Mother tries to protect 3-yr-old, but fails
Father Has Boy Circumcised, Rendering Part Of Court Case MootKANSAS CITY, Mo. -- A portion of a petition before the Missouri Supreme Court has been made moot because a father had his nearly 3-year-old son circumcised last week.
The child's mother, Camille Azar of Lee's Summit, said in July that her son, Ethan, who will be 3 in September, was too old to be circumcised and too young to decide for himself if he wants to undergo what she believes is an unnecessary procedure.But the boy's father, Ray Jagoda of Leawood, Kan., said circumcision is a Jewish rite that he wants his son to experience. Jagoda is Jewish. Azar -- who had custody of Ethan for the first 29 months of his life -- is not.
|
Kansas City Star Mother seeks high court order to block circumcision
By STEVE ROCK The Kansas City Star
A Lee's Summit woman is asking the Missouri Supreme Court to prevent the
"unneeded and irreparable'' circumcision of her almost 3-year-old son.
The attorney for Camille Azar filed a petition for a writ of prohibition
Wednesday with the Supreme Court, effectively asking the state's highest
court to reverse a decision made in Jackson County Circuit Court.
Ultimately, Azar hopes to stop Ray Jagoda, the child's father, from having
their son circumcised.
The child turns 3 in September and, according to the petition, is "aware
of his own body."
"The potential for psychological harm from non-infant circumcisions is
well established and great," the petition states.
Michael Whitsitt, the attorney for Jagoda, said Wednesday he had no
comment about the latest development in the case.
Jagoda and Azar never married, and Jackson County Circuit Judge Christine
Sill-Rogers granted full custody to Jagoda earlier this year. Azar, who
was the child's primary caregiver until he was about 29 months old, has
appealed that ruling.
Her immediate concern, she said Wednesday, is preventing a circumcision
that she deems unnecessary and potentially harmful. According to the
petition filed with the Supreme Court, "Mr. Jagoda has indicated that he
is determined to circumcise the child immediately, with or without a
doctor, with or without anesthesia."
Azar said Wednesday that, according to studies she has read and experts
she has spoken with, her son's age might be the worst for a child to be
circumcised.
"This is the most frightening age and damaging age psychologically," she
said. "I have to protect him.
"He knows his body very well. He's aware enough to understand what his
body is like now but not able to understand why part of that would be
taken away. Kids this age see the operation as a punishment, a mutilation,
a castration."
Azar said she is generally opposed to the idea of circumcision. If her son
were old enough to decide for himself, she said, she wouldn't object.
So she's taking her fight to the state's highest court.
According to legal rules, Whitsitt has 10 days to file suggestions and
oppositions.
"Circumcision . would be the removal of perfectly healthy tissue from a
person not legally competent to object," the petition states.
"Circumcision is non-reversible amputation. It is the permanent
destruction of living, non-threatening, sensitive tissue."
