Citation

Bansal D. J. Crim. Law 2018; 82(6): 496-506.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0022018318816152

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This article critically evaluates the law on bodily modifications and consent in English criminal law. The law on consent to (serious) bodily harm has been looked at on numerous occasions by both academics and the judiciary. The current position is that conduct must fall within one of four broad categories for consent to bodily harm to be effective--surgery, regulated sports, chastisement of children and tattooing and ear-piercing. This article argues that extreme bodily modifications, which involves the infliction of grievous bodily harm, are not permitted when utilising the current category-based rationale favoured by the judiciary. This article posits that extreme bodily modifications are of such social disutility that their criminalisation must be correct. It is submitted that interference with personal autonomy is justified considering the significant inherent risks with such extreme procedures.

Language: en