Sunday, September 2, 2012

KENYA: Traditional circumcision infringes rights

Standard Digital News
September 1, 2012

A clash of cultural practices and the enjoyment of civil liberties

By Henry Wasilwa
Among the Bukusu, in western Kenya, a young male child is obliged by customary practice, to undergo the traditional circumcision. It is taboo to cringe, flee or show open fear of the cut and that the entire family is ostracised if the initiate fails to withstand the cut as expected.

A recent occurrence that was featured in The Standard On Saturday, brings to the fore the choice between complying with this painful cultural practices and the enjoyment of civil liberties such as freedom from forceful or harmful practices.

Article 25 of the Constitution ensures that certain human rights can never be modified, limited or affected by anything not even custom or tradition, and it protects every person’s freedom from torture and cruelty, and proscribes inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; In the hierarchy of laws, custom or traditional practices rank way below constitutional edicts, statutory imperatives, subsidiary legislation, and the common law. Any custom that abridges, diminishes, or in any way impinges on the right to life and limb, is at once repugnant to the Constitution for violating the higher element of the human rights set out in Article 25 of the Constitution.

Initiation in the manner prescribed by Bukusu custom might have been designed to compel the subject to undergo a process of pain, and perseverance, ostensibly to celebrate the symbolic transition from adolescence into adulthood. The manner prescribed for managing the resultant wound was by application of the leaves from a traditional herb known as “enguu” or in some Luhya dialects, “ingwe” thought to be an antiseptic; and any swelling on the organ is to be relieved by puncturing the swollen membrane with the means of some thorny flower called “namusuni” named after the tiny red breasted bird that suckles the flower’s nectar.

Others would use the horrifying mandibles of a live ant known for its vicious bite to puncture any septic part of the organ and in the process release any septic fluid. This would impart the most excruciating pain imaginable to the septic part of the initiate and in Bukusu custom, such pain depicted bravery and brawn in the initiate anything else is considered woolly.

I asked an elder why this practice and he said it prepared an initiate on how to consciously process and accept, deprivation, deal with inconvenience, extreme conditions of weather, and how to emerge from the horror of direct pain to the body. Perhaps these were useful attributes for men in the days of hunters and gatherers because the process of securing food and subsistence was fraught with danger, pain, deprivation and inconvenience.

Any utilitative purpose that such practice might have served, can no longer be justified in a market economy in which the dangerous hunting moors have now been replaced by supermarkets, the stock exchange and other platforms of accessing basic human livelihood and succour.

Any benefits that circumcision delivers can be obtained by humane, clinically efficient and hygienic means in a hospital, without taking away the core benefit, if any. With so many practical reasons falling away, it is now difficult to defend this system of removal of the foreskin.

The young hapless lad of the Baala clan, recently featured, wailing and screaming in horror during his forceful cut, should consider bringing a petition in any court that his constitutional right to his civil liberties, were flagrantly infringed by his Bukusu customary circumcision. Indeed this young boy could, in theory file a similar petition to obtain compensation for assault, humiliation and the deliberate denigration of his civil rights by his father, clan and the local administration. I believe civil rights groups like the Cradle would snap up and support, such a case.

In the mid seventies when I underwent the traditional cut, I did it voluntarily but had I flunked the test, together with my family, I would have been considered pariah forever.

The writer is advocate of the High Court

USA: AAP policy does not address non-consent

BioEdge
September 1, 2012

US doctors' stand on circumcision changes again

By Michael Cook
For the fourth time in 40 years the American Academy of Pediatricians has changed its tune on the controversial topic of infant circumcision. It now says that “preventive health benefits of elective circumcision of male newborns outweigh the risks of the procedure”. These benefits include: “significant reductions in the risk of urinary tract infection in the first year of life and, subsequently, in the risk of heterosexual acquisition of HIV and the transmission of other sexually transmitted infections”.

The AAP has worded its new policy carefully. The benefits do not appear to be significant enough to justify recommending routine circumcision, but enough to justify it for parents who insist on it. This neat compromise will allow Jewish and Muslim families to circumcise their sons without acrimonious disputes.

On the ethics of circumcision, the AAP has little to say. Its brief statement did not address the problem of non-consent from the infant. In the US the popularity of the procedure has been in decline, but half of newborn boys are still circumcised. Opponents, known as “intactivists”, claim that it is a potentially dangerous cosmetic procedure which amounts to genital mutilation.

Neither side seems to have an open-and-shut case. Elizabeth Reis, of the University of Oregon, points out in the Bioethics Forum of The Hastings Center that the AAP has changed its mind on the issue several times. In 1971 the AAP decided that it was not a medical necessity; in 1989 that it might be helpful; in 1999 that it probably wasn’t; and now that it probably is.

Earlier story

MICHIGAN: Group to protest AAP policy

The Detroit News
September 1, 2012

Michigan group to protest report urging circumcision

By Oralandar Brand-Williams
Royal Oak — Protesters outraged over a recent medical report blessing circumcision plan to demonstrate today outside Beaumont Hospital.

