Mohels in particular were concerned that they could be punished for any health issue that might develop, even if it arose some time after the circumcision. === Albania === In 1967 all religion in Communist Albania was banned, along with the practice of circumcision.
This was in line with the 1990 Convention on the Rights of the Child, and mirrors the 2013 non-binding Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe's resolution against underage non-therapeutic circumcision.
No prosecutions have occurred in Queensland, and circumcisions continue to be performed. In 1999, a Perth man won A$360,000 in damages after a doctor admitted he botched a circumcision operation at birth which left the man with a badly deformed penis. In 2002, Queensland police charged a father with grievous bodily harm for having his two sons, then aged nine and five, circumcised without the knowledge and against the wishes of the mother.
Ben Shalem, an organisation dedicated to the abolition of circumcision, petitioned the Supreme Court in 1999 on the grounds that circumcision violated human dignity, children's rights and criminal law.
An estimated 2000 of these are performed by persons who are neither physicians nor have officially recognised certification. The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare reviewed the law in 2005 and recommended that it be maintained, but found that the law had failed with regard to the intended consequence of increasing the safety of circumcisions.
In the Eastern Cape province the Application of Health Standards in Traditional Circumcision Act, 2001, regulates traditional circumcision, which causes the death or mutilation of many youths by traditional surgeons each year.
The stated purpose of the law was to increase the safety of the procedure. Swedish Jews and Muslims objected to the law, and in 2001, the World Jewish Congress called it "the first legal restriction on Jewish religious practice in Europe since the Nazi era".
In such a case, a decision in favor of circumcision was said to be likely. In 2001 the General Medical Council had found a doctor who had botched circumcision operations guilty of abusing his professional position and that he had acted "inappropriately and irresponsibly", and struck him off the register.
Agudath Israel of America and other Jewish groups have planned to sue the city in response. Disputes between parents Occasionally the courts are asked to make a ruling when parents cannot agree on whether or not to circumcise a child. In January 2001 a dispute between divorcing parents in New Jersey was resolved when the mother, who sought to have the boy circumcised withdrew her request.
In June 2001 a Nevada court settled a dispute over circumcision between two parents but put a strict gag order on the terms of the settlement.
In July 2001 a dispute between parents in Kansas over circumcision was resolved when the mother's request to have the infant circumcised was withdrawn.
(The woman's pastor had stated that circumcision was "important" but was not necessary for salvation.) On 24 July 2001 the parents reached agreement that the infant would not be circumcised. On 14 July 2004 a mother appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court to prevent the circumcision of her son after a county court and the Court of Appeals had denied her a writ of prohibition.
No prosecutions have occurred in Queensland, and circumcisions continue to be performed. In 1999, a Perth man won A$360,000 in damages after a doctor admitted he botched a circumcision operation at birth which left the man with a badly deformed penis. In 2002, Queensland police charged a father with grievous bodily harm for having his two sons, then aged nine and five, circumcised without the knowledge and against the wishes of the mother.
The incidence has been gradually rising: in 2002, about 17,800 boys or men underwent circumcision, which increased to almost 26,200 in 2016.
He was put on an 18-month period of review and retraining, and was allowed to resume unrestricted practice as a doctor in March 2003, after a committee found that he had complied with conditions it placed on him.
Among other provisions, the minimum age for circumcision is age 18. In 2004, a 22-year-old Rastafarian convert was forcibly circumcised by a group of Xhosa tribal elders and relatives.
(The woman's pastor had stated that circumcision was "important" but was not necessary for salvation.) On 24 July 2001 the parents reached agreement that the infant would not be circumcised. On 14 July 2004 a mother appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court to prevent the circumcision of her son after a county court and the Court of Appeals had denied her a writ of prohibition.
However, in early August 2004, before the Supreme Court had given its ruling, the father, who had custody of the boy, had him circumcised. In October 2006 a judge in Chicago granted an injunction blocking the circumcision of a 9-year-old boy.
The boy was not circumcised. Other disputes In September 2004 the North Dakota Supreme Court rejected a mother's attempt to prosecute her doctor for circumcising her child without fully informing her of the consequences of the procedure.
Silja Dögg Gunnarsdóttir, who proposed the ban, retorted that Iceland had already prohibited female circumcision in 2005, and "If we have laws banning circumcision for girls, then we should do so for boys." On 29 April, the bill was sent back to Parliament for revisions.
