Macklin's Ethical Relativism In A Multicultural Society

In Macklin’s “Ethical Relativism in a Multicultural Society,” she discusses the difference between cultural tolerance and intolerance in the medical field. The main argument that follows is if physicians are obligated to follow contemporary ethics or in the case United States medical ethics or respect cultural difference of their patients and give treatment accordingly, especially when dealing with children. Macklin argues that while cultural tolerance should be practiced it is the “obligation of the pediatricians to educate and to even urge parents to adopt practices likely to contribute to the good health…of their children, and to avoid practices that will definitely or probably cause harm and suffering (Macklin, pp. 125). To state simply, Macklin is trying to discern when culturally diverse treatment can be practiced under the universal code of ethics and which are culturally relative. Based on this case:

G brings his 12-year-old daughter, Aliya, to Dr. Jordan’s office with the request that he perform the procedure on her. Although traditionally the procedure is performed without anesthesia or antiseptics, Mr. G says that he wants his daughter to have access to these, because he does not want her to suffer and wants her to be safe. Dr. Jordan does not find these concessions satisfactory, however. He believes that the practice, even with anesthesia, reflects an unacceptable disfigurement, repression, and control of women. Mr. G and his daughter insist that they want the procedure carried out; if not, they will seek the traditional method when they return to their home country for a planned visit.”
I argue that female genital mutilation (FGM) should not be covered under the universal code of ethics when dealing with cultural tolerance, parents should not be able to make harmful decisions for their children, and doctors are under no obligation to perform such rituals to conform to the beliefs and traditions of their patients such as in cases of