Home  >  Correspondence  >  Child Protection Agencies

Dear Dr. Bhimji:

Thank you for your letter dated June 15, 2000 in which you request clarification of issues with regard to male circumcision and female genital mutilation. Unfortunately, we do not have the resources to respond to your request at this time.

The Child and Family Services Act, which constitutes the child protection legislation in Ontario, outlines the accepted definition of child abuse within this province. As one of 51 Children's Aid Societies in Ontario we believe that your request should more appropriately be sent to the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies [address and telephone number given]. This organization would be in a better position to provide you with a provincial perspective on this matter.

Yours truly,
 
[signed]
 
Cecilia J. Taylor, MSW
Director, Intake Services
 
 

Dear Dr. Bhimji:

I am in receipt of your letter of June 15, 2000 regarding routine infant circumcision. Your questions have been forwarded to our Assistant Director of Child Protection Services, Lynda Cullain, for follow-up.

Best of luck in your undertakings.

Sincerely,
 
[signed]
 
Marion Roberts
Interim Executive Director

cc: Lynda Cullain, Assistant Director of Services—Protection Services
 
 

Dear Dr. Bhimji,

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your letter of June 15, 2000. While the Society does not engage in the practice of routine infant circumcision, its written policy with respect to circumcision relates only to female genital mutilation. I have forwarded your letter to Dr. Peggy Robertson, the Manager of our Health Services, who will be in contact with you directly to respond to your specific questions. In addition, for your information I enclose the Society's policy on female genital mutilation, and a copy of a background paper that outlines the basis upon which that policy was recommended and approved.

Sincerely,
 
[signed]
 
Bruce Rivers
Executive Director

cc: Dr. M.E. Robertson
 
 

Dear Dr. Bhimji:

Your letter of June 15, 2000 certainly raises some interesting issues and questions. I am enclosing literature which should provide you with a generally accepted definition of child abuse, as set out by the government of Ontario.

I am not aware of any prosecutions or apprehensions related to female genital mutilation in this area.

A more appropriate resource to answer your questions would be the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies [contact information supplied].

I trust this information may be of some assistance to you in support of your academic pursuits.

Regards,
 
[signed]
 
M. Etherington
for Maureen Collins
Director of Services
 
 

Dear Dr. Bhimji:

This is in response to your letter of June 15, 2000 in which you request information about the positions of Children's Aid Societies on male circumcision and female genital mutilation.

The definition of child abuse that we work from is that contained in the Child and Family Services Act (CFSA) Section 37(2). The first part of this section states that a child is in need of protection where the child has suffered physical harm, inflicted by the person having charge of the child or caused by or resulting from that person's failure to adequately care for, provide for, supervise or protect the child, or a pattern of neglect in caring for, providing for, supervising or protecting the child.

The Ontario Child Welfare Eligibility Spectrum, endorsed by the Ministry and the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies, describes in more detail the interpretation of this section of the CFSA to include physical force, maltreatment, cruel and inappropriate treatment, inadequate supervision, and neglect of a child's basic needs. Specific examples are given in each area.

However, both the CFSA and the Eligibility Spectrum are silent on the issues of male circumcision and female genital mutilation. To my knowledge, there has not been a case in Ontario where either of these procedures has been treated as a case of child abuse, or where a child has been apprehended from parent(s) as a result of these issues. Our agency does not have a specifically stated position on these issues at this time.

The question of whether circumcision fits the definition of child abuse, and the related question as to how Children's Aid Societies and law enforcement authorities will eventually respond to this issue will still need a lot of clarification, and some test cases.

I trust that this information is helpful to you.

Yours sincerely,
 
[signed]
 
Maurice D. Brubacher, MSW, CSW
Executive Director
 
 

Dear Dr. Bhimji:

Re: Your correspondence dated June 15, 2000

The Society does not have the resources to contribute to research such as yours at this point in time. Perhaps you could contact the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies or the School of Social Work at the University of Toronto where child welfare related research is being conducted.