Local anaesthesia needs to be applied and a licensed physician needs to be present at the circumcision, which hospitals started to perform in March 2015. In May 2017, the right-wing Progress Party proposed to ban circumcision for males under sixteen. In favour of a ban Centre Party (under 18, since 2012) Progress Party (under 16, since 2017) === South Africa === The Children's Act 2005 makes the circumcision of male children under 16 unlawful except for religious or medical reasons.
An estimated 2000 of these are performed by persons who are neither physicians nor have officially recognised certification. The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare reviewed the law in 2005 and recommended that it be maintained, but found that the law had failed with regard to the intended consequence of increasing the safety of circumcisions.
They say there is "no compelling legal authority for the common view that circumcision is lawful". In 2005 a Muslim man had his son circumcised against the wishes of the child's mother who was the custodial parent. In 2009 it was reported that a 20-year-old man whose father had him ritually circumcised as a baby is preparing to sue the doctor who circumcised him.
The report makes fourteen recommendations for reform of Tasmanian law relative to male circumcision. === Belgium === The Belgian Advisory Committee on Bioethics finds that circumcision is a radical operation, and that physical integrity of the child takes precedence over parents' belief systems: In 2012, Le Soir reported a 21% increase in the amount of circumcisions in Belgium from 2006 and 2011.
According to an online survey by the parents' portal Mamy in 2006, the rate was 95%, while earlier estimates put it at 98–99%.
However, in 2006, the U.S.
However, in early August 2004, before the Supreme Court had given its ruling, the father, who had custody of the boy, had him circumcised. In October 2006 a judge in Chicago granted an injunction blocking the circumcision of a 9-year-old boy.
The charges were dropped when the police prosecutor revealed that he did not have all family court paperwork in court and the magistrate refused to grant an adjournment. Cosmetic circumcision for newborn males is currently banned in all Australian public hospitals, South Australia being the last state to adopt the ban in 2007; the procedure was not forbidden from being performed in private hospitals.
In granting the injunction the judge stated that "the boy could decide for himself whether to be circumcised when he turns 18." In November 2007, the Oregon Supreme Court heard arguments from a divorced Oregon couple over the circumcision of their son.
A lawyer for the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health stated that there is neither legislation nor prohibition on male circumcision, and that "the operations have been performed on the basis of common law." The case was appealed and in October 2008 the Finnish Supreme Court ruled that the circumcision, "carried out for religious and social reasons and in a medical manner, did not have the earmarks of a criminal offence.
In 2008, the Finnish government was reported to be considering a new law to legalise circumcision if the practitioner is a doctor and if the child consents.
The court referred to the Convention on Human rights and Biomedicine of the Council of Europe, which was ratified in Finland in 2010. In February 2010, a Jewish couple were fined for causing bodily harm to their then infant son who was circumcised in 2008 by a mohel brought in from the UK.
In the 2008 case, the infant was not anesthetized and developed complications that required immediate hospital care.
The father wanted his son, who turned 13 on 2 March 2008, to be circumcised in accordance with the father's religious views; the child's mother opposes the procedure.
On 25 January 2008, the Court returned the case to the trial court with instructions to determine whether the child agrees or objects to the proposed circumcision.
In 2009, the Tasmanian Law Reform Institute released its Issues Paper investigating the law relating to male circumcision in Tasmania, it "highlights the uncertainty in relation to whether doctors can legally perform circumcision on infant males". The Tasmania Law Reform Institute released its recommendations for reform of Tasmanian law relative to male circumcision on 21 August 2012.
They say there is "no compelling legal authority for the common view that circumcision is lawful". In 2005 a Muslim man had his son circumcised against the wishes of the child's mother who was the custodial parent. In 2009 it was reported that a 20-year-old man whose father had him ritually circumcised as a baby is preparing to sue the doctor who circumcised him.
The court referred to the Convention on Human rights and Biomedicine of the Council of Europe, which was ratified in Finland in 2010. In February 2010, a Jewish couple were fined for causing bodily harm to their then infant son who was circumcised in 2008 by a mohel brought in from the UK.
The case is expected to be heard in 2010. In a 2015 case regarding female circumcision, a judge concluded that non-therapeutic circumcision of male children is a "significant harm".
The report makes fourteen recommendations for reform of Tasmanian law relative to male circumcision. === Belgium === The Belgian Advisory Committee on Bioethics finds that circumcision is a radical operation, and that physical integrity of the child takes precedence over parents' belief systems: In 2012, Le Soir reported a 21% increase in the amount of circumcisions in Belgium from 2006 and 2011.