The Michigan March for Integrity plans to gather at noon to blast an American Academy of Pediatrics report this week that favors the age-old practice.

The doctors group found benefits to the surgery "outweigh the risks." Protesters disagree.

"Circumcision is the only surgery performed on children without a diagnosis," said Norm Cohen, state director of NOCIRC of Michigan, who expects about 40 people at the protest. "It violates their inalienable right to bodily integrity.The genital cutting of children is an ancient obsession in need of a rational basis."

Dr. Brian Berman, the chairman of pediatrics at Beaumont Children's Hospital, said the hospital leaves the decision to parents and supports the policy statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics.

"We encourage families to thoughtfully discuss options with their care providers," he said, adding the policy "found the health benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks, but are not great enough to recommend universal circumcision."

Cohen said Michigan ranks as the No. 1 state in the country for circumcision, with 87 percent of newborn boys undergoing the procedure annually. The rate of hospital circumcision has dropped nationwide from about 80 percent in the 1980s to 55 percent now.

...

Earlier story

Saturday, September 1, 2012

BERLIN: Infant ear-piercing goes wrong, charges considered

iol.com
August 31, 2012

Parents may face piercing probe

Berlin - A German couple who filed for damages from a piercing studio where they had the ears of their 3-year-old daughter pierced could face charges of harming her after a court said it might ask police to investigate whether their actions were legal.

The case at a Berlin court could further heat up a debate in Germany about parental consent after a court in the western city of Cologne ruled in June that a doctor had inflicted bodily harm by circumcising a 4-year-old Muslim boy at his parents' request.

A Berlin court approved the parents' demand for 70 euros (88 dollars) in damages for excessive pain inflicted on their daughter during the piercing. But noting the Cologne case, judge Uwe Kett raised the possibility of referring the parents and the piercing artist to the police.

...

[Maybe Romani will claim their culture makes piercing little girls' ears mandatory...]

ISRAEL: Knesset Speaker calls off circumcision-persuation trip to Berlin

Yes, it could look like that....

Israel National News
August 29, 2012

Knesset Delegation to Germany Cancelled

Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin has cancelled a planned delegation to Germany to discuss the issue of a recent court ban on circumcision. The decision to cancel the trip was made unanimously along with trip leaders MK Yaakov Edri (Kadima) and MK Yisrael Eichler (United Torah Judaism).

The MKs were concerned that the trip could make Israel look over-involved in internal German affairs. Rivlin noted that German Chancellor Angela Merkel has already committed to ensure [adult] Jews’ religious freedom despite the ruling, and said Israel should wait to see what happens before commenting further on the issue.

Earlier story

Friday, August 31, 2012

BERLIN: Rabbi charged after vowing to keep circumcising

the Times of Israel
August 29, 2012

Charges filed against prominent Berlin rabbi for vowing to continue circumcisions

By Raphael Ahren
One of Germany’s most prominent rabbis has been charged after publicly vowing to continue to perform circumcisions, The Times of Israel has learned.

The office of Rabbi Yitshak Ehrenberg, who has been serving the Berlin Jewish community since 1997, on Wednesday confirmed in an email that criminal charges had been filed against him. Ehrenberg has received a letter from the prosecutor’s office because of comments he made on a nationwide broadcast television show, an aide confirmed. At this point it is not known who filed the complaint and what exactly the letter states.

Ehrenberg could not immediately be reached for comment.
...
On July 11, Ehrenberg ... participated in a debate on “Anne Will,” a popular talk show dedicated to the Cologne ruling and its implications [link in German].

“I don’t even want to go into this discussion,” Ehrenberg said after a proponent of a ban said that the act was tantamount to causing the child bodily injury without his or her consent. “We’re talking about religion,” said Ehrenberg. “This ruling will kill Judaism in Germany.”

After more than an hour of lively discussion, host Anne Will allowed Ehrenberg the last word. The rabbi first appealed to his congregants not to have their children circumcised in a hospital but in a synagogue or at home. Then he concluded: “Circumcision is a basic law for us Jews. There is no Judaism without circumcision, and therefore — we will continue.”

Earlier story

TEL AVIV: Dissenting voices in Israel

Haaretz (Subscription required)
August 28, 2012

The national consensus on the mutilation of every newborn male

By Eyal Meged  
...

It's an irony of fate that the Germans, of all people, are calling us to order in Jewish matters. It's an irony of fate that they are the ones telling us the religious precept, which even complete heretics among us keep without blinking an eye, is a barbaric, primitive act, not to say a violation of the law.

...

What disaster would have befallen had the president turned to us, his flock, and asked us to reconsider the automatic sacrifice of every Jewish male on the circumcisers' altar? I too had to go through most of my life and two male sons before I acknowledged the sin of circumcision, which I committed light-headedly.

If we think rationally for one moment, why should the Germans - and the Swiss who followed their lead, or any other Western state - allow a Jewish rabbi to perform a surgical act forbidden to anyone else who isn't a doctor? What chutzpah on our part to ask for ourselves a privilege that is a blatant infraction of the law, which is intended to protect people from various charlatans.

...