"The medical benefits previously claimed, however, have not been convincingly proven, and it is now widely accepted, including by the BMA, that this surgical procedure has medical and psychological risks"

NORM-UK and the NSPCC?

David Smith
(This page does not contain medical advice)

Last updated on 31st December 2002

Buy Books about Circumicsion and Foreskin Health

Over the past few months a number of members have contacted me to ask if we are working with the NSPCC, especially following the Full Stop Campaign. Some members even sent me copies of correspondence with the NSPCC. I thought it would be helpful to give a brief report on our negotiations with them.

I have been writing to the NSPCC in a personal capacity since 1995. Most of my original letters were ignored, but I did receive a reply saying that they were working on a policy dealing with circumcision.

In April 1999, I received a circular letter from Jim Harding asking me to sign the Full Stop Pledge. I replied on 8th April saying that I would be delighted to sign the pledge if he could assure me that it included all forms of child cruelty including male infant circumcision. To reinforce my point I quoted a passage from an article in the Guardian in 1996 by David Flusfeder about the circumcision of his son who he was holding down at the time which read, "I heard the sound of scissors tearing through skin. And then, a moment later the horrible scream that Julius made of utter, excruciating pain"
That letter remained unanswered and I followed it with a letter on 20th May 1999 that I threatened to copy to several members of the press. This letter prompted a reply from David Truen the Legal Officer who said that they had no immediate plans to campaign on circumcision.

In June 1999 I again wrote to David Truen. My final paragraph said, "Again I will quote a passage from your Full Stop leaflet. Through our work in these areas we will develop partnerships with many other professionals and organisations - statutory, voluntary, private, - who are already working with children. To stop cruelty we must all work together. Again on behalf of NORM-UK, I accept your invitation to work together and look forward to receiving details of a date and venue for the first meeting of our two organisations. I enclose leaflets and information books giving details of the work of NORM-UK." This letter was replied to on 9th July 1999 and I was told that they had no immediate plans to campaign on circumcision but when they decided to do so they would welcome liaison with other organisations such as ours.

In November 2000 one of our members received a reply to his letter from Christopher Cloke the Head of Child Protection Awareness, which said, "At present the NSPCC does not have a policy on male circumcision but we are considering the need for one."

As we seemed to be making no headway with the NSPCC on an individual basis, following a discussion in committee it was decided to make an official approach from NORM-UK. On 8th October 2001 John Warren sent a letter together with two information sheets, the first dealing with the medical aspects of circumcision and the second dealing with the legal and human rights aspects prepared by Christopher Price. The final paragraph of the letter said that members of our committee would be pleased to come along and meet with members of the NSPCC to explain our point of view.

On 18th October 2001, Lucy Thorpe, Policy Adviser replied to our letter saying, "I wanted to thank you for sending us detailed briefing material on the medical, legal and human rights aspects of this practice, which will be very helpful for our examination of the issues. We will bear in mind your offer to attend any future discussions we may have on this matter." We have heard nothing since.

It would seem however, that our dealings with the NSPCC are not unusual. In February 2002, our attention was drawn to an article published in the Guardian by Dea Birkett following the inquiry into the death of Victoria Climbie. Victoria had been referred to an NSPCC run family centre seven months before her death, but nobody from the centre went to see her. The Guardian report painted a very black picture of the NSPCC, accusing their director, Mary Marsh of attempting to use the inquiry as a publicity platform for the �3 million Satchi "Full Stop Campaign".

Birkett went on to report that last year, just �36m of its' annual �82m budget was spent on direct services to children; much of the rest went on publicity and campaigning. She added that the NSPCC has been around since 1884, but the level of child abuse has remained constant. Last autumn they had in fact closed sixteen child protection centres.

In the final two paragraphs of her article, Birkett says that the NSPCC seems to have lost all sense of what is important in the fight against child abuse. The size of their coffers is what concerns this charity.

The NSPCC tells us that it wants everyone to work together to end all forms of child cruelty. NORM-UK has done everything it can to help them achieve this. Birkett says that posters in bus shelters rather than hands on help is the charity's way of tackling child abuse. From the evidence we have seen this would seem to be the case.

Why not contact the NSPCC about this and tell them what you think
If you normally give money to the NSPCC why not give to us instead (we don't spend it on ads in bus shelters!)

(NORM-UK is not responsible for the content of external sites)