Circumcision in the courts...a custody battle

[applecider]

My sister sent me this article today:

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/orego...820.xml&coll=7

[ChristaN]

This quote raised some serious concerns for me:

James Boldt says a custodial parent has a constitutional right to raise his son in his religion.

If my religion required female circumcision and I wanted to circ my 12 y/o dd, there would be no court case here except for maybe a criminal case against me or a family law case resulting in my losing custody.

Also, why are there no studies of the effect of female circ on female HIV rates in Africa? If such studies somehow managed to be funded and found reduced infection rates for circed African women, would we now be discussing whether all American females should be circed?

[mamasophy]

There is a study on FGM and HIV: it reduced the rate of HIV...



http://www.ias-2005.org/planner/Abstracts.aspx?AID=3138

[applecider]

[QUOTE=ChristaN;8452659]

If my religion required female circumcision and I wanted to circ my 12 y/o dd, there would be no court case here except for maybe a criminal case against me or a family law case resulting in my losing custody.

[QUOTE]

That's exactly what my sister said!

[Revamp]

Believe it or not this is actually what passes for good news: there was some uncertainty over whether the high court were even taking this one up.

[glongley]

Here's a release from Doctors Opposing Circumcision in this development in the Misha case. [Edited to delete reference to fund raising.] Gillian

Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 4:43 PM
Subject: MISHA IS GRANTED APPELLATE REVIEW IN OREGON

DEAR COLLEAGUES:

Within the hour, on Wed, 6/20, we learned that the Oregon Supreme Court has granted review in the case of 'Misha,' (Boldt vs. Boldt), the 12-year-old
boy facing a circumcision he does not want, upon the demand of his custodial
father, who claims recent conversion to Judaism.

As you may remember, in April, 2007, Doctors Opposing Circumcision
interposed an Amicus Curiae (friend of the Court) brief on Misha's behalf
with the help of donations from many of you from all over the world.

This latest is very good news, indeed, though much work remains to be done.
Grant of review was never pro forma, nor 'of-right,' and was entirely
discretionary with the Court. It is an obviously easier course for courts
to merely uphold lower courts summarily. Thus denial of review is not only tempting, but can also be imposed for numerous convenient reasons.

We got lucky.

Now the possibilities narrow somewhat -the OR Supreme Court could hear the
case and uphold the lower courts' reasoning that the father's rights are
paramount. Or the Court could hear the case and remand for a hearing in the
matter, with or without instructions to the lower court. This would be the very first time the child has been conceded any rights whatsoever other than the right to exhaust his appeals. But at least Misha will be heard --at long, bloody, last.

D.O.C., working with two Oregon counsel, has 28 days from today to file a
50-page brief. Oral argument is scheduled for mid-November. As before, all
delays help the child, as age gives him the aplomb and courage to oppose his father himself. (Not frankly, that the child's acquiescence, qua minor, should have any weight, or be used to force him to waive his natural and legal rights as an adult-in-waiting. )

D.O.C. thanks all those who helped protect the boy thus far, in this very
important, -possibly landmark- test of the religious beliefs of the parent
vs. the child's right to an intact body free of unnecessary surgical risk.

Feel free to re-post this plea to protect Misha.

THANK YOU!

John V. Geisheker, J.D., LL.M.
Attorney at Law
General Counsel
Executive Director
Doctors Opposing Circumcision
2132 Westlake Ave N, Suite #150
Seattle, WA 98109
tel [phone]

[pdx.mothernurture]

Oops, posted before I saw this.

[SleeplessMommy]

Oral argument is scheduled for mid-November

This is good news, I think - the more delay the better in this case.

:

[Daisyuk]

What a way to grow up though, imagine 4 years (so far) as a child with the threat of genital mutilation hanging over you. What is that going to be doing to him?

Talk about cruel.

[ChristaN]

My fear is that this has messed with his mind so much at this point that, even if the courts say it can't be done until he is 18, he will turn around and have it done himself as soon as he reaches 18. Given that he is in the physical custody of his father, who knows what his dad is saying to him. A brainwashed 18 y/o is in no condition to make life changing decisions like that either.

[PuppyFluffer]

Just a quick note, this forum does not host discussions of religous circumcision. We are free to discuss this as a matter of custody and from the angle of the child having a right to decide his bodily integrity.

I hope the courts allow this minor to decide on his own how he wants his penis to be. I cannot imagine having this hanging over his head. I too am concerned about the emotional impact on him of this situation.