Meaning and value attributed to non-therapeutic circumcision of boys among Danish parents of Jewish Origin: The formation of parents and families

Abstract

Non-therapeutic circumcision of boys (NTCB) has been the subject of a heated public debate in Denmark from around 2010 to 2022. In this debate, the parents' perspective has largely been missing. Until now, very little is known about the meaning with and attribution of value to NTCB by Danish-Jewish parents. In the present study, we have examined social and discursive practices of NTCB among Danish-Jewish parents. The analysis is based on 20 semi-structured interviews with parents about their views and experiences with either choosing or opting out of NTCB. The concepts used in the analysis are Sense of Coherence proposed by medical sociologist Aaron Antonovsky, and Davies and Harré positioning theory of Subjectivation, Becoming, Belonging and Positioning. Using these concepts, the analysis indicates that NTCB may be understood as a cultural act and related to the interviewees' process of becoming parents and a family, actualizing questions of gender, ethnic-cultural identity, origin, family biography, and affiliation to Judaism as well as questions of identity and belonging. Parents viewed NTCB as a valuable and meaningful continuation of culture and tradition. The analysis shows how NTCB is currently articulated and how parents make sense of the practice based on their cultural, social and religious identity and within the current context of Denmark where debates about NTCB are raised. This article makes an important contribution to the understanding of the perspective of Danish-Jewish parents. Knowledge on the cultural and religious reasons for NTCB is critical to inform the debate and decision about a ban on non-therapeutic circumcision of boys in Denmark. Taking the views of Danish-Jewish parents into account will allow us to understand the complexity of the practice as well as reveal new and different ways of making sense of non-therapeutic circumcision of boys.

1. Introduction

Globally, non-therapeutic circumcision of boys (NTCB) is one of the most common surgical procedures. It is estimated that 37–39 % of all men in the world are circumcised (Morris et al., 2016).

The most common narrative is that the procedure is performed for religious, cultural, and/or health reasons (World Health Organization and Joint UN Programme on HIV/AIDS 2007). NTCB is common in The United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Indonesia, South Korea, Taiwan, and a number of countries in northern Africa, the Middle East, and sub-Saharan Africa (Morris et al., 2016).

A large proportion of the world's NTCB takes place in Muslim societies, but male circumcision is also considered a widespread and common cultural-ethnic and cultural-religious practice among Jews and Christian Copts, and as an important rite of passage in many African societies (Morris et al., 2016; World Health Organization and Joint UN Programme on HIV/AIDS 2007).

Among Jews, circumcision of boys is considered an important marker of ethnic-religious identity, which originates from the covenant between God and Abraham as described in the Old Testament (Ben-Yami, 2013; Laura, 2010). NTCB is also motivated by sexual reasons related to marriageability and romantic partners.

To the best of our knowledge, only one other study shed light on how contemporary Danish Jews perceive circumcision of boys and what significance, value, and meanings are related to this practice (Schmidt, 2021). This study found that the Danish Jews define their community as cultural and share a sense of belonging to the same culture. NTCB is an essential ritual because it confirms Danish Jews belonging to the Jewish community. In Denmark, NTCB and a proposed legal ban on the practice – in addition to the Covid-19 pandemic – have been among the most debated health topics in recent years (Schmidt, 2021). Therefore, it is important to shed light on the perceptions and attitudes among Danish Jews regarding the cultural and religious reasons for both NTCB and the debate in order to inform the public debate and political decision-making about a possible ban on NTCB in Denmark.

1.1. Jews in Denmark

The Danish-Jewish history extends over 400 years. During this period, there have been immigration of Jews to Denmark on several occasions (Falk, 2015). The first Jews were allowed to settle in Denmark in the 17th century but were not allowed to practice handicrafts until 1788 (Blüdnikow, 2021).

In the 19th century, Danish Jews obtained civil rights (Smedegaard, 2018). In recent times, Jews have immigrated to Denmark from Russia and other parts of Eastern Europe (ca. 1900) and from Poland (1968–1973) (Thing, 2008; Jødisk Informationscenter, 2023).

During World War II, Denmark was occupied by Nazi Germany. In a large-scale rescue operation with the participation of many Danish citizens, the majority of Danish Jews escaped to Sweden. A total of 47 Jews died during the escape. In total, 472 Jews were captured and deported to Nazi concentration camps. Of these, 53 Danish Jews perished (Jødisk Informationscenter, 2023).

Today, the number of Jews in Denmark is estimated at approximately 7000 individuals (Jødisk Informationscenter, 2023). Of these, about 2000 are members of or affiliated with one or more of the Jewish communities in Denmark: The Jewish Community in Denmark, Shir Hatzafon, and Chabad/Machsike Hadas (Jødisk Informationscenter, 2023).

1.2. Non-therapeutic circumcision in Denmark

Since around 2000, it has not been possible to have NTCB performed at public hospitals in Denmark as was previously the case.

It is estimated that there are approximately 10 circumcisions each year of Jewish boys in Denmark, which take place in private homes and are performed by a mohel (traditional Jewish circumcision) under the supervision of a licensed medical doctor in accordance with current Danish rules (Jødisk Informationscenter, 2025). In addition to this, an unknown number of circumcisions of boys with a Jewish family background are performed at private medical clinics.

1.3. The debate about non-therapeutic circumcision in Denmark

In Denmark, NTCB has been debated at length, and from 2010 to 2022 the topic has been covered extensively and repeatedly on national TV, radio, newspapers, and social media.

At times, there have been 2–3 articles daily in nationwide Danish newspapers, and national TV stations have hosted feature programs, discussion panels, and satire programs on the topic. The primary focus of this extensive media coverage has been on Jewish circumcision, specifically, and Danish-Jewish parents who have chosen to have their son circumcised have been characterized repeatedly as child mutilators (Nielsen, 2021).

Circumcised Jewish men have been described as victims of violence and mutilation, among others by a member of the Danish Parliament (Nepper-Christensen, 2018). Along similar lines, some Danish doctors have described NTCB as being associated with sexual dysfunction and autism, among other ailments (Frisch, 2025; Frisch et al., 2011; Frisch and Simonsen, 2015). Similar narratives have been further disseminated by Danish comedians, on a state-funded research information portal, and in various programs on state-funded nationwide radio (Jødisk Informationscenter, 2025).

