcision related crimes against boys, including GBH and child cruelty.

Following the convictions, the Crown Prosecution Service added circumcision to its prosecutorial guidance for the first time.

Two coroners, one in 2015 and one in 2025, have issued prevention of future death reports after boys died following circumcision performed by unregulated circumcisers. But the Government has refused to change the law.

In September, Labour MP Sam Carling tabled an amendment to regulate circumcision but there was insufficient parliamentary time for it to be debated. In July, the Court of Appeal said it would “clearly be preferable for Parliament to regulate non-medical circumcisions”.

NSS: ‘GMC should now follow this argument to its logical conclusion’

National Secular Society human rights lead Dr Alejandro Sanchez said: “Medical ethics and child safeguarding norms clearly militate against non-consensual genital surgery performed on boys for religious or cultural reasons.

“We therefore commend the GMC for taking Dr Mehat to tribunal for failing to elicit the child’s views before subjecting him to a medically unnecessary circumcision.

“The GMC should now follow this argument to its logical conclusion: doctors should defer all decisions about non-therapeutic circumcision until the individual is old enough to provide informed consent, based on his own values.”