Mothering › Forums › Health › The Case Against Circumcision › spin off: parental disagreement over circ
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

spin off: parental disagreement over circ  

post #1 of 20
10/19/06 at 10:49am
Thread Starter 
The other thread got me wondering - does anyone know if there has ever been a court case regarding one parent wanting to circ, and the other not? I know there have been a couple recent cases where a separated couple has gone to court over and older child with "infections", but has there ever been a case re: RIC?
And if not, how soon do you think there will be?

I was thinking it through the other day, what I honestly would've done if my dh had absolutely 100% refused to budge...and if we had been married at the time of birth (we were not...had he refused to budge, I simply would not have put him on the birth cert). I tried to think about it honestly, with no grandstanding because it's hypothetical...and I came to the conclusion that I would contact a lawyer during pregnancy, and would try to get some sort of restraining order in the meantime to cover birth/right after birth. I'd refuse to sign papers in the hospital, and I'd try to get some sort of court injunction to make it illegal for him to ever have the baby circed behind my back.

I can't see an instance where a court would force the infant to undergo unnecessary surgery, you know? I don't know, I was going through all of it in my head and it got me thinking.

Of course, I don't say any of this lightly, either...it would be devastating to me to lose my dh over ANYTHING, especially something so...unnecessary. He is my best friend, my partner, I adore him and can't imagine going through life without him - however, that still doesn't give him the right to hurt our child. And I realized that yes, if push came to shove, I would take it all the way to court. I wonder if that's ever happened, and I wonder if it hasn't, how soon it will?

/early morning coffee ramblings
post #2 of 20
10/19/06 at 3:21pm
I don't know, but when I had my first I think I would've given in. I was against it (but not nearly the way I am now0) and I'd love to say I would've gone to court over it, but I was young, had been married less than 2 years and I don't think I would'v risked my marriage over it.

Now, however, I feel so strongly about that I have no doubt that I'd go as far as necessary to protect my babies.
post #3 of 20
10/19/06 at 3:32pm
I don't think a case like this will come up soon. I think too many people would give in to their spouse. I know I would have taken DH to court over circ if I had to, and we've been married 8 years
post #4 of 20
10/19/06 at 3:59pm
If it came to it I'd be worried that the court might not take my side so I would have probably moved to a country that doesn't do it before giving birth (Ireland in my case b/c of the law of return.)
post #5 of 20
10/19/06 at 4:42pm
I am so sorry you are going thru this during your pregnancy I know the possibility of losing your marriage over this, is easier said then done. I would highly suggest contacting the lawyer in Atlanta that is a member of this board. He will be very helpful I am sure. He will know about case history, etc

Hopefully it will not come down to this...but at least you will be prepared. Be strong momma!! I will keep you in my prayers, and good for you in thinking about your baby first!

You will not regret your decision.
post #6 of 20
10/19/06 at 4:47pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mamm2 View Post
I am so sorry you are going thru this during your pregnancy I know the possibility of losing your marriage over this, is easier said then done. I would highly suggest contacting the lawyer in Atlanta that is a member of this board. He will be very helpful I am sure. He will know about case history, etc

Hopefully it will not come down to this...but at least you will be prepared. Be strong momma!! I will keep you in my prayers, and good for you in thinking about your baby first!

You will not regret your decision.
Oh no, sorry, I tried to make it clear - this was hypothetical thinking outloud...my dh came around very easily, and now wouldn't think of circing an infant (after our ds was born, dh said he would've beaten anyone that had tried to come near him with a scalpal).
post #7 of 20
10/19/06 at 4:59pm
:

Totally misread your post....
post #8 of 20
10/19/06 at 7:28pm
I don't know if there has been one beforethe child was circ'd but plenty after. Wait-there was a post here in the last year or so-about a divorced couple that had a 3yo boy and he was intact. Apparently the Mom wanted him intact and the Dad didn't. I beleive they were in court because the Dad kept threatening to take the boy to have him circ'd. Lemme go google!
Well, this isn't the one I was thinking of but more recent!
Quote:
CHICAGO — Groups opposed to circumcision are watching the case of an 8-year-old suburban Chicago boy whose divorced parents are fighting in court over whether he should have the procedure.

The child's mother wants him circumcised to prevent recurring, painful inflammation she says he's experienced during the past year. But the father says the boy is healthy and circumcision, which removes the foreskin of the penis, is an unnecessary medical procedure that could cause him long-term physical and psychological harm.

"The child is absolutely healthy," the father said during a break in a court hearing on the matter Wednesday. "I do not want any doctor to butcher my son."

The mother testified that her son has had five bouts of painful inflammation and has begged her to help him. Her son cannot wear underwear or jeans during the bouts and is comfortable only in loose-fitting pajamas, she said.

"My child was in the bathroom crying. He asked me to come in because his penis did not look normal," she said, describing one of the episodes.

The couple's 2003 divorce decree gave the father the right to offer input on medical decisions. Earlier this year, he sued to block the surgery and Cook County Judge Jordan Kaplan ordered the mother not to have the boy circumcised until he could hear from both parents and the opinions of doctors who've examined the boy
Huh! I was wrong- In both these cases it was the MOTHER!! that wanted the circ!
Quote:
A divorcing couple who went to court over the circumcision of their 3-year-old son settled the dispute yesterday when the boy's mother withdrew a request to have the surgery performed.

The case, which attracted significant attention from medical groups, legal scholars and the media, was decided behind closed doors in the Somerville County Courthouse.

