CDC wants US circ program - Page 6

[tennisdude23]

quote removed by administrator for defamation concerns

Uhm, no. In this country as in all of the other industrialized countries you need to sign a consent form for any surgery, no matter how small or benign. Otherwise the hospital, clinic, etc faces serious legal issues. I believe what you are referring to was a statement from a physician in one St. Louis hospital. That statement represented her disgusting, biased opinion. However, the issue of consent is central to any procedure no matter the personal preferences of the secondary parties. You also have the legal right to refuse any procedure. If any health care professional ever tries to force you to sign a consent using tactics and behavior that you may find uncomfortable or distressing, you have every right to file a complaint and change services. Because of the very real and serious fear of litigation, proper consent, either direct or by proxy, is always necessary for any procedure. I believe this has been the case since the early 70s. Of course, the legality and ethics of proxy consent in such a context as that of circumcision is highly questionable, which is why people can file lawsuits when they reach legal age.

[PuppyFluffer]

Originally Posted by tennisdude23

Uhm, no. In this country as in all of the other industrialized countries you need to sign a consent form for any surgery, no matter how small or benign. Otherwise the hospital, clinic, etc faces serious legal issues. I believe what you are referring to was a statement from a physician in one St. Louis hospital. That statement represented her disgusting, biased opinion. However, the issue of consent is central to any procedure no matter the personal preferences of the secondary parties. You also have the legal right to refuse any procedure. If any health care professional ever tries to force you to sign a consent using tactics and behavior that you may find uncomfortable or distressing, you have every right to file a complaint and change services. Because of the very real and serious fear of litigation, proper consent, either direct or by proxy, is always necessary for any procedure. I believe this has been the case since the early 70s. Of course, the legality and ethics of proxy consent in such a context as that of circumcision is highly questionable, which is why people can file lawsuits when they reach legal age.

I do not want to derail this thread but I do want to explain an exception to the bolded statement. You have the right to refuse medical intervention until "the system" decides it's in the best interest of the child to force treatment or testing and they invoke the legal action available to force you to consent or remove your power to consent. There have certainly been situations where this has happened to parents. I was almost there myself recently. I'll be happy to explain via PM my particular situation.

I don't foresee this happening with circumcision but I did want to make the above clarification (since this is a recent personal issue with my family.)

[tennisdude23]

Originally Posted by PuppyFluffer

I do not want to derail this thread but I do want to explain an exception to the bolded statement. You have the right to refuse medical intervention until "the system" decides it's in the best interest of the child to force treatment or testing and they invoke the legal action available to force you to consent or remove your power to consent. There have certainly been situations where this has happened to parents. I was almost there myself recently. I'll be happy to explain via PM my particular situation.

I don't foresee this happening with circumcision but I did want to make the above clarification (since this is a recent personal issue with my family.)

Oh yes, naturally. Proxy consent is a murky area from a legal perspective. For example, we pretty much allow parents to do as they please with their children unless of course they are charged with abuse or something. Then the courts step in. The courts can also step in and overrule parental proxy when they try to determine the best interests of a child. But that's done only on a case by case basis. So, for example, if a child needs a life saving blood transfusion but the parents object then the state will step in and give that child the transfusion, meaning that the state can curb parental rights in order to protect the child's interests. This is why circumcision remains such a thorny issue. While it's impossible to prove medically that circumcision is in a child's best interest, it is certainly feasible to say that operating on healthy tissue without warranted and urgent medical cause is by our current moral and legal standards unethical and illegal. We have already made that determination for girls, without taking into consideration the possible "benefits" of female circumcision. So, why should we have a legal differentiation for boys if everyone is created equal under the constitution. That's the central question to this debate and one that most people won't touch with a ten foot pole because of religious and cultural sensitivities. So, perhaps, one can only conclude that in many instances justice depends only on political correctness as determined by society. The quest for justice always has and will remain illusive in the realm of controversy until someone steps up and grabs the mantle.

PS: Puppyfluffer, I hope everything worked out well in your personal situation.