For your information, please find attached the Ministry of Community and Social Services' pamphlet on Reporting Child Abuse and Neglect. This pamphlet provides you with a definition of a child in need of protection in Ontario. The legislation does not refer specifically to FGM or infant male circumcision. Our Society has not developed a specific position in this respect nor does it gather data on FGM or infant male circumcision which could be made readily available to you.

Sincerely,
 
[signed]
 
Pierre Viger
Director of Professional Standards
 
 

Ms. Jeanette Lewis, Executive Director
Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies

Dear Ms. Lewis,

As it is the practice of the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies to review and respond to research material in the areas of child abuse, please find enclosed a letter dated June 15, 2000 from Dr. Arif Bhimji requesting professional opinions on the issue of infant male circumcision. Dr. Bhimji will be notified that his letter has been forwarded, and will await a reply from the Association.

Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter.

Yours truly,
 
[signed]
 
Bernard Smith
Executive Director

cc: Dr. Arif Bhimji
 
 

Dear Dr. Bhimji

Re: Your research into infant male circumcision

Due to other responsibilities we are sorry that we are not able to provide the information you requested in your letter of June 15, 2000. We wish you well in your research.

Sincerely,
 
[signed]
 
William J. Charron
Executive Director
 
 

Dear Dr. Bhimji

Your letter dated June 15, 2000 to Executive Directors of Children's Aid Societies throughout the province has been forwarded to the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies for response.

The Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies represents the interests of its 50 member Children's Aid Societies in public forums which may affect children and families and the CASs that serve them.

In response to your questions, I attach the following information:

• Section 37 of the Child and Family Services Act that defines a "child in need of protection"
   
• Section 72 of the Child and Family Services Act that outlines the public and professional's duty to report
   
• Letter to Dr. George Morrison, President, College of Physicians and Surgeons dated April April 3, 1992
   
• Other information/articles related to female genital mutilation.

I trust this information is helpful to you.

Sincerely,
 
[signed]
 
Diane Cresswell
Manager of Communications
 
 

Dear Dr. Bhimji

Further to your letter of June 15, 2000, I am advised by Diane Cresswell of the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies that she will be preparing a provincial response to your questions. I am confident that Diane's response will provide the information that you are requesting.

Sincerely yours,
 
[signed]
 
Raymond J. Muldoon, M.S.W.
Executive Director
 
 

Dear Dr. Bhimji:

I am writing in response to your letter of June 15th. While there certainly has been discussion in our field about female circumcision, I am not aware of any cases that have come to the attention of child welfare in Ontario with respect to infant male circumcision. I have just recently taken up my post at the Hastings Children's Aid Society in Belleville; in discussion with department heads here, there is no record or knowledge of any case in this jurisdiction involving female circumcision. I can offer the following comments in reference to the questions raised in your letter:

1. The generally accepted definition of child abuse is that set out in the Child and Family Services Act in Ontario. More specifically the Eligibility Spectrum is a working document that defines in great detail the types of abuse and maltreatment that constitute grounds for intervention by a child protection authority in this province. These documents can be obtained from the Minstry of Community and Social Services.
    
2. Female genital mutilation (FGM) would constitute child abuse in our view if it is performed outside outside of medical support or sanction. No such cases have been brought to our attention in this community. The issue has been one of greater concern in larger communities such as Toronto or Ottawa where certain cultural or ethnic groups have brought the practice with them from their countries of origin. There is no reference in the Eligibility Spectrum document with respect to FGM.
    
3. We would not at this point view infant male circumcision as constituting child abuse. It is our understanding that debate is continuing in the medical field with respect to this practice although the pendulum appears to be swinging away from the practice as exercised in earlier generations. The point you raised is an interesting one and perhaps your research may lead towards some further discussion in both the medical and child welfare communities with respect to a shifting view as to this practice.

Thank you for your interest in the work of our Society. We wish you luck in your research on this question.

Yours truly,
 
[signed]
 
P. Len Kennedy, M.S.W.
Executive Director
 

^Top