Posted on 02/18/2006 6:34:25 PM PST by dpa5923
CHICAGO (AFP) - A clash over of their son's circumcision has landed the parents of an eight-year-old Illinois boy in a US court where there is no apparent precedent.
A Cook County judge ordered the mother in the case not to have her son circumcised until the court can hear arguments from the child's father, who opposes the operation, and decide if it is in the boy's best interest.
Jews and Muslims circumcise their sons for religious reasons.
But this case instead involves shifting medical and cultural preferences, which have recently become a matter of debate in the United States.
The mother, 31, is a homemaker from Northbrook, Illinois. She says two doctors recommended the procedure for health reasons.
But her ex-husband, 49, a building manager in Arlington Heights, Illinois, has called the procedure an "unnecessary amputation" that could cause his son physical and emotional harm.
In the 1900s, surgical circumcision, in which the foreskin of the penis is removed usually before a newborn leaves the hospital, was the norm in the United States.
But the percentage of US babies being circumcised has plunged from an estimated 90 percent in 1970 to some 60 percent now, data show.
The American Academy of Pediatrics no longer recommends routine neonatal circumcision but says the decision should be left to the parents. That has added fuel to the fire where until recently there was little debate on the issue at all among the US Christian majority.
Some staunch opponents of the procedure see it as akin to female genital mutilation. They argue that the procedure is medically unnecessary and morally wrong. Still others have launched support groups for those who have been circumcised and would rather not have been; some have even pursued surgical options for restoration.
Legal experts however say that there are no published US opinions to serve as precedents in this case. As such it normally would be determined based on the best interests of the child.
When the divorced parents appeared Friday in Cook County Circuit Court, Judge Jordan Kaplan got the two sides to agree that the child would not be circumcised "until further order of (the) court."
He also also ordered them not to discuss the case with their child.
Tracy Rizzo, an attorney for the mother, said the father scared the child by telling him frightening stories about what might happen if he were circumcised.
The father's lawyers, John D'Arco and Alan Toback, have argued that the couple's divorce agreement provides that the father must be consulted before any non-emergency medical care.
Male circumcision is much more widespread in the United States, Canada, and the Middle East than in Asia, South America, Central America, and most of Europe.
If he is a baby that is fine I have no problem with that. But at eight years old?
and do the numb the area before the procedure?
Yes, I agree eight years old is a little late, which is why I asked if they numb the area.
First of all, what loon would go through the process to have foreskin reattached/stretched? I mean what purpose would it serve except some weird penis envy thing.
Personally, as a woman, I do not like an uncircumsized one and I don't care what the current trend, I know NOT ONE woman who disagrees with me. They'll of course except it in the man they love, but prefer cut.
Second, it was my understanding that muslims do NOT circumsize as was the difference between Abraham's children being jews. Am I incorrect?
But the hood is.
Let's SLICE HOODS, and see how long we get away 'wid it'
LOL He and I don't talk about it. He's into girls now...well two girl...seperately.
Thanks for the post. I was unaware of much of that even at my age.
If it was me I would want to be completely knocked out.
>>>Isn't eight years old a little late to decide this? I do not blame the dad in this one at all.>>>
"She says two doctors recommended the procedure for health reasons."
Did you even read the article?
Sandbar...I agree. I prefer my man to be cut. But hey, each to his/her own right.
LMAO I suppose any man would want to be knocked out.
I thought so too, but it appears we are mistaken...
http://search.yahoo.com/bin/search?fr=ybr_sbc&p=muslim%20circumcision
It's not like it was an emergency operation.
That last sentence would have covered my thoughts on this as well.
The mother wants to have her 8 year old son circumsised? I object to doing it to babies, but at least they don't remember it. An 8 year old boy though, if it happens, you know he'll never forget that one. Geez, does his mom really hate him (or her ex-husband) that much? What a bitch.
" Hey Frankie, if ya cut it COMPLETELY OFF you can REALLY negate all those nasty diseases."
Well, all except for that one nasty disease...the Irish Curse!!!! I, unfortunately, can vouch for that.
>>>Damn straight it is. At eight, a circumcision is painful, and psychologicaly traumatic.
Leave this boy alone.>>>
"She says two doctors recommended the procedure for health reasons."
I see you haven't read the article either. Let's see how many others that don't bother to read it make comments that they don't fully know the details of.
* A two-year cohort study of male partners of HIV-positive women in Rakai, Uganda, in which 40 of 137 uncircumcised men became infected, compared with 0 of 50 circumcised men.
Game, set, match. The debate is over, the question is resolved.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.