As a result of these widespread narratives about the negative health consequences of NTCB, the Health and Elderly Committee in the Danish Parliament instructed the Danish Patient Safety Authority (STPS) under the Danish Ministry of Health and the Elderly to review best knowledge in the area. In February 2020, STPS released the results of a systematic literature review of the topic (Styrelsen for Patientsikkerhed 2020). The report concludes, among other things, that there is no association between NTCB and neither sexual dysfunction nor autism.

Subsequently, the aforementioned Danish doctors have rejected the report from STPS, and continue to disseminate information about negative health consequences of NTCB, including on national Danish radio (Thiele, 2020).

In 2018, Intact Denmark and one of the doctors who has been vocal in the circumcision debate in Denmark submitted a citizen proposal which sought to ban and criminalize NTCB and recommended up to 6 years of prison as punishment for parents (Jødisk Informationscenter, 2025).

The proposed bill, presented as parallel to current Danish law regarding Female Genital Mutilation, was intended to apply extraterritorially, meaning that even if an NTCB is performed outside Denmark, the parents are still liable to face prosecution and punishment in Denmark. After four months of extensive campaigning, including a segment on a popular satire program on national TV and paid Facebook ads, the citizen proposal obtained the required 50,000 signatures.

After repeated debates in the Danish Parliament, including lengthy investigations in several subcommittees, and after having been postponed for final consideration several times, the citizens' proposal was rejected by a vote in Parliament in May 2021 (Afstemning nr. 496, 2020–21 2021).

This is the background against which we have conducted a qualitative study, using an interviewer’s guidelines with open themes and a sociological and phenomenological analysis of the meaning and value attributed to NTCB by Danish-Jewish parents.

2. Theoretical framework

The analysis is theoretically informed by Davies and Harré's positioning theory (Davies and Harré, 1990) which offers concepts that may capture the meaning and value ascribed to NTCB among Danish-Jewish parents, in their formation as parents and families.

The central concept used for organizing the analysis of the empirical material is Davies and Harré's concept of “subjectivation” (Davies and Harré, 1990). This concept is useful to understand specific aspects of NTCB in relation to subjectivity and identity processes among Danish-Jewish parents. "Subjectivation" refers to "the process through which the participants become subjects by establishing and entering into relationships, which at the same time consist of mastery and submission" (Davies and Harré, 1990). In this study, “subjectivation” is this double movement of mastery and submission by which the Interviewees are led both to experience themselves and relate to others as being and becoming appropriate Danish-Jewish parents. Subjectivation refers to the process of “constructing” “one’s own identity by a conscience of self-knowledge”.

The other concepts that organize the analysis are “being”, “discursive practices”, “becoming” and “positioning”. The concept of “being” covers the fact that the parents assume “discursive practices” as if they were their own, rather than seeing discursive practices as something external that is imposed on them (Davies, 2000). Discursive practices refer to the idea of language as a social practice, which is constitutive of identities, social relations and knowledge. Representations of reality emerge via language as language articulates representations of reality. In turn, articulated representations are constitutive of discursive practices. In this study, the concepts of “discursive practices” and of “being” describe how the interviewees articulate representations of NTCB, thereby “constructing” themselves as a part of the category of “Parents” as well as part of a Danish-Jewish cultural-ethnic, social, or religious community, by assuming the constitutive discursive practices.

“Becoming” is defined as the relational and dynamic process "through which a person positions himself within the various social categories that are made available to them" (Davies and Harré, 1990). In our empiric material, it is “becoming” when the interviewees begin to speak and act as Danish-Jewish parents.

By positioning is meant “the way in which discursive practices constitute the speakers and the audience, and at the same time it constitutes [a] resource through which speakers and listeners can negotiate new positions” (Davies, 2000, Davies and Harré, 1990).

“Positioning” is a particularly useful concept, partly because it illustrates how relationships are constituted in conversations between participants, partly because, it illustrates that relationships are negotiable via our positioning in the conversations we participate in. Through "subjectivation", we can show in the analysis that parental subjectivity and identity are constantly created and negotiated in specific contexts and situations where interviewees draw on social categories such as gender, class, culture, ethnicity, and religion, which are brought into play through language and actions.

The analysis also draws on the the concept of Sense of Coherence, proposed by medical sociologist Aaron Antonovsky. Antonovsky addresses the question of how health arises rather than what causes disease. Based on his interest in what creates and maintains health, Antonovsky examines the sources of “what keeps people healthy, despite all the stresses we are exposed to”.

Antonovsky finds that human beings' universal resilience, which maintains and restores our health, is based in a Sense of Coherence, i.e., the sense of living a coherent life. Sense of Coherence or the sense of living a coherent life is learned through lived life experience in a process, which is best unfolded when a person has a broad sense of confidence that life is meaningful, comprehensible, and manageable. In the present study, Antonovsky's Sense of Coherence is relevant, as the concept supports our analysis of NTCB as a “cultural fact,” a social ritual, and a possible marker of identity, which creates tangibility, meaning, and coherence in the interviewees' process of becoming parents and a family.

By applying the concept of Sense of Coherence, the analysis thus emphasizes that NTCB must be understood as a taken-for-granted ritual which contributes to the new parents' process of becoming and shaping themselves as parents and as a family. Thereby, NTCB fulfils an existential and universal human need, partly for actions marking life cycle events and transitions between the phases of life, partly for actions expressing identity and belonging, be it religious, ethnic-cultural, biographical, social, in relation to gender, etc.

3. Method and material

The qualitative data for this study were generated between 2017 and 2021 through semi-structured interviews with 20 individuals, who either have a Jewish family background or are married to a person with such a background. All interviewees were parents, either fathers (n = 12) or mothers (n = 8) of boys between two and eight years of age in 2017–2020. The group of interviewees included both parents who had chosen circumcision (n = 18) and who had chosen not to circumcise their son (n = 2).

