Mothering Forum banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,928 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Something very interesting has happened on the Intactivist front. Please read:<br><br><a href="http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm?id=57704&section=News" target="_blank">http://www.in-forum.com/articles/ind...4&section=News</a><br><br>
What is really interesting is this quote:<br><br><i>"That seemed curious to Justice Dale Sandstrom. "If this plaintiff doesn't have standing, who does?" he asked state Solicitor General Douglas Bahr, who argued in favor of the law. Sandstrom wondered how a law specifically protecting girls wouldn't be as suspect as one written to protect white children but not black or American Indian children.<br><br>
"The legislative intent is pretty clearly to protect female children," Sandstrom said."</i><br><br><br>
For those of you who don't know the history, this is about a circumcision case in the North Dakota judicial system. The plaintiff, Anita Flatt gave birth to her son in 1998 and was given the usual non-information about circumcision and her son was circumcised. Then like so many times, she learned about circumcision, the non-necessity, non-beneficial, sexually damaging, etc. She then brought suit against Dr. Kantak citing the 1995 North Dakota FGM law as being unconstitutional. Judge Roth-Seeger dismissed the case in short order. Flatt brought another suit contending that she was given inadequate information to give informed consent. Judge Roth-Seeger took many unusual steps in the trial such as barring Flatt's expert witnesses from testifying about the procedure and barring her evidence. Most who are knowledgable in intactivism and law were outraged at her behavior.<br><br>
It now looks like the screw has turned. From the quote above from Justice Sandstrom, it looks like we have an ally in the state Supreme Court. It also appears that he has hit the nail squarely on the head in his assessment of the situation and hopefully, he will have a great deal of influence on his colleagues on the bench.<br><br>
It's at this point that my expertise in legal matters starts getting a little fuzzy but I have written a friend at Attorneys For The Rights Of The Child for some clarification. I'll keep all of you posted on what he says.<br><br>
The issue here is "Is the North Dakota FGM law of 1995 discriminatory and therefore unconstitutional?" There are some questions here I can't answer like "If it is declared unconstitutional, what effect does it have on the federal FGM law?" "Can Flatt go on to the US Supreme Court to have the Federal law declared unconstitutional?"<br><br>
This is going to be a real contentious issue. If the law is declared unconstitutional, girls are no longer protected. I don't think the American public will stand for that and I think it will give the US a public relations black eye if the issue is not addressed. However, it will be very difficult to write a replacement law that will both protect the genitals of girls and allow circumcision of boys to continue while passing constitutional muster. As a matter of fact, I think it will be impossible. I do think they will try dilligently but I also feel they will fail repeatedly until they just give up and include boys in the protection.<br><br>
Keep watching. You may be watching history in the making. If it happens, there will be a lot of wailing and moaning and there will be intense lobbying by the medical profession. There will be threats and warnings and front page articles as well as daily coverage by all of the media. This is something that much of America does not want to give up and they are not going to go quietly. However, they are ultimately destined to fail. YaHooooo! ! ! ! ! !<br><br><br><br><br>
Frank
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,213 Posts
I hope something good comes of this!! Let them scream and cry about not being able to perform such a disgusting procedure on infant boys. Let all little boys have there birthright to an intact body!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,928 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
There isn't much you can do to influence the judicial system so probably not. The only thing I can think of would be letters to the editor to ND newspapers showing support for genital integrity for all. That would show support for the "right" decision although the justices try to avoid outside influences in making these decisions.<br><br><br><br><br>
Frank
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,400 Posts
I can't help thinking that this is a mixed blessing. What if they decide that it's better to allow FGM than to disallow MGM? FGM is so rare in this country that they might not think it's a big enough problem to place a lot of importance on the law. And there's still too much support for MGM in this country. Even among those who don't circ, some still feel that it should be up to the parents.<br><br>
I'm scared for the baby girls. I don't want them to lose their protection.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
304 Posts
You know, this makes me a bit nervous too, although I know it has to happen in order for RIC to stop. I HIGHLY doubt FGM will be allowed based on this. What I do fear is all the last ditch attempts to show how MEDICALLY BENEFICIAL circ is, headlines, studies, articles, could have a hopefully temporary detrimental effect on the movement. I guess that's where we come in with our letters to the editor and our other efforts.<br><br>
Jackie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
865 Posts
I live in neighboring South Dakota and hadn't even heard of this case. I think the more it is brought to the attention of the public, the more people may think a little more before they have their boys circ'ed. My son is intact, and I thought we'd have some trouble at the hospital. In fact, the nurses were very pleasant. We were asked twice about getting him circ'ed before going home, and we said, "We're not having that done." They just smiled and moved on to the next thing on the list of things we "needed" to go home. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/smile.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="smile">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,951 Posts
