US mom faces prison for blocking son’s circumcision

[Desperate Measures]

There's a medical reason here.

Not really. Kid is still too young for it to be a concern.

Yeah --- I just started reading up on it. Unless there's some severity aspect to it, that judge is kind of shit.

[DaAngou14]

There's a medical reason here.

No, there's a little trouble peeing here, and phimosis often corrects itself.

[Diopolis]

While I normally oppose circumcision in the absence of a valid cultural reason, he has a medical condition that necessitates it. The mother isn't blocking a cosmetic procedure; she's blocking a medically necessary procedure.
Edit: Yes, I know that this condition often corrects itself, but it's affecting the boy's health in the near term. That makes it a medical decision as opposed to a cultural decision. Circumcision isn't that bad- I would know. Parents get the right to make medical decisions for their children, and they'd already agreed to this.

[Ashmoria]

no they don't. the father is just as much a parent as the mother so their previous agreement on this matter should be the deciding factor.

I don't think the parents had any right to come to such an agreement in the first place.

of course they do. millions of parents make this decision every year. until circumcision is outlawed it is the parent's decision.

[Greed and Death]

That's debatable.

Where else? Israel it's probably very common, so that's two, maybe Canada? Really not the done thing in Europe though.

In Korea it is very common.
The Philippines
Most of Africa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_circumcision

[Ostroeuropa]

I don't think the parents had any right to come to such an agreement in the first place.

of course they do. millions of parents make this decision every year. until circumcision is outlawed it is the parent's decision.

Like the right to own slaves.
The fact that the rights of children to bodily autonomy and protection from assault are being ignored en masse isn't indicative of the right of the parents to do this.

[Scomagia]

Not really. Kid is still too young for it to be a concern.

Yeah --- I just started reading up on it. Unless there's some severity aspect to it, that judge is kind of shit.

We don't, as Nathi pointed out, know how severe it is. I'm being optimistic and leaning towards it being somewhat severe, otherwise I doubt this would be happening in the first place.

[Hanchu]

If those legal agreements include preforming elective surgery on a minor , one parent has every right to ignore them

no they don't. the father is just as much a parent as the mother so their previous agreement on this matter should be the deciding factor.

I don't give a Damn who the parents are this is about the child having a part of his penis removed without his consent , if an aunt , uncle or third cousin twice removed, rescued the child I would praise them the Same as I do the mother

[Devvo Mate]

The Middle East in general?

Wouldn't really count the Middle East as developed, not most of it anyway

[Greed and Death]

of course they do. millions of parents make this decision every year. until circumcision is outlawed it is the parent's decision.

Like the right to own slaves.
The fact that the rights of children to bodily autonomy and protection from assault are being ignored en masse isn't indicative of the right of the parents to do this.

We allow children to get their ears pierced with parental consent.

[Ashmoria]

of course they do. millions of parents make this decision every year. until circumcision is outlawed it is the parent's decision.

Like the right to own slaves.
The fact that the rights of children to bodily autonomy and protection from assault are being ignored en masse isn't indicative of the right of the parents to do this.

parents make ALL medical decisions for their minor children.

[Ostroeuropa]

Like the right to own slaves.
The fact that the rights of children to bodily autonomy and protection from assault are being ignored en masse isn't indicative of the right of the parents to do this.

We allow children to get their ears pierced with parental consent.

I'd say that practice should also stop.
Though i'd also lower the age of consenting to proceedures like circumcision, tattooing etc. to 15.

[Arkiasis]

Here's an important bit that you've left out.

A pediatrician had diagnosed the son as having phimosis, a condition that prevents retraction of the foreskin.

As such, there's a medical condition present. Given that, I support the decision of the court. Otherwise, I wouldn't.

For some people the foreskin doesn't retract until you're 8 or 9 or so. Hell, I couldn't until I was around 10.

[Ostroeuropa]

Like the right to own slaves.
The fact that the rights of children to bodily autonomy and protection from assault are being ignored en masse isn't indicative of the right of the parents to do this.

parents make ALL medical decisions for their minor children.

I wouldn't consider mutilation a medical decision.

[Ostroeuropa]

Ashmoria, would you say it should be legal for parents to Castrate their children?
It has medical benefits.

[Occupied Deutschland]

parents make ALL medical decisions for their minor children.

I wouldn't consider mutilation a medical decision.

You would be in direct contravention of the American Academy of Pediatricians and the Mayo Clinic, as well as a number of other medical professionals.
Including many who oppose widespread circumcision.

[DaAngou14]

We allow children to get their ears pierced with parental consent.

I'm alright with that. If you regret it later it's your own fault. I'll leave anti-peer pressure for the future generations. I never bend, if other people do I'll just have to pity them.

[Desperate Measures]

Yeah --- I just started reading up on it. Unless there's some severity aspect to it, that judge is kind of shit.

We don't, as Nathi pointed out, know how severe it is. I'm being optimistic and leaning towards it being somewhat severe, otherwise I doubt this would be happening in the first place.

Also - she signed a document agreeing to it...

I don't like being able to see multiple sides to a story, damn it! What is my opinion supposed to be? Help me, Obama!

[DaAngou14]

parents make ALL medical decisions for their minor children.

Medical is a strong word for something that often corrects itself without interference and poses no danger to the child.

[Devvo Mate]

In Korea it is very common.
The Philippines
Most of Africa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_circumcision

The Philippines and most of Africa aren't developed.

[Ostroeuropa]

I wouldn't consider mutilation a medical decision.

You would be in direct contravention of the American Academy of Pediatricians and the Mayo Clinic, as well as a number of other medical professionals.
Including many who oppose widespread circumcision.

In some circumstances it can be acceptable.
It's akin to deciding that open heart surgery on someone with no heart problems isn't a medical decision. It's pointlessly fucking with someone and endangering their livelihood, and would be medical malpractice.
There are risks to circumcision. I don't see much difference.

[Devvo Mate]

Here's an important bit that you've left out.

A pediatrician had diagnosed the son as having phimosis, a condition that prevents retraction of the foreskin.

As such, there's a medical condition present. Given that, I support the decision of the court. Otherwise, I wouldn't.

The foreskin isn't supposed to be able to retract before the age of 5

[Zakuvia]

Don't really get where all this vehement aggravation is coming from when it comes to circumcision. It has some health benefits in general, doubly so because this kid has the potential for Phimosis. It's not a crippling ailment, but when you consider the medically neutral nature of circumcision already, it makes no sense not to allow or even enforce it.

I myself am circumcised (TMI, I know) and have never experienced any kind of discomfort or shame as a result of it. I also know I have a few things working in my favor as a result of it, medically.

Tonsillectomies are body torture! #Appendixlivesmatter ! Vestigial tails are God's will!

[DaAngou14]

It's not a crippling ailment, but when you consider the medically neutral nature of circumcision already, it makes no sense not to allow or even enforce it.

It makes sense from the point of conscience. Other standpoints are what are called sociopathic.

I myself am circumcised (TMI, I know) and have never experienced any kind of discomfort or shame as a result of it.

Good for you, I wasn't asking.

[Libacur]

I would go with banning it since I find it disgusting, but it should be up to the person who is getting circumcised to decide.