A majority of the parents were in their thirties and 4 were in their forties. In total, 16 interviewees were born and raised in Denmark, 4 were born outside of Denmark and were in their early or mid-twenties when they settled in Denmark. All but three interviewees lived in Copenhagen or Greater Copenhagen. Two lived in another major Danish city and one person lived abroad. All interviewees held a college or university degree with the exception of one person who had completed a craftsman education. Two interviewees were in training at the time of the interview. In terms of religiosity, four interviewees defined themselves as practicing Jews, seven described themselves as moderately practicing Jews and eight described themselves as secular or cultural Jews.

Interviewees were recruited via seed sampling and snowball sampling. Potential interviewees were approached by the researchers and asked if they would participate in an interview and/or ask within their network for other potential interviewees. A research assistant provided potential interviewees with a short written description of the study and contact information of the researchers. Individuals who agreed to participate either contacted researchers directly or were contacted by the researchers. Prior to the interview, researchers asked for and obtained informed consent from the interviewees. The interview focused on the parents’ articulations of NTCB and sense-making of the practice based on the interviewees' family background, religion and/or spirituality while growing up, everyday life, experiences of practicing a Jewish religious and cultural affiliation, and the context of the debate about a legal ban on NTCB in Denmark.

Interviews were scheduled to last approximately 1½ hour. The semi-structured interviews were conducted by the first author of the article, with one exception, where the interview was conducted by the last author of the article. All interviews were conducted according to the same interview guide and were coordinated, to ensure that the same series of general questions were asked and to achieve uniformity in interview technique. In total, 16 interviews were conducted face-to-face either in the homes of interviewees (n = 13) or at the interviewers’ or interviewees’ workplace after working hours (n = 3). Four interviews were conducted online, either as the interviewee was residing abroad or because of COVID-19 imposed lockdown measures preventing researchers to meet face-to face.

Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and then analysed with a phenomenologically inspired approach which is characterized by its descriptive approach to everyday life phenomena as these are immediately experienced and attributed meaning (Kvale and Brinkmann, 2009, Malterud, 2011).

The transcribed interviews were manually coded and themed by the first author of the article, cf. procedure as described by Giorgi (Giorgi, 2009) through four closely related stages. In the first stage, each interview was read several times to form an overall impression, after which natural units were identified and themed as openly and as near as possible to the interviewee's descriptions and unattached to the study's topics and assumptions. Natural units were identified and themed based on their relevance to interviewees’ practices of NTCB. As an example, all statements relating NTCB to the religious practice of Judaism were identified and these statements were then themed as “religious aspect of NTCB”.

In the subsequent stage, natural units were identified and grouped into central themes based on the research questions' focus on experiences with NTCB and attribution and meaning. At this third stage, we were looking for patterns in the empirical material and found a similarity in interviewees' articulation of NTCB as a taken-for-granted ritual of everyday-life. Finally, the central themes of the third and fourth stages were linked, so that they formed a whole, a story which reproduced the interviewees' expressed experiences, both situated and on a general level. At this fourth stage, we were looking to relate the themes to theoretical concepts, which could bind together and render a coherent story about how interviewees make sense of NTCB. At this final stage, we also identified the theoretical concepts of Sense of Coherence, Subjectivation, Becoming, Belonging and Positioning.

In the presentation of the findings of the analysis, the content of the natural units was reproduced as interview quotes which support and illustrate the central themes of the analysis. This approach has been chosen, as Giorgi (Giorgi et al., 1975) in his development of phenomenology in the perspective of practical application – indicates a method which is suitable for the core themes of the present study, i.e. creating a better understanding of phenomena as they unfold in everyday life with a focus on the interviewees’ own experiences and with a search for invariant, essential meanings in the descriptions. Thus, the interviewees’ experience and description in this approach were given priority. This corresponds to our focus on understanding the choice of NTCB and the attributed value through the families’ everyday experiences with becoming parents and a family.

4. The findings of the analysis

The presentation of the findings of the analysis is divided into four main themes. The first theme presents the interviewees’ articulation of the practice of NTCB, illustrating that NTCB is both religiously and not religiously emphasized. Yet, NTCB is “inevitable” in the creation of the interviewees as being Jewish. The second theme focus on the articulation of NTCB as a taken-for-granted ritual, an unnoticed act of everyday life. This theme explores the practice of NTCB as inscribed in the process of becoming parents and family. The third theme explores the articulation of NTCB as the marker of belonging to the Jewish community: relating NTCB to gender, ethnic-cultural identity, origin, and family biography. The fourth theme explores interviewees’ positioning as Danish-Jewish parents and families in the context of the public debate about a ban on NTCB. Finally, the analysis is related to the significance of NTCB to the positioning regarding the public debate about the ban on NTCB in the Danish context. All together, the analysis unfolds the interviewees’ articulations and varying valuation of NTCB.

4.1. NTCB is both religiously and not religiously emphasized: yet NTCB is quint-essential

The analysis shows that 17 out of 20 interviewees view NTCB as essential, because it is a marker of gender, ethnicity, culture, origin, and family biography. A small proportion of the interviewees express that the choice of NTCB was primarily but not exclusively a religious practice of Judaism. But the vast majority of interviewees (n = 16) do not explain their choice of NTCB as a religious practice. Illustrative of this pattern, one interviewee highlights: “For us, it was not religious”, whereas another participant states: “It was not mainly religious”.

Only four interviewees describe themselves as religiously practicing Jews in the sense that they observe the religious rules of kosher food, the Sabbath, are members of a Jewish congregation, attend services at the synagogue on a regular basis, adhere to Jewish traditions, and celebrate all religious holidays.

Several interviewees (n = 7) describe themselves as moderately practicing Jews: they observe the Sabbath, adhere to some traditions, and celebrate the most important religious holidays, but also express the sentiment that religious practice is a limited part of their everyday life.

As for the vast majority of interviewees, Jewish traditions and religious rules played a limited role during their upbringing. Along similar lines, these were explained not to shape the daily lives of their families. A mother of two boys aged 2 and 4 describes it as follows:

“No, we are not religious in everyday life. It was very much a mixture of us having to integrate, but we have to… It’s a long story because of what they [my parents] came from, they grew up in countries where Judaism was oppressed. For example, unlike my husband David, [addressed at her husband] your mother grew up here in Denmark, so they grew up with Judaism being less dominant in their homes, and so they do not have the same traditions. Even though I grew up celebrating Hanukkah, it was not in the religious way. There was no Hebrew at home. It was a combination of Jewish traditions sometimes and also with roast pork for Christmas. I went to … a Christian school.”