|
Important ethical breakthrough
CTV news B.C. doctors take stand against circumcision
CTV.ca News Staff
B.C.'s College of Physicians and Surgeons has issued guidelines that state circumcision on newborns is medically unnecessary. Not only that, it hurts. "The concern is that, most males would agree, that this is very painful," Dr. Peter Seland of the College told CTV Newsnet. "Most babies would voice that." There are also concerns the procedure "reduces sexual enjoyment later in life," he said. Those downsides are for a procedure that primarily reduces the risk of some localized infections, he said. "Beyond that, I think primarily the benefits rest primarily with ethnic beliefs, which these guidelines don't attempt to address at all." The College acknowledges in its guidelines that circumcision is an important tradition in Jewish and Islamic culture. Asked about the child's best interests, Seland said, "parents have an obligation to make medical decisions that are in their child's best interests, and they do it all the time." With circumcision, "the risks and benefits more or less seems to be evenly weighed, so it's a nil issue," he said. In the policy statement published online, the CPSBC raises a number of questions on the ethical, legal and medical implications of the procedure. "Routine infant male circumcision performed on a healthy infant is now considered a non-therapeutic and medically unnecessary intervention," the College writes. Calling for a "wider societal discussion" of the practice, the manual goes on to call routine infant male circumcision "an unnecessary and irreversible procedure." "Therefore, many consider it to be 'unwarranted mutilating surgery.' Many adult men are increasingly concerned about whether their parents had the right to give consent for infant male circumcision." The new guidelines were developed in response to the 2002 death of one-month-old Ryleigh McWillis. He bled to death after a circumcision at Penticton regional hospital. Though the consensus of many medical agencies -- including both the Canadian and American Paediatric Societies -- comes down against its medical benefits, there are still many doctors who routinely perform the surgery. Doctors who favour circumcising healthy children say the best time is in the first few weeks after birth. The CPSBC does make allowances for circumcision on religious grounds or other similarly compelling grounds. "Therefore, each request for the procedure should be carefully evaluated, and an agreement to perform the procedure should take into consideration the ethical principles of beneficence (duty to benefit); non-maleficence (do no harm); veracity (accurate information); autonomy (consent); and justice (fairness)." Seland said the guidelines should help B.C. physicians in counselling parents "so they just don't make it on the basis of 'we want him to look like daddy.'" The college wants parents to understand "the risks and the limited benefit, and to understand there are moral and human rights issues that they need to at least consider in their decision," he said. |
"He was covered in blood"
BBC Circumcision doctors face
hearing But Dr Virinder Madhok and Dr Ayyaswany Vasanthakrishnan, from
Glasgow, denied causing them unnecessary pain.
The pair also admitted failing to inform the babies' parents
about the risks involved in the procedure, during the hearing in
Manchester.
The two boys had been taken to Dr Madhok's private surgery in
2002.
The GMC heard that the two babies, referred to only as Master A
and Master B, had been taken to the surgery in Battlefield Road,
Glasgow, to have the circumcisions performed in accordance with
Muslim tradition.
As the family waited to be seen by the doctor they saw another
boy who had just been circumcised return to his family.
His body and legs were covered in blood, he was sweating and in a
distressed state, Master A's aunt told the hearing.
"He was just crying and crying and just wouldn't stop. He was
covered in blood, it got me quite scared," she said.
She told the GMC that she noticed Dr Madhok's hands were also
covered in blood and he was not wearing gloves.
The doctor handed back the baby to its parents, telling them he
was a "stubborn child who would cause them a lot of problems in the
future".
Baby A was then taken away for just under an hour for the
surgery.
Dr Madhok and Dr Vasanthakrishnan, who was performing the
surgery, both admitted they failed to get written consent from the
mother or explain that the procedure was to be performed by Dr
Vasanthakrishnan, who in fact was never introduced to the family
members.
When Master A was returned he was covered in blood, sweating and
had scratches on his arms and stomach, his aunt said.
Dr Madhok explained that the scratches had been caused by his
fingernails during the circumcision.
"I felt quite angry that this had happened, he was a doctor. I
was quite angry and shocked," she said.
'Very distressed'
She told the hearing that she did not believe the scratches had
been caused by the doctor's fingernails.
The GMC also heard that the four-month-old boy, referred to as
Master B, was taken to the same surgery for circumcision on 26
October, 2002.
It was alleged that the doctors again failed to explain the risks
involved in the procedure and failed to gain either the aunt or
mother's written consent.
The boy was returned to them in a "very distressed state" and
could be heard screaming from the waiting room as the procedure was
performed, Mr Braslavsky said.
Dr Madhok, of Dalziel Drive, Glasgow, suggested that he had not
been anaesthetised properly or at all during the surgery, it was
also claimed, which the doctor denied.
The hearing continues. |
Another death
South African Press Association Circumcision school initiative dies
An initiate from Zone 13 circumcision school in Mdantsane died inside his hut after suffering from septicaemia, a post mortem revealed on Wednesday.
|
Aftonbladet |
Police support abuse
paper Rastafarian circumcised against his will
Melanie Peters A 22-year-old Cape Town man was taken by force and circumcised against his will this week. And far from sympathising with him, his father insists it was for his own good. |
Back to the Intactivism index page.