In December 2011, Helsinki District Court said that the Supreme Court's decision does not mean that circumcision is legal for any non-medical reasons.
After a failed attempt to adopt a local ordinance banning circumcision on a San Francisco ballot, the state of California enacted in October 2011 a law protecting circumcision from local attempts to ban the practice. In 2012, New York City required those performing metzitzah b'peh, the oral suction of the open circumcision wound required by Hasidim, to obey stringent consent requirements, including documentation.
In 2009, the Tasmanian Law Reform Institute released its Issues Paper investigating the law relating to male circumcision in Tasmania, it "highlights the uncertainty in relation to whether doctors can legally perform circumcision on infant males". The Tasmania Law Reform Institute released its recommendations for reform of Tasmanian law relative to male circumcision on 21 August 2012.
The report makes fourteen recommendations for reform of Tasmanian law relative to male circumcision. === Belgium === The Belgian Advisory Committee on Bioethics finds that circumcision is a radical operation, and that physical integrity of the child takes precedence over parents' belief systems: In 2012, Le Soir reported a 21% increase in the amount of circumcisions in Belgium from 2006 and 2011.
The boy had planned to sue his father for . In May 2012, the Cologne regional appellate court ruled that religious circumcision of male children amounts to bodily injury, and is a criminal offense in the area under its jurisdiction.
Circumcision carried out in a responsible manner must be possible in this country without punishment." In July 2012, a group of rabbis, imams, and others said that they view the ruling against circumcision "an affront on our basic religious and human rights".
Local anaesthesia needs to be applied and a licensed physician needs to be present at the circumcision, which hospitals started to perform in March 2015. In May 2017, the right-wing Progress Party proposed to ban circumcision for males under sixteen. In favour of a ban Centre Party (under 18, since 2012) Progress Party (under 16, since 2017) === South Africa === The Children's Act 2005 makes the circumcision of male children under 16 unlawful except for religious or medical reasons.
After a failed attempt to adopt a local ordinance banning circumcision on a San Francisco ballot, the state of California enacted in October 2011 a law protecting circumcision from local attempts to ban the practice. In 2012, New York City required those performing metzitzah b'peh, the oral suction of the open circumcision wound required by Hasidim, to obey stringent consent requirements, including documentation.
This was in line with the 1990 Convention on the Rights of the Child, and mirrors the 2013 non-binding Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe's resolution against underage non-therapeutic circumcision.
Many believe it should be limited to consent for diagnosis and treatment of medical conditions, and that it is not relevant for non-therapeutic procedures." === Denmark === Circumcision is legal in Denmark, and each year 1,000 to 2,000 boys are circumcised of non-medical reasons, the Danish Health Authority estimated in 2013, with most circumcisions being performed on Muslim or Jewish boys in private clinics or private homes.
The operation requires "sufficient pain relief (analgesic) and sedation (Anesthesia)" The doctor is responsible for having the necessary qualifications (both for the operation and the pain relief) and for being informed about the newest scientific developments in the area. The current guidelines for non-medical circumcision are from 2013, and , a committee under the Danish Patient Health Authority are in the process of updating them.
The introduction of regulations by the Member States in order to set the conditions and the appropriate medical training for those called to perform it is warranted." On 1 October 2013, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted a non-binding resolution in which they state they are "particularly worried about a category of violation of the physical integrity of children", and included in this category "circumcision of young boys for religious reasons".
In 2013, a Rabbinical court in Israel ordered a mother in the midst of divorce proceedings to circumcise her son in accordance with the father's wishes, or pay a fine of 500 Israeli Shekel for every day that the child is not circumcised.
To remedy this, the report suggested a new law obliging all county councils to offer non-therapeutic circumcision in their hospitals, but this was later abandoned in favour of a non-binding recommendation. In 2013, the children's ombudsmen of all Nordic countries – Finland, Iceland, Denmark, Sweden and Norway – released a joint declaration in 2013 proposing a ban on non-medical circumcision of male minors.
The alleged victim was purportedly circumcised while in its Muslim father's care at his grandparents' in July 2013 without the consent of his mother (a non-religious white British woman who conceived the child after a casual affair with the man, whom she had separated from after the incident).
After inquiries were submitted to the Belgian Bioethics Advisory Committee in early 2014, an ethics commission was set up to review the morality of covering the costs of medically unnecessary surgery through taxpayer money, especially considering that many taxpayers regard the practice as immoral.