Asked about their religious practice, 8 interviewees describe themselves as either “secular,” “assimilated,” or as “cultural Jews,” and their upbringing as characterized by either very limited or no religious practice:

“Yes, my grandfather and my father and grandmother came from Kiev, Ukraine. Back then, it was the Soviet Union. They came to Denmark in the 1960s. My mother’s family is from Poland and came to Denmark a few years later. I myself was born in Denmark and grew up in Denmark. I have had a non-religious upbringing. I have never doubted the fact that I have a Jewish background, but we never practiced anything Jewish at home. We never had a kosher kitchen at home. I did not go to the Jewish school. With a bit of luck, we would go to the synagogue once a year. My parents do not know any of the rituals or read prayers, and they have been very assimilated in relation to Judaism. Still, I was circumcised. I don’t think there was much doubt in their minds about that [NTCB].”

As the quote also illustrates, NTCB is practiced among families, where the religious practice, “with a bit of luck”, is limited to a single annual visit to the synagogue. Whether interviewees perceive themselves as religiously observant or raised in a religiously observant family, the analysis shows that NTCB is continued among families where there is a tradition for the practice. With just two exceptions, all interviewees have chosen to have their sons circumcised, as NTCB is perceived to be “essential” or, as one interviewee puts it: “With our origin, what we come from, it would just be completely wrong not to do it.”

As the quote above illustrates, “doing” one’s Jewish background includes much more and many other things than the practice of NTCB. Practicing NTCB is just one of a vast range of practices which serves to maintain and perpetuate the affiliation to Judaism:

“Judaism is about many other things [other than NTCB, red.]. If you do not concern yourself with being a Jew, then your life is about all sorts of other things. It is not about being circumcised. That is just one tiny little part of it. But still, it is such a fundamental part for Jews.”

As the interviewee puts it, in his view it makes no sense discussing NTCB as isolated from other Jewish traditions and religious rules. On the other hand, the issue of NTCB is extremely relevant in common considerations among new parents about how to become parents and a family.

As mentioned above, NTCB among the interviewees is perceived as both religiously and not religiously emphasized. Therefore, one may ask how the practice of NTCB is nonetheless considered a currently relevant practice and by whom. If not cast in religious terms, what other importance is attached to the practice among the interviewees?

In the following part of the analysis, we emphasize how the question of NTCB is first raised in connection with life cycle events such as parenting and family formation.

4.2. Becoming Danish-Jewish parents and family: NTCB as a taken-for-granted ritual, an “unnoticed act” of the everyday life

In the analysis we find an overarching and pervasive pattern that NTCB first becomes relevant in relation to the interviewees’ considerations and ongoing negotiations on how to become Danish-Jewish parents and a family in a Danish context. Therefore, NTCB can be seen as a taken-for-granted ritual among a range of traditions and social rites, all of which contribute to the marking of a life cycle and landmark events, and transitions in the biography of the family. At the same time, as a tradition, NTCB forms part of the link between the past and the future, and between paternal origins and male offspring.

For the majority of interviewees (n = 16), NTCB is a positive marker of their cultural affiliation. In our study, the taken-for-granted component is clearly expressed by how this majority of parents (n = 16) had not given the question of the value of NTCB any thought before they themselves became parents. For the interviewees, reflections on the meaning of NTCB only began when they realized they were expecting a boy. This pattern – that NTCB is a taken-for-granted ritual the value of which the interviewees only become aware of when they must “make themselves” parents and become a Danish-Jewish family or a family of Jewish origin – is expressed by several interviewees in varying terms. For some interviewees, the taken-for-granted is articulated through questions they ask themselves, such as, for instance, what role Judaism plays in the family’s everyday life and in their parenthood. How and to what extent do spirituality, religion, and culture affect their everyday life as parents to a boy and as a family?

For other interviewees, parenting a boy raises questions about origin and transmission, e.g. how am I shaped by my background? What role did religion and/or spirituality play during my upbringing? What role did Jewish culture play? What are my origins? Who am I in this world? Where is my “place”? and in which community? How do I become who I am? What do I bring along? and how do I pass on that which I am to my offspring? These are common questions asked by interviewees, when expectant and becoming new parents, regardless of cultural and religious background.

An interviewee with a Christian background and married to a man of Jewish background describes how the decision to circumcise their son was made through a negotiation:

“At that time we found out we were expecting a son. We wanted to know, so we asked for a scan. We knew for quite some time that we were expecting a boy, and then Benjamin mentioned the question of circumcision because he himself is circumcised. I did not agree, I argued against it [NTCB]. We talked about it for a while, then I gave in [to husband]”

But also among interviewees where both parents have a Jewish background and there is agreement to have their son(s) circumcised, NTCB is discussed. Several interviewees have discussed with their partners how, i.e. by whom and where the circumcision is to take place. For most interviewees (n = 16), NTCB is first and foremost a matter of indicating an ethno-cultural identity. It is seen as a physical characteristic of Jewish affiliation, the continuation of which is carried out with pride. By practicing NTCB, parents indicate who as a family, they see themselves, as connected to. To most of the interviewees, NTCB is considered a positive identity marker: to choose to have their son circumcised is a continuation of the traditions of Jewish culture, and it is a way in which one may show one’s affiliation. For interviewees, the practice of NTCB may also be part of finding one’s own identity as a young parent of Jewish origin:

“During my teens, I was rebellious and angry at my parents for not emphasizing Judaism enough. This put me in certain dilemmas because it was difficult to find a place anywhere. Why had I not gone to the Jewish school like everybody else? But at the same time, we did not celebrate Christmas, because we were not Christian, so that was also a bit odd. We were neither one thing nor the other. But deep down I knew, of course, that I’m Jewish. But for my parents, growing up in an environment where Jewish culture was oppressed, and they then come to Denmark, it was a mixture of our children should not be exposed to the same as we were, so we do not want them to attend the Jewish school, they are going to [a Danish private school]. Me and my brother. I’m talking to many of my friends about that now. That what my generation is experiencing now is that our children are going to attend the Jewish school. Hopefully, some time has passed, and of course we would like our children to stand by their religion and identity. Of course, they should not be oppressed. Of course, it must be allowed to be a part of that. As opposed to my parents’ experience…”

In this perspective, parents, when articulating the practice of NTCB, appear to both take on the category of Jewish-Danish parent and family as well as redefining the category so the category “fits” their perceptions of doing parenthood and family-making.