All I can see happening from this is the FGM law being withdrawn and then little girls won't be protected either. I don't think the US is ready for MGM to be outlawed. I hope I am wrong though. I do think this is a step in the right direction though. It has to start somewhere.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,928 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Alice:<br><br>
We have little to worry about. If the FGM Law is declared unconstitutional, there will be a rush like you've never seen to replace it with something. I suspect the first attempts will be the 1996 law slightly reworded which will be promptly knocked down. Finally, they will be a law that protects everyone equally as it should have been in 1996. You can expect feminist groups, intactivists, circumcision advocates, medical organizations, child protection groups and others to be intensely lobbying congress for their own point of view and there is no way this will just go away<br><br><br>
Jackie:<br><br>
There is going to be a huge stink if and when it happens and there will have to be a final chapter to the controversy. You have to understand that the US is very conscious of it's international perception. For us to have made such a stink and issue about FGM worldwide and then let the law just go away and FGM begin again in our own country will result in the condemnation of America by the world community. The govmint ain't gonna let that happen! There is too much at stake. They would eventually just grit their teeth and outlaw all genital mutilations if they saw that happening.<br><br><br><br>
Frank
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,738 Posts
Hopefully people will start thinking twice about circ. It seem so routine...the day after I gave birth to my oldest son the nurse walked in and said I'm taking him for his circ. even though I was asked when I was admissted and didn't sign consent. They don't even look at the charts anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
635 Posts
<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/fingersx.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="fingersx">: <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies/carrot.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="carrot"> , this is exciting!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>noodle4u</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;"><img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/fingersx.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="fingersx">: <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies/carrot.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="carrot"> , this is exciting!<br><br>
Proud mum of Morgan Raine 1.5yrs artist and lover of animals</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
I find your sig interesting...my son's name is "Morgan Dain", and he's 18 months old as of yesterday.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,021 Posts
Thanks for bringing this to my attention! I will be watching for updates. This is very very hopeful legislation.<br><br>
Thanks for all you do Frank!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,400 Posts
<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/oops.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="oops">T We have MDC kids named Morgan Raine and Morgan Dain? That's so cool!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
635 Posts
Morgan Dain is a cool name too. Morgan will be two on June 23 (my moms birthday,lol).<br><br>
I met a woman not long ago. Our Children are born on the same day, she said that if she had of had a girl she was going to call her Morgana rai. But she had a boy and called him Justin.<br><br>
Sometimes there are just some cool coincidences or what ever you want to call them out there.<br><br>
Nice to meet ya! <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/smile.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="smile">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>noodle4u</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Morgan Dain is a cool name too. Morgan will be two on June 23 (my moms birthday,lol).<br><br>
I met a woman not long ago. Our Children are born on the same day, she said that if she had of had a girl she was going to call her Morgana rai. But she had a boy and called him Justin.<br><br>
Sometimes there are just some cool coincidences or what ever you want to call them out there.<br><br>
Nice to meet ya! <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/smile.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="smile"></div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Likewise! Morgan's 2nd is on 20 Nov. Little bugger pitched up two months early, and spent a month in ICU for his troubles.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,212 Posts
Why, exactly, would it be unconstitutional? The Equal Rights Amendment failed to pass, remember? I think using the 14th Amendment would be a stretch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,400 Posts
The ERA is a clarification, since people don't seem to want to apply the 14th amendment to women. The 14th is supposed to protect all citizens from discrimination. Why would it be a stretch?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,212 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>SBF</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Why would it be a stretch?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
<br>
Because it doesn't specifically mention sex or gender.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,400 Posts
It doesn't specifically mention race, either. Or anything else. It simply says that no person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top