State Superior Court Judge Paul Armstrong signed the consent order yesterday morning, which said the request for surgery had been dropped and the issue resolved. No other terms of the settlement were disclosed. "We are certain that our decision will promote Matthew's best interests and welfare," read a joint statement released by the boy's parents, James Price of Raritan and Jennifer Price of Clinton, who share custody.

James Price has previously maintained that if a judge—at any level— granted the circumcision, he would oppose it. "We are going to do what's right for Matthew. We love him very much," the father said yesterday. The case, which went on for seven months, became a focal point in the debate over the need for circumcision. A California-based nonprofit group called the National Organization of Circumcision Information Resource Centers, came to the aid of James Price, setting up a website to raise funds for his legal battle, and filed court papers to support his opposition. About 64 percent of the nation's boys are circumcised shortly after birth, according to the National Center for Health Statistics, but in 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics stepped back from its position that the procedure should be done at birth.

The medical community also weighed in. A "friend of the court brief" was filed by the Medical Society of New Jersey and the Urological Society of New Jersey opposing court-ordered treatments. The medical community says those decisions should be made by doctors and parents.

Legal scholars said the case had the potential to set an explosive precedent that could have sent divorced or separated parents back to court to settle routine health matters normally decided by the custodial parent. As the case made headlines, James Price appeared on the Howard Stern radio show and on the Montel Williams TV talk show.
post #9 of 20
10/19/06 at 8:08pm
Wow...I couldn't even go hypothetical about this. I don't think I would have married my DH let alone had a child with him if if a disagreement over this was even a remote possibility.
post #10 of 20
10/19/06 at 9:16pm
It IS an awfully good thing to discuss before making the decision to have children.
post #11 of 20
10/19/06 at 9:32pm
I'm so glad I never had to fight with dh about this. Last night, I told him I was thankful for that, since I would have had to leave him.
post #12 of 20
10/19/06 at 10:20pm
I'd consider it him leaving you (hypothetically), since he would be the one wanting to deviate from the norm. I don't think it's fair to put the onus of divorce on the person protecting a child from painful useless elective surgery.

We need to take a cue from lactivists & remember the paradigm we're speaking from: 'Watch Your Language- When Breast is not Best"

"We must not let inverted phrasing by the media and by our peers go unchallenged."

http://www.het.brown.edu/people/kjp/...r_language.htm
post #13 of 20
10/19/06 at 10:24pm
I didn't even really know what circ meant before I got married. My intact DH explained it and I thought it was one of the more babrbaric things I'd ever heard. If he's supported it, me as part of the uneducated masses would likely not have even questioned it. Or I would have been racked by the same guilt that a lot of the ladies here feel...after they what it is!!
post #14 of 20
10/19/06 at 10:26pm
I'm really glad it wasn't a major issue here. DH definately wanted him circ'd, but I would not even discuss it at all. I don't "put my foot down" about a lot, but when I do, it's down, if you kwim. Although DH would have preferred DS to have been circ'd, I don't think his stance on it was as important to him and mine was to me, so that made it easier too. Now DH says he came around to my way of thinking, but really, I don't think he has. I think if we had another son and I wanted to have him circ'd, he'd be all for it. He just didn't have a choice, but it's easier for him to say he 'came around'.
post #15 of 20
10/19/06 at 10:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeannie81 View Post
I think if we had another son and I wanted to have him circ'd, he'd be all for it. He just didn't have a choice, but it's easier for him to say he 'came around'.
Give him time, the more years the little guy is running around nudely in all his glory the more 'normal' it will be for him to accept & be appalled at the idea of doing that to his little, I'm guessing.
post #16 of 20
10/20/06 at 12:22am
I doubt that a judge would find in favor of allowing RIC, unless you got a very strange/stubborn/crooked judge. Legally it just doesn't make any sense, especially in light of the fact that people have been sucessfully sued for performing RIC. Now, throw in that there other factor and who knows where the chips may fall; I wouldn't lay bets either way.
post #17 of 20
10/20/06 at 2:07am
I can't imagine getting involved with someone that I distrusted that much, in the first place. But not putting a name on the birth certificate is not a cure all. First off if you are legally married your husband is considered to be the father unless there is proof otherwise. Second off it's extremely easy for a man to petition the court claiming to be the father and have a paternity test ordered by the court.

I personally do not trust courts to handle these kinds of situations.
post #18 of 20
10/20/06 at 9:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerTail View Post
I'd consider it him leaving you (hypothetically), since he would be the one wanting to deviate from the norm. I don't think it's fair to put the onus of divorce on the person protecting a child from painful useless elective surgery.

We need to take a cue from lactivists & remember the paradigm we're speaking from: 'Watch Your Language- When Breast is not Best"

"We must not let inverted phrasing by the media and by our peers go unchallenged."

http://www.het.brown.edu/people/kjp/...r_language.htm
Well put. But since you mention language, may I say that it is not only painful useless and elective but, more crucially, DAMAGING!
post #19 of 20
10/20/06 at 9:49am
Thread Starter 
I agree TigerTail, I would consider it "him leaving me", as well.
ared1 - very interesting about that second article! I have heard of the first case, but not the second.

But yeah, like many of you said, I would not have married my dh if he were the type that would allow something like that to get to that point.
post #20 of 20
10/20/06 at 2:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cristina63303 View Post
Well put. But since you mention language, may I say that it is not only painful useless and elective but, more crucially, DAMAGING!
Well, I had put 'mutilation', but edited it out lest I be accused of crucifying pro-circers.

It's the new improved self-editing TigerTail Intactivist 2.0.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Case Against Circumcision
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Forums › Health › The Case Against Circumcision › spin off: parental disagreement over circ