As a taken-for-granted ritual, NTCB is part of an everyday practice related to being of Jewish origin.

As illustrated by the quote below, NTCB is an “unnoticed act” in everyday life, i.e. “not something you think about a lot”:

“Again, it [NTCB]) is not something you talk about on a daily basis. It is not something that you think about all the time because it is a ritual. Once it is done, it doesn’t figure highly in one’s consciousness. It is not like walking around in the street thinking, “I am circumcised,” or “he is circumcised.” It’s about getting it done and after that it does not matter.”

Jewish life is rich in religious rituals and traditions and an important part of “doing” everyday life in a specific way in which taken-for-granted rituals provide structure for place and time. For the majority of parents in the study (n = 16), this everyday practice of Jewishness was the framework of their upbringing, and this is what they want to pass on to their children. The interviewees describe how religious practice and religious rules were not decisive for their everyday life while growing up, but how they were aware of their Jewish background from an early age. Thus, belonging to a Jewish background is perceived as something one “does,” via concrete and tangible actions, woven into everyday actions and chores, and as such these actions themselves become invisible and unnoticed by the families themselves. The Jewish background is actualized in everyday life through traditions and by complying with prescribed rules and prohibitions:

“I grew up in a very traditional Jewish home where the values ​​we grew up with, me and my brothers, are built around family, which is based on the Sabbath and the traditions associated with the Sabbath and Jewish holidays. I do not even feel that I grew up in a religious home, because when I say religious, it is a term that I associate with people who are very religious, and I do not feel that I am or that my family has ever been religious in that sense. But we have been very traditional, and we have kept a lot of laws and rules that are associated with Judaism. For example, when you keep the Sabbath, you light candles and eat together on Friday night, and as much as possible, the food is prepared before the Sabbath. You do not drive a car and you do not use electricity. We didn’t follow all rules to the letter, but some more than others. As happens in life, one finds one’s own path. I’m still building that path, and it’s constantly changing. I lived in Israel for four years. I have probably been very influenced by living in Israel and also by my wife, who is from a very secular home in Israel.”

In this part of the analysis, the focus has been on the fact that NTCB constitutes a significant part of the taken-for-granted rituals of becoming Jewish, i.e. to practice a Jewish affiliation in everyday life. Thus, NTCB is considered essential, both as a religious practice, and in an everyday practice of Judaism.

As a cultural and family tradition, NTCB contributes to mark the male child’s Jewish origin. It assigns him with a place in the Jewish family biography, and the family a place in the Jewish community. The family’s connection to the Jewish background is made current, actualized, and continued in adapted rituals and traditions for the next generation.

NTCB derives significance from being the first but not the only ritual act marking the origin of a new-born boy and inscribing him in the family biography and culture while simultaneously continuing the family’s place in the larger context of the Jewish community. This is explored in the third theme.

4.3. Belonging to the Jewish community NTCB as the first rite of passage which marks the course of life from birth to death in the Jewish life cycle

Several of the interviewees highlight how they see NTCB as a gender marker, the physical sign that their son may become bar mitzvah and thus be admitted as a full-fledged male member of the Jewish community. Among the interviewees, the rite of passage component of NTCB is visible in the articulation of questions about how NTCB is a part of cultural-ethnic identity and belonging to the Jewish community. The parents describe how NTCB, specifically, is related to the expression of the male body, and how they would find it “strange” or “completely wrong” if their male children looked different from the other boys and men in the family. Among them, one woman who grew up in a Christian family and married a man with a secular Jewish background describes her husband’s reflections regarding NTCB:

“For him, it would be strange to have a son who did not look like him. It was not mainly religious. It was more that when they got older and took a shower, or he was bathing his son and he looked at his penis, that it would not be the same as his dad’s. He would have a hard time with that”.

A woman who was the mother of a two-year-old boy describes how it is difficult for her that her son is not circumcised. The boy’s father is a Christian and opposed the idea of having their son circumcised:

“He [their son] does not look like my brothers, my father, my uncles or cousins. I did not think that it was important for me, when we had him, but now, it makes him stand out, it feels odd, especially when we are with my family”.

The rite of passage component of NTCB is also visible in the marking of the circumcision as a joyous event and in emphasizing NTCB as religious, secular or both religious and secular. Among the interviewees, NTCB were either performed by a mohel in the parents’ home, by a doctor at a clinic, or first by a doctor at a clinic, and then the circumcision was confirmed in a religious ritual performed by a mohel in the home.

It is a common pattern for the interviewees to describe NTCB as a joyous event that is usually shared with the immediate family, if the circumcision is performed at home by a mohel. If the circumcision is performed by a doctor at a clinic, only the parents themselves are present.

For most interviewees, the circumcision of their son(s) is marked by a celebration of the event, for instance by serving a light meal and perhaps a glass of wine. NTCB is thus described by the participants as an important event which is duly, yet often discreetly celebrated, but otherwise does not warrant special attention.

Above, we have described the essentialness of NTCB as a marker of life cycle events from birth to death, and of transitions between phases of life. In this perspective, birth and NTCB are, respectively, a breach of routine and the necessary action that restores order by enrolling the new-born in the culture and religion of the community. In this way, NTCB is a rite of passage whereby the newly born boy and his family belong to the Jewish community. Prompted by the joyous event of becoming a parent, NTCB is also an opportunity to bring the family together and celebrate the new member of the family. But NTCB is not exclusively associated with joy and pride, as for some interviewees, the significance of NTCB is more ambivalent and source of dilemmas. In the following part of the analysis, we unfold the interviewees’ dilemmas and ambivalence surrounding the public debate on a ban on NTCB and the parents’ positioning as Danish-Jewish in this particular context.

