In recent years, circumcision of boys has sparked off debate in Sweden. Even though mostpoliticians do not consider the procedure as problematic, if the procedure is done beforepuberty as the rights are covered by the Swedish law on freedom of religion, the SwedishCentre Party are drafting a ban on religious circumcisions of boys. This essay aims to analyzethe current discourse surrounding the subject of circumcision.Circumcision of boys is a procedure of frequent occurrence in all parts of the world. Thecircumcision is most often performed when the boy is an infant, or of such a low age, that thechild is too young to understand and give consent for such a procedure. Therefore, it is mostoften the guardian who decides if a circumcision is to be performed. In the current discourse,many regard circumcision as a way for the child or guardian to express their religion, since itis the right of the guardians to pass on their religion onto their child. Consequently, a ban oncircumcision of boys would discriminate against people belonging to the Jewish and Muslimfaith who will not be able to perform their religious duties freely, which could result in theincrease of isolation and segregation in society. Many see the choice of religion as a right thatis to be taken by the child, and that is why a prohibition on circumcision of boys is advocatedby some groups in society.According to the ‘UN Convention on the Rights of the Child’, all the decisions involving achild are to be taken while considering the well-being and what is best for the child inquestion. There is concurrently legislation that allows circumcision of boys on the conditionthat both guardians give their consent. The ones advocating for a ban on circumcision of boysargue that the procedure is against the well-being of the child as it is a limitation of the child’sbest interest and bodily integrity. While the side arguing for circumcision of boys consider theprocedure as part of the religious identity and the group identity, and that the procedure alsohas medical benefits that are considered to be favorable for the child’s well-being. / Omskärelse av pojkar har väckt debatt i Sverige under de senaste åren. Även om de flestapolitiker inte anser att ingreppet är problematiskt om det sker innan puberteten och medhänvisning till lagen om religionsfrihet, arbetar Centerpartiet för ett förbud mot religiösomskärelse av pojkar. Uppsatsen syftar till att analysera nuvarande diskurser kring omskärelseav pojkar.Omskärelse av pojkar är ett ingrepp som är vanligt förekommande i hela världen, liksom iSverige. Omskärelsen sker oftast när pojken är ett spädbarn eller i för låg ålder för att kunnaförstå och samtycka till ingreppet. Därav är det i de flesta fallen vårdnadshavarna sombeslutar om att omskärelsen ska ske. I de rådande diskurser betraktar många omskärelser somett uttryck för barnets och vårdnadshavarnas religionsfrihet, eftersom vårdnadshavarna harrätt till att föra över sin tro på sitt barn. Därmed anses förbud mot omskärelse varadiskriminering mot muslimer och judar som inte kan utföra sin religion fritt, vilket kan ökasegregationen i samhället och känslan av utanförskap. Medan många tolkar barnets religionsom barnets rätt att fritt välja sin religion därmed hävdar dem ett förbud mot omskärelse avpojkar.Enligt FN:s barnkonvention ska alla beslut rörande barn fattas utifrån barnets bästa. Samtidigthar vi en lagstiftning som tillåter omskärelse av pojkar om både vårdnadshavarna uttryckersitt medgivande. De som förespråkar ett förbud mot omskärelse anser att ingreppet är motbarnets bästa eftersom det innebär inskränkning av barnets intresse och kroppsliga integritet.Medan de som är för ingreppet anser att ingreppet ingår i den religiösaidentiteten/gruppidentiteten och medför medicinska fördelar vilka anses vara för barnetsbästa.

The advent of ARTs has enabled many individuals to have children and build families. Although ARTs have from the start been designated to serve as alternative way for heterosexual infertile individuals and couples to have genetically related children, ARTs are nowadays widely used by gays and lesbians to have even genetically unrelated children and build their families. This study addresses the well-being of children born as a result of ARTs and growing up in homosexual families in South Africa. South Africa has legalised homosexual unions, granting gays and lesbians several rights, including the right to marry, use ARTs to reproduce, and build families in which they raise their children. South Africa has also provided constitutional and statutory protection of children’s rights and has further required that the child’s best interests be considered as paramount in every matter concerning the child. Although ARTs may have allowed people to have children, they have proven to put the child’s interests at risk. ARTs are associated with several physical and psychological problems for resulting children. The legal protection provided for those children seems to be inadequate in respect of their best interests. Unlike Australian statutes that have provided strong protection for the child’s best interests, South African legislations regulating ARTs are far from protecting ART-born children’s interests. The application of the child’s best interests criterion to ART procedures has revealed that in the USA and Australia efforts of the state, ART providers and parents have been centred on the transfer of the custody of the ART-born child to the commissioning parent(s). Although in South Africa the application of the child’s best interests in the context of surrogacy procedures has revealed the protection of the child’s interests, it should be noted that that protection seems to focus on the child’s post-birth period. This situation leaves ART-born children without any protection, especially before their birth. In order to give effect to section 28 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 and protect ART-born children’s interests, I make certain proposals for law reform in the final chapter of this thesis. / Private Law / LL. D