A 2020 survey measured the support at 86%, while surveys in 2018, 2016 and 2014 measured the support at 83%, 87% and 74%, respectively In 2018, a citizen's initiative calling for such a ban reached the threshold of 50.000 signatures to be put forward in the Folketing.
The mother first contacted social services and eventually the police in November 2014.
Local anaesthesia needs to be applied and a licensed physician needs to be present at the circumcision, which hospitals started to perform in March 2015. In May 2017, the right-wing Progress Party proposed to ban circumcision for males under sixteen. In favour of a ban Centre Party (under 18, since 2012) Progress Party (under 16, since 2017) === South Africa === The Children's Act 2005 makes the circumcision of male children under 16 unlawful except for religious or medical reasons.
The case is expected to be heard in 2010. In a 2015 case regarding female circumcision, a judge concluded that non-therapeutic circumcision of male children is a "significant harm".
The incidence has been gradually rising: in 2002, about 17,800 boys or men underwent circumcision, which increased to almost 26,200 in 2016.
The expenses of undergoing circumcision are covered by the National Institute for Disease and Disability Insurance (RIZIV/INAMI), costing about 2.7 million euros in 2016.
A 2020 survey measured the support at 86%, while surveys in 2018, 2016 and 2014 measured the support at 83%, 87% and 74%, respectively In 2018, a citizen's initiative calling for such a ban reached the threshold of 50.000 signatures to be put forward in the Folketing.
In 2016, the Family Court in Exeter ruled that a Muslim father could not have his two sons (aged 6 and 4) circumcised after their mother disagreed.
The Ministry of Health stressed the importance of safe circumstances, physicians warned that 'no surgical procedure is without risk' and that circumcision was 'not a necessary procedure'. In 2017, it was estimated that about 15% of Belgian men were circumcised.
By July 2017, the commission reportedly reached consensus on discontinuing the financial coverage of non-medical circumcision, but was still debating whether to advise the government to institute a total ban of the practice.
The commission's final (non-binding) recommendation, presented on 19 September 2017, was to cease public funding for non-medical circumcision, and to not circumcise anyone underage until they can consent or reject the procedure after being properly informed.
Local anaesthesia needs to be applied and a licensed physician needs to be present at the circumcision, which hospitals started to perform in March 2015. In May 2017, the right-wing Progress Party proposed to ban circumcision for males under sixteen. In favour of a ban Centre Party (under 18, since 2012) Progress Party (under 16, since 2017) === South Africa === The Children's Act 2005 makes the circumcision of male children under 16 unlawful except for religious or medical reasons.
Mrs Justice Roberts declared that the boys should first grow old enough "to the point where each of the boys themselves will make their individual choices once they have the maturity and insight to appreciate the consequences and longer-term effects of the decisions which they reach". Nottingham case In June 2017, Nottinghamshire Police arrested three people on suspicion of "conspiracy to commit grievous bodily harm".
In November 2017, the Crown Prosecution Service explained to the mother in a letter they were not going to prosecute the doctor, who claimed he was unaware of the mother's non-consent.
A 2020 survey measured the support at 86%, while surveys in 2018, 2016 and 2014 measured the support at 83%, 87% and 74%, respectively In 2018, a citizen's initiative calling for such a ban reached the threshold of 50.000 signatures to be put forward in the Folketing.
On 25 March 2018, members of Jews Against Circumcision spoke in the Alþing expressing their support for the proposed ban, dismissing claims that it was motivated by antisemitism, anti-Muslim bigotry, xenophobia or anti-immigration sentiment.
In October 2018, the right-wing populist Sweden Democrats party submitted a draft motion to parliament calling for a ban.
The by then 29-year-old mother finally sued the doctor in April 2018.
At the annual conference of the Centre Party in September 2019, 314 to 166 commissioners voted in favor of prohibiting boys' circumcision.
In August 2020, the Danish Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine withdrew from the committee, because they disagreed with the Authority's opinion that local anaesthesia was sufficient, instead saying the scientific literature showed that general anaesthesia was necessary.
A 2020 survey measured the support at 86%, while surveys in 2018, 2016 and 2014 measured the support at 83%, 87% and 74%, respectively In 2018, a citizen's initiative calling for such a ban reached the threshold of 50.000 signatures to be put forward in the Folketing.
The parents were ordered to pay 1500 euros in damages to their child. In November 2020, the Finnish Parliament passed a new law on female genital mutilation.
All text is taken from Wikipedia. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License .
Page generated on 2021-08-05