4.4. Dilemmas and ambivalence actualized by the Danish public debate on a ban of NTCB: parents’ positioning

The analysis focuses on how the value attributed to NTCB may be understood in the context of the Danish public debate on the ban on NTCB.

The debate on the ban on NTCB actualizes dilemmas and ambivalence and at the same time, offers a context in which interviewees can bring into play their positions as Danish-Jewish. Parents’ positioning are illustrated by the interviewees who articulate the dilemmas and ambivalence of opting for or against NTCB.

4.4.1. Parents positioning as making a well-informed choice of NTCB based on available medical knowledge and family members’ experiences

That the public debate on a ban on NTCB actualizes dilemmas and ambivalence is expressed, for example, by the fact that among some of the interviewees, in contrast to their own parents’ generation, conversations and discussions take place about whether they want to have their son circumcised at all. These interviewees describe how they have investigated and discussed with others whether there might be adverse health effects to the practice. For interviewees opting for NTCB, their choice may become a dilemma as the opponents to NTCB have argued that NTCB may expose their son(s) to potential health and well-being risks. These parents expressed having made their decision about NTCB based on extensive research on the health benefits and potential harmful effects on health and well-being of NTCB. One mother of Christian-Protestant origin, explained how she had carefully examined the knowledge available on NTCB, discussed with her partner and enquired among family members and a medical doctor before deciding for NTCB:

“I thought I had enough knowledge to make a proper decision that wasn't just based on emotion. I can't make a decision if I don't know for myself what it [NTCB] is about, what are the risks of being circumcised? What is the process? Can something go wrong? If it goes wrong, what could go wrong? Are there any consequences? […]. He [partner] also said that if there are the slightest risks with an operation, and some worst case can happen, then of course it is not worth it. If all risks and odds are fine, then that's a wish I have […]. Then we sat down, and now there are many in the family who have been circumcised, and so we asked them. Some have had it done religiously by a rabbi by a medical doctor. The medical doctor explained everything in detail”.

As illustrated above, the public debate on a ban on NTCB actualizes a dilemma about health and well-being, which when articulated by the interviewees allow them to navigate NTCB as being conscious about the potential health risks and well-being and making a well-informed choice about NTCB.

4.4.2. Parents positioning as taking on and passing on family heritage and traditions

Along similar lines, other interviewees explained having conflicting feelings about NTCB, as circumcision of their boys might expose themselves and their son(s) to negative reactions from other Danes opposed to NTCB. One interviewee explained that at an antenatal care visit during her pregnancy, a midwife had enquired about the future parents’ wish to circumcise the child, should she give birth to a boy. As the parents had confirmed their wish to have their son circumcised, the midwife had expressed her concern and opposition to the parents’ decision about NTCB.

It is pertinent and relevant among the interviewees to discuss the choice of NTCB. The discussion about choosing NTCB between the parents is especially apparent among couples where one of the parents has no Jewish background. A woman with a Jewish family background and whose husband grew up in a Christian-Protestant family emphasizes this. They are the parents of two boys, both of whom are circumcised. In the interview the woman explains that neither she nor her husband are practicing any religion, but that they have certain values, which they want to pass on:

“That way, again, my husband does not have a strong feeling that anyone needs to have a Christian confirmation. He had one, but he says it was not for the right reasons, so again, he is of the opinion that if I have any strong feelings in relation to this, then he has no intention of trying to pull in another direction just to try to make things equal for the sake of equality. On the other hand, he thinks it is important that they attend a year at boarding school which he himself did, and he wants them to learn to play music. So that way we have some negotiations going on, but at the same time we are very good at giving each other [the mandate to decide in matters that matter to each of us]”

Practicing NTCB is the continuation of a family tradition and/or a religious ritual. The practice of NTCB is part of the “effort” of becoming Danish-Jewish and of navigating one’s Jewish origin within a range of affiliations. The question of whether, as parents, one chooses to continue the tradition of circumcising a male child raises the eternal questions of Who am I in the world? What is my imprint on the world? What do I come from and what do I pass on? By choosing NTCB, parents appeared to take on their origin and ensure that it is passed on to the next generation. They inscribe their family and their male offspring in the family biography and in the family history, which is both the history of the individuals and the family and the larger history of Judaism in the world.

For these interviewees, opting for NTCB, is experienced as a form of taking on and passing on their Jewish origins and their belonging to the Danish-Jewish community. Some interviewees argues for the continuation of NTCB as the practice is a part of a variety of ways in which to stand out as Danish-Jewish. To these interviewees, NTCB is a marker of what they articulate as their way of becoming young(er) Danish-Jewish and attempts to define the characteristics of the Jewish community in Denmark.

4.4.3. Parents positioning as visible and standing out as Danish-Jewish

Several interviewees emphasize that the choice of NTCB for their children is part of a conscious effort to make their Jewish affiliation visible. Among this group of interviewees, it is emphasized that they do not attach value to being discreet and keeping a low profile with regard to their Jewish background. Along these lines, the term “assimilation” does not hold positive connotations for the intervieweses or that this is something Danish Jews should strive for. This is expressed by one interviewee, who describes how she was reprimanded by family elders for taking part in the debate about circumcision:

“My aunts told me how they disproved of me expressing my opinion on the debate on circumcision of boys in the Danish media. They said that “being loud” about the negative effect on the Jewish community of a possible ban of circumcision of boys did not serve our family or Danish Jews”.

As illustrated above, choosing NTCB is articulated as being part of a chain of actions, collectively marking how interviewees choose to practice being Danish-Jewish. Among interviewees whose parents and grandparents are Holocaust survivors and/or have survived persecution in the former Soviet Union or Poland, and who have experienced attempts to hide their Jewish identity in order to avoid further persecution, the question of choosing NTCB is about standing by one’s heritage and origin, and of being able to choose one’s own identity and being proud of one’s background. For the parents who define themselves as secular and having had a secular upbringing, NTCB may have become an essential part of practicing a cultural affiliation.

