BERLIN: Jews denounce conditions of circumcision acceptance

Vosizneias
September 6, 2012

Berlin - German Jews Reject Circumcision Terms

Berlin, Germany - Berlin’s Jewish community denounced on Thursday the city’s rejection of male circumcisions conducted by traditional specialists, saying the restriction was “flagrant interference” in religion.

The city-state of Berlin had announced a day earlier that it would not prosecute doctors conducting the ritual on boys in accordance with ancient Jewish and Muslim practice. But it said a mohel, a professional Jewish circumciser, could not claim the privilege.

The assembly of the city Jewish community passed a unanimous resolution saying, “this is flagrant interference in a Jewish tradition going back more than 3,000 years.”

A mohel is trained in the circumcision of baby boys and must live strictly according to kosher rules. Jewish groups said it would be rare to find a man who is both a mohel and a doctor at the same time.
The city-state said immunity from prosecution would apply on its territory if doctors used painkillers and obtained written parental consent and proof that the family belonged to a Jewish or Muslim community. Two other states said they had set similar conditions.

...

Jews are also concerned that Germany will demand use of a local anaesthetic during circumcision. One of Israel’s two chief rabbis has visited Berlin to say that this is not allowed in traditional circumcision.

Germany’s President Joachim Gauck released Thursday a letter to his Israeli counterpart, Shimon Peres, assuring him “the way of life and beliefs of Jews in Germany” needed to be protected. Peres had earlier asked Gauck to intervene and speak up for Jews.

Jewish groups plan a demonstration on Sunday in Berlin with Christian supporters to protest against the restrictions on circumcision. They have appealed to Muslims to also take part.

Muslims in Germany mostly ask doctors to perform circumcisions and have no equivalent of the mohel.

Earlier story

BERLIN: Ritual circumcision conditionally permissible

Haaretz
September 5, 2012

Circumcision declared legal [allowable] in first of 16 German states

Ruling in Berlin city-state follows recent controversy that erupted when a Cologne court indicted a doctor with inflicting unlawful bodily harm by circumcising a 4-year-old boy.

Infant male circumcision was declared legal Wednesday in one of Germany's 16 states, following weeks of controversy about whether the Jewish and Muslim ritual is a crime or not. [What follows falls short of declaring it legal. It's more like turning a blind eye to it.]

The city-state of Berlin became the first to rule on the issue, saying its prosecutors had beeninstructed not to charge doctors if the boy's parents had consented in writing and proved they were religiously motivated.

...

While Berlin has moved more swiftly than the federal government or the other states to restore the procedure's legality, it has also imposed restrictions on it, including the duty to inform parents about any medical risks.

"If these criteria are fulfilled, circumcision will remain immune from prosecution," the state justice minister, Thomas Heilmann, said. "If medical standards are observed, circumcision at home or in a synagogue is also acceptable."

He said those standards included using all possible means of reducing pain and limiting bleeding. However, only doctors would be legally allowed to perform the procedure.

Heilmann said the state government did not have the power to authorize a mohel, or Jewish person trained in circumcision, to carry out the ritual. He said only the upcoming federal legislation could change that aspect of the law.

Earlier story

DENMARK: Does circumcision violate the health code?

August 26, 2012

Denmark to probe whether circumcision violates health code

(JTA) -- Denmark has commissioned an investigation into whether non-medical circumcision procedures violate its health code.

“We will examine the public health recommendations followed in this area,” Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt told the Copenhagen-based Politiken daily on Saturday.

Politiken reported that the Danish government has commissioned a study on this question. Last month the paper published an expose that said the National Board of Health did not monitor the conditions under which circumcision takes place.

Non-medical circumcision of minors has been the subject of a heated debate in Denmark over the past few months. Several politicians reportedly have called for a ban on the practice, prompting angry reactions from Jews and Muslims.

Venstre, Denmark’s largest party, will decide whether to seek a ban on such circumcisions based on the results of the study, a party spokesperson told JTA.

The chief rabbi of Denmark, Bent Lexner, told Politiken that he did not think the launching of the investigation reflected distrust on the government’s part. He said the government was welcome to carry out its investigation.
...

TASMANIA: Circumcision legallity decision due

The Mercury (Tasmania)
May 15, 2012

Circumcision decision due

By Michelle Paine
A TASMANIAN report into whether circumcision may be illegal is expected this month.

It comes as the Federal Government considers whether the procedure should continue to qualify for Medicare payments.

The Tasmanian Law Reform Institute began its review in 2009.

Public hospitals in Tasmania, as in most states, only circumcise if medically necessary.

A 2008 University of Tasmania researcher said the law failed to clarify whether the person doing the procedure, usually a doctor but sometimes a religious figure, was committing assault or abuse, or that consent from the boy's parents was protection against criminal and civil action.

In 2007 then Children's Commission Paul Mason said that other than for medical reasons, it was a breach of the most basic human right to inflict permanent, painful and disfiguring surgery on a boy's body when he was too small to resist.

"Everyone is entitled to bodily integrity, to protection of their own body from injury by another without their consent," Mr Mason said.

The Royal Australasian College of Physicians said there was no medical evidence for routine circumcision.

It said the rate of complications, which could be severe, was 1 to 4 per cent, and that a well trained practitioner should do the procedure.

"Informed parental choice should be respected .. [consent] should include the possibility that the ethical principle of autonomy may be better fulfilled by deferring the circumcision to adolescence with the young man consenting on his own behalf," its statement said.

Department of Health and Human Services strategic planning director Martin Hensher said it was an elective surgical procedure when deemed medically necessary.

Last year there were 84 circumcisions, 57 on children, in Tasmanian public hospitals.

"Any debate on a change in policy relating to male circumcision, including Medicare coverage, needs to take place on a national basis in close consultation with physicians and the relevant peak bodies like the [RACP]."

Earlier story

SOUTH DAKOTA: Prisoner sues for wrongful infant circumcision

necn.com
April 16, 2012

SD man's lawsuit says circumcision 'robbed' him

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (AP) — A South Dakota prison inmate is suing the hospital where he was circumcised as a newborn, saying he only recently became aware that he'd undergone the procedure and that it robbed him of his sexual prowess.

Dean Cochrun, 28, is asking for $1,000 in compensatory and punitive damages. He also asks in the lawsuit that his foreskin be restored "in the hopes I could feel whole again," though he acknowledged that he didn't expect such a restoration to be anything more than aesthetic.

Cochrun, who is imprisoned in Sioux Falls on a kidnapping conviction, filed the federal lawsuit Friday against Sanford Hospital. Cochrun claims that an "unknown doctor" at the then-named Sioux Valley Hospital misled his mother to believe that the procedure was medically necessary. Cochrun argues that the procedure was unnecessary, unethical and without medical benefit.

"I was recently made aware of the fact that I had been (circumcised) and that ... I was robbed of sensitivity during sexual intercourse as well as the sense of security and well-being I am entitled to in my person," he argued in the lawsuit, adding that neither he nor his partners would "have that sensitivity during sexual intercourse and have a normal sex life."

Cochrun isn't represented by a lawyer in the lawsuit, which includes a letter from Sanford officials responding to a letter requesting that his foreskin be replaced. Patient relations representative DyAnn Smith replied that Sanford would not pay for the procedure.

"There will be no further correspondence about this matter," she wrote.