[Fyrestorm]

Originally Posted by PuppyFluffer

I do not want to derail this thread but I do want to explain an exception to the bolded statement. You have the right to refuse medical intervention until "the system" decides it's in the best interest of the child to force treatment or testing and they invoke the legal action available to force you to consent or remove your power to consent. There have certainly been situations where this has happened to parents. I was almost there myself recently. I'll be happy to explain via PM my particular situation.

I don't foresee this happening with circumcision but I did want to make the above clarification (since this is a recent personal issue with my family.)

:

Can you say "forced c section" after threat of a court order and CPS?

[georgia]

Hello, posts have been removed that were in violation of the User Agreement and Forum Guidelines. We do not host namecalling. Please do not use pejorative terms to discuss circumcision or the thread will be removed. Members of the community are expected to be able to post respectfully, even when we are upset. If you can't post something within the UA, don't post.

Please also be mindful that we do not host reference to or discussion of religion per the forum guidelines. We also do not host discussion of other site's comments nor do we host posts asking others to go comment at another site:

Do not post to invite MDC members to other communities, blogs or message boards for adversarial purposes or link to discussion about MDC at another site. Do not negatively discuss other communities or discussions elsewhere (this includes blog comments), regardless of whether or not you link to that discussion or community. This is to maintain and respect the integrity of our own and other communities.

Further User Agreement violations will result in this thread's removal, and I doubt anyone wants this to happen as it is a very important topic. If you have a question about the appropriateness of a post, please utilize the report button or PM a forum moderator. Thank you!

[georgia]

Hi, more posts removed. Please note what I posted above:

Do not negatively discuss other communities or discussions elsewhere (this includes blog comments), regardless of whether or not you link to that discussion or community. This is to maintain and respect the integrity of our own and other communities.

This includes Facebook. Please keep the discussion on-topic to CDC conference, thanks! Please take questions or comments regarding our forum policies to me via our Private Messaging system rather than posting here on the thread. Thanks!

[serendipity22]

jumping on the bandwagon

Reading the CDC website there seem to be some people there who are very biased towards circ.

IMO the CDC is jumping on the African bandwagon.

[Minarai]

Originally Posted by serendipity22

Reading the CDC website there seem to be some people there who are very biased towards circ.

IMO the CDC is jumping on the African bandwagon.

More like they OWN that bandwagon. :

[Fyrestorm]

Wanna bet the panel was crowded with Peds that make $$$ off cutting baby genitals?

They are merely trying to preserve their income levels. If circ rates continue to fall at the rate that they have been, who is going to leep them in the style to which they've become accustomed?

Circumcision has always been a cure in search of a disease to keep up the revenue stream.

[Minarai]

Originally Posted by Fyrestorm

Wanna bet the panel was crowded with Peds that make $$$ off cutting baby genitals?

You've already won; no need to bet on it.

They are merely trying to preserve their income levels. If circ rates continue to fall at the rate that they have been, who is going to leep them in the style to which they've become accustomed?

Easy: they convince the highest medical authority in the US (the CDC) to make a "recommendation" in favor of circ and before we know it, that "recommendation" becomes law. Anyone who attempts to opt out will be prosecuted and/or have CPS take their children away. All in the name of profit.

Circumcision has always been a cure in search of a disease to keep up the revenue stream.

There's no other logical explanation.

[K703]

Originally Posted by Minarai

Easy: they convince the highest medical authority in the US (the CDC) to make a "recommendation" in favor of circ and before we know it, that "recommendation" becomes law. Anyone who attempts to opt out will be prosecuted and/or have CPS take their children away. All in the name of profit.

Do you seriously think that would happen? I think if they made it illegal to not circumcise there would be a lot of outcry.

[Fyrestorm]

Originally Posted by K703

Do you seriously think that would happen? I think if they made it illegal to not circumcise there would be a lot of outcry.

I doubt it...but scare enough people and it won't be an issue. Most people don't realize that there is no law that that you have to vaccinate...they just think there is because of all the misinformation and scaremongering. How many mamas here are worried about CPS being called because they do the perfectly legal thing and don't vaccinate. I can see them trying to get the same mindset going about genital cutting.

Take my parents generation...My MIL just told me that she didn't even know she had a choice not to cut my DH...even though her DH was happily intact.