This is especially true of those of the interviewees whose grandparents are Holocaust survivors and for whom circumcision enabled exclusion, segregation, and persecution. For this group of interviewees, male circumcision is associated with conflicting feelings of being a sign of belonging, but also the marker which made male family members identifiable as Jewish during the Holocaust and pogroms. One interviewee, whose parents’ and grandparents’ histories are characterized by persecution and exile describes NTCB as “essential”:

“I have always felt that it [NTCB] was essential. It is still difficult for me to explain. When I think about it, I often think about that as a child I had a great attachment to my grandparents in Israel. My grandfather was an old Polish Jew, a Jew from Warsaw, who barely avoided the ghetto, but many of his family members died.”

The interviewee further recounts how her grandfather barely escaped confinement in the ghetto by fleeing eastward, only to be identified as a Jew at the Russian border and then sent to a labour camp in Siberia:

“Once, when I was a child, he told me that they fled to the Russian border, and the Russians sent them to Siberia because they did not want them, and there most of them died. The way the Russians identified Jews as distinguished from other refugees was by pulling the boys’ pants down (to determine whether the boy was circumcised or not). That made a huge impression on me because I keep thinking that it was the mark that sent my grandfather to Siberia. That was also how he told the story, that was what they were, and it was terrible, but they were Jews. So it was a curse, but also… not a blessing, but that was what they were. It is a fate that Jews have suffered for thousands of years. Persecution constantly, among other things on the basis that it has been possible to identify them in that way. But Jews have continued to do it, and Jews, despite persecution, have continued to hold on to their identity and maintained that one should not let oneself be cowed by the fact that the surrounding society does not understand why one continues to adhere to one’s own traditions and background, and that one does it in spite of everything. I think that has affected me a lot.”

Capturing the ambivalence of NTCB, this interviewee highlights that “Circumcision was the marker that sent my grandfather to Siberia”, yet describes the circumcision of their boys as “essential”.

Among these interviewees, the practice of NTCB may thus signify a visibility of Danish Jews in the public space. These interviewees express their position as a conscious choice against flying below the radar, in terms of one’s Jewish background. As such, these interviewees articulate a position of the young Danish Jews of today, characterized by being less worried about their visibility. In this perspective, NTCB can be viewed as a political statement.

Other interviewees acknowledge that it is possible to be Jewish without being circumcised. For example, an interviewee answers the question of whether parents may continue the Jewish affiliation without having their sons circumcised:

“That is possible. But often, and especially because we are a minority in Denmark, and we already have to continuously remind ourselves of who we are so as not to fade away and forget who we are, I just think it would be strange for me to grow up without being circumcised while at the same time growing up in a specifically Jewish home with strong Jewish values. Because circumcision is part of that package. But it may well be that there are other constellations out there that I do not know about. But it is my impression that those who choose not to circumcise their sons are also those who do not wish to pass on a strong Jewish identity to their children. But this assumption may be wrong on my part.”

Another interviewee, who is not circumcised, and whose two boys are not circumcised states:

“There are rules for all everyday actions in Judaism, yet none of the rules of Judaism may not be adapted to time and place. It is a religion where rules and rituals are adapted to current circumstances.”

Summing up, the analysis first shows that NTCB is both religious and not religious emphasized. A majority (n = 18) of interviewees consider NTCB to be “inevitable”. Then, the analysis shows that NTCB is a taken-for-granted ritual of everyday-life and constitutive of interviewees’ becoming as parents and family. For most of the interviewees, NTCB is a rite of passage, the first of the seven Jewish life-cycles. NTCB remains a joyous event and a solemn celebration of the family welcoming a new child, and the child being received into the family and the Jewish community. In that sense, NTCB marks the belonging to the Jewish community of boy child, his parents and family. Finally, the analysis focuses on how the value attributed to NTCB may be understood in the context of the Danish public debate on the ban on NTCB. The analysis highlights how the debate on the ban on NTCB actualizes dilemmas and ambivalence yet, offers a context in which participants can bring into play their positions as Danish-Jewish. Thereby, the context of public debate on the ban on NTCB is the source of discursive and social practices, from which new positions may emerge. These new positions allows participants to navigate NTCB as a deliberate and informed choice related to gender as well as ethnic and cultural identity, origin, and family biography. By articulating NTCB as a question of becoming, being and belonging, Danish-Jewishness emerges in a new light: a new category of Danish-Jewishness is defined as both enlightened about the health risks of NTCB, the risk of their boys being singled out as Jewish and the wish to take up and pass on Jewish identity to the their children.

Interviewees present their choice of NTCB as significant in marking gender as well as ethnic and cultural identity, origin, and family biography. In this sense, interviewees articulate the meaning and value attributed to NTCB. At the same time, NTCB serves to position interviewees. Among the interviewees, NTCB is articulated as both religious and not religious, as both a taken-for-granted ritual and a rite de passage. Finally in the context of the debate on a public ban on NTCB, which actualizes dilemmas and ambivalence, interviewees bring into play their cultural, religious and social identity as Danish-Jewish parents.

5. Discussion and perspective

The aim of this study was to explore the meaning with and attribution of value to NTCB by Danish-Jewish parents.

Interviewees explained NTCB as “inevitable”. NTCB is an unnoticed act of every-day life, a taken-for-granted ritual, and a rite of passage which marks life cycle events such as birth. As a taken-for-granted ritual, NTCB contributes to the becoming of the interviewees as Danish-Jewish parents and family. As a rite of passage, NTCB confirms the belonging to the Jewish community of the boy, his parents and family. This finding is supported by Van Gennep (Van Gennep, 1909) and Sered (Sered, 1993).

Among interviewees, NTCB is more often performed by a surgeon in a clinic, after which a mohel may or may not be called upon to perform a religious ritual. There is variation in the framework for whom and how NTCB is practiced, as substantiated by Jackson (Jackson, 2021) and Marcus (Marcus and Birth, 2021). This finding is also supported by other studies; the unnoticed is less unnoticed, e.g. performance of NTCB in a “safe” setting (Marcus and Birth, 2021).

In our study, NTCB is articulated by interviewees as a taken-for-granted ritual, but is also presented as an expression of cultural identity and belonging as well as an expression of religious faith, religious practice, or spirituality. This is expressed by NTCB being practiced among families who position themselves in very varied ways on a broad spectrum of affiliations to Jewish religion, culture, and ethnicity. Thereby, interviewees highlighted how NTCB is both religiously and not religiously emphasized. This finding contrasts with a study by Cerchiaro and Odasso (Lunde et al., 2020) who have shown that NTCB is a very strong marker of ethnicity, which is often not associated with religiosity. "It [NTCB] therefore emerges as a tangible act that connects social rites, the family of origin, and cultural belonging." (Cerchiaro and Odasso, 2021).

For the interviewees in this study, becoming parents of a boy raises immediate, universal, and eternal questions about how one, as a new parent, enrols the child in the family biography and about how a new family member is admitted into the community. The analysis emphasizes how social and discursive practices surrounding NTCB are part of a wide range of actions which are relevant to the interviewees who, being Danish-Jewish, attempt to balance multiple cultural affiliations (belonging). This finding is supported by other studies on the continuation of minority identities (Le Gall and Meintel, 2014).

Limitations of the study

With a theoretical starting point in medical sociology and an analysis inspired by phenomenology of everyday life, this study has examined the social and discursive practices of NTCB. The analysis showed that interviewees both accommodate to and adjust existing discourses surrounding NTCB, thereby granting NTCB crucial value in the continuation of the family's ethnic and cultural identity and affiliation. Through the social and discursive practices, the interviewees thus establish themselves in the parental role and create a place for themselves in the family biography. In so doing, the analysis has indicated the sociological significance of the phenomenon and contributed to a more nuanced insight into the value attributed to NTCB, both as establishing the interviewees' position as Danish-Jewish parents and as a continuation of their origin, family biography, and ethnic and cultural identity.

The context in which the study was conducted was characterized in part by the public debate over the course of several years on the potential introduction of a legal ban on NTCB. The debate was driven by the pretext that NTCB involves a risk of harmful effects. This debate coincided with and continued in the wake of two terrorist attacks. In one attack on the main Danish synagogue in Copenhagen one person was killed. In a second attack on a non-Jewish cultural center, another person was killed. For years, the debate has become increasingly heated and incriminating. This context contributed to our possibility to gain access to the field and also to our finding of a high level of reflection on the practice of NTCB among the interviewees.

Yet, we cannot claim that the incriminating tone of the debate has sharpened social and discursive practices regarding NTCB. When we find that the interviewees have well-articulated considerations about dilemmas and ambivalence, but also about identity and belonging, we cannot know if these have been nourished by the debate about NTCB. However, as the debate on NTCB has been conducted in national radio and TV, the newspapers, and on social media, it has elicited experiences of antisemitism to varying degrees. Other interviewees describe that the debate has reactivated fears of antisemitism (Bates et al., 2013).

Possibly, the specific nature of the public debate, as well as the way in which it has been conducted by proponents of a legal ban, have struck an identity-political chord. This finding may therefore be rooted in the debate on the introduction of a legal ban on NTCB itself, which all interviewees over the past decade have experienced as both unsubstantiated and increasingly incriminating. Accusations of child molestation, as well as scientifically unsubstantiated claims of harmful effects to health and sexual performance have been repeated a myriad of times on social and public media and even by members of the Danish Parliament.

Had the topic not been publicly debated at all, or had the debate taken place in the context of medical evidence and a health professional discourse, it is possible that our analysis would not have found that NTCB among the interviewees is related to religious, cultural and social background and has, among other things, become the source of new positions as Danish-Jewish parents and family.

Implications

The analysis is of general relevance as it illustrates how Danish-Jewish parents navigate dilemmas and ambivalence of NTCB by adapting social and discursive practices, thereby taking on and passing on their identity to their son(s). This article is also important as it provides an insight into the value attributed to NTCB among parents with a Danish-Jewish background. As such, it may add nuances to the debate about NTCB in Denmark and Scandinavia, a debate in which the parents' perspective has largely been missing.

In a broader perspective, the analysis is important as it examines how new positions may emerge as religious, cultural and social identities are articulated in social and discursive practices when these practices are framed as problematic in the public debate, as is the case with NTCB.

6. Conclusion

Using the concepts of “Sense of Coherence”, "subjectivation", "being", "becoming", and "positioning", the study explored the interviewees' discursive and social practices. The analysis is based on 20 semi-structured interviews with Danish parents of Jewish origin. The analysis showed how social and discursive practices surrounding NTCB may be understood as both religious and not religious emphasized. NTCB is a taken-for-granted ritual that meets a universal human need to mark life cycle events from birth to death and the transitions in between. At the same time, social and discursive practices surrounding NTCB emphasize the families’ everyday life as Danish-Jewish and articulate the families’ identity and affiliation. In this way, the new fathers and mothers create meaning, coherence, and tangibility in their emergence as parents and as a family, which in turn shapes the basis of Sense of Coherence.

The analysis illustrates that the parents individually and together "make" parenthood and family, and via discursive and social practices establish and renegotiate problem-oriented subject positions, through which NTCB can be navigated, in other ways than as harmful to their boy(s)' health and well-being. The parents’ and family’s everyday-life and opting for or against the practice of NTCB signals a position as being conscious about one’s Jewish background and traditions. At the same time, opting for or against NTCB contributes to the creation of one’s identity as Danish-Jewish. NTCB thereby becomes a political manifestation and a way by which the interviewees can redefine what it means to be Danish-Jewish in the context of the public debate on a ban of NTCB.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Tania Aase Dræbel: Investigation, Writing – review & editing, Data curation, Validation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Formal analysis, Conceptualization. Jane Brandt Sørensen: Methodology, Writing – review & editing. Dan Wolf Meyrowitsch: Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Project administration, Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing, Validation.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

In 2017, DWM recieved a travel grant of 5000 DKK from the Meta Melchior Foundation for his engagement in scientific and evidence-based communication on the consequences of non-therapeutic male circumcision. DWM has taken part in national and international debates on the criminalization of non-therapeutic circumcision of male children DWM is not promoting non-therapeutic circumcision of male children, but shares the viewpoints of the Danish Council on Ethics and the Danish Medical Association that a law banning non-therapeutic circumcision of male children may result in negative health consequences when circumcision can no longer be performed under medically safe and hygienic conditions in private clinics in Denmark.