German court bans circumcision of young boys

Safe-Keeper said:
Oh, you're one of those people the "you don't miss what you don't remember losing" apologists claim do not exist.
Click to expand...

From what I've seen they don't even go that far, they don't bring them up at all, and ignore evidence that they do.
 
The Don said:
I imagine that circumcision will be allowed where there is a medical necessity for the procedure to be carried out. A large proportion of people in religious and/or ethnic groups where circumcision is the norm will find doctors who will certify that the circumcision of their boy is a medical necessity.
Click to expand...

They will then have to explain to the insurance company, and later to the licensing bodies, why such an epidemic of circumcision-requiring ailments happened in their area, and only in religious families.

They will soon after stop being practicing doctors. Since it will be considered assault on the infants, the now ex-doctor will also start enjoying state housing, with three meals a day.
 
Megalodon said:
They will then have to explain to the insurance company, and later to the licensing bodies, why such an epidemic of circumcision-requiring ailments happened in their area, and only in religious families.

They will soon after stop being practicing doctors. Since it will be considered assault on the infants, the now ex-doctor will also start enjoying state housing, with three meals a day.
Click to expand...

Well that's immensely encouraging, I fear in the UK we would look the other way. If they cannot be circumcised legally in Germany they I suppose they'll either be illegally circumcised (by a mohel) or they'll be taken abroad on holiday during which time they'll be genitally mutilated. :mad:


edited to add....

I just read the Mohel wiki page and found this gem:

Under Jewish law, a mohel must draw blood from the circumcision wound. Most mohels do it by hand with a suction device, but some Orthodox groups use their mouth to draw blood after cutting the foreskin
Click to expand...

:jaw-dropp
 
Last edited:
The Don said:
Well that's immensely encouraging, I fear in the UK we would look the other way. If they cannot be circumcised legally in Germany they I suppose they'll either be illegally circumcised (by a mohel) or they'll be taken abroad on holiday during which time they'll be genitally mutilated. :mad:
Click to expand...

Might happen... but then their doctors will have to report the abuse to the police, and the children might be taken from their parents. Even if not, they'll be supervised.

Please note, the system is not foolproof. Since I've been here there's been reports of honor killings that could have been prevented if the system was implemented as written.

However, I'm confident that it will work for the most part, and that the practice will dwindle. And about time!
 
"They might do it anyway" was never an argument when we banned female genital mutilation, and shouldn't be an argument against circumcision either.
 
Rasmus said:
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/menshealth/facts/circumcision.htm

A quick reading would suggest to me - as a layperson - that none of these could possibly justify a circumcision for a young child that's only a few days old.

A little older - possibly, but then the doctor would have to fake an entire medical history just to reach the desired conclusion, really.
Click to expand...
One of my nephews was circumcised, for medical reasons, but I can't remember the details atm.

The Don said:
I just read the Mohel wiki page and found this gem:

:jaw-dropp
Click to expand...
Yes in the USA this practice has caused several deaths, hospitalisations et cetera from herpes. But no prosecutions as yet.
 
Last edited:
ehcks said:
Quite rare cases of severe phimosis.

But apparently there are non-surgical procedures to fix that even in infants.
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/777539-treatment

http://www.brazjurol.com.br/january_february_2010/Nobre_75_85.htm
Click to expand...


In am surprised that phimosis is even mentionned , as it is an adulthood onset problem. Which I have by the way. There isn't a diagnosis in childhood or infanthood. Sure you can have a non rectractable or difficult retractable membrane up to the adoleschence, but it is perfectly a normal development in infanthood/childhood.
 
Aepervius said:
In am surprised that phimosis is even mentionned , as it is an adulthood onset problem. Which I have by the way. There isn't a diagnosis in childhood or infanthood. Sure you can have a non rectractable or difficult retractable membrane up to the adoleschence, but it is perfectly a normal development in infanthood/childhood.
Click to expand...

Actually there is, but it is pretty rare:

Non-retractability of the foreskin in childhood does not constitute phimosis. Ballooning during micturition is a harmless and transient phenomenon and is part of normal development requiring no treatment [ 6 ]. True phimosis has been defined as scarring of the tip of the prepuce, and is usually due to Balanitis Xerotica Obliterans (BXO) [ 7 ]. The incidence of pathological phimosis in boys has been recently reported as 0.4 cases/1000 boys per year, or 0.6% of boys affected by their 15th birthday [ 8 ]. The non-retractable foreskin in adult life may also be regarded as phimosis.
Click to expand...
http://www.norm-uk.org/phimosis_clinical_guidelines.html
 
Last edited:
Safe-Keeper said:
Oh, you're one of those people the "you don't miss what you don't remember losing" apologists claim do not exist.
Click to expand...
They seem to be complaining that circumcizing their male children is part of their religion. The German government says the child is not able to consent or choose which religion they wish to believe in. It is a case that seeks to define where a parent's religious rights end and a child's religious rights begin. I'm not sure where that line is, but I'm pretty sure that genital mutilation of children is on the wrong side of it.
 
RenaissanceBiker said:
They seem to be complaining that circumcizing their male children is part of their religion. The German government says the child is not able to consent or choose which religion they wish to believe in. It is a case that seeks to define where a parent's religious rights end and a child's religious rights begin. I'm not sure where that line is, but I'm pretty sure that genital mutilation of children is on the wrong side of it.
Click to expand...

You would think that "if it ain't your dong, keep a scapel the hell away from it" would be all the explanation someone would need.
 
The Don said:
Not a direct analogy but it's now illegal in the UK to dock dogs' tails unless they are a working dog which specifically needs it (for some spurious reason). Amazingly, a lot of show dogs in breeds where docking has historically been done are working dogs who have to have their tails docked. Who'da guessed :rolleyes:

I imagine that circumcision will be allowed where there is a medical necessity for the procedure to be carried out. A large proportion of people in religious and/or ethnic groups where circumcision is the norm will find doctors who will certify that the circumcision of their boy is a medical necessity.
Click to expand...

As someone who has had to change his life quite a bit because of of joining the medical profession ( just graduated from pharmacy tech, have to do JP in a couple of months, going full pharmacist.) i think you underestimate the level of dedication it takes to become a medical professional.

I have no doubt a few might, but i also believe that keeping in line with the demands of the job is a very high priority for most folks in the field. Especially when a if a few doctors get nailed for recommending unnecessary surgery.

Worst case scenario i think it will go the route of narcotics. It used to be very easy to get a doctor to write a new script for "Losing" your narcotics, but once it was noticed as a trend, it was cracked down upon, and now one would have to really search to find a doctor willing to put his career on the line so you can get high.
 
Polaris said:
You would think that "if it ain't your dong, keep a scapel the hell away from it" would be all the explanation someone would need.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling the entire vote went like this.

"So, raise your hand, any guy here who would let me make a permanent decision regarding their wang?"

**No hands raised.**

"Vote passed unanimously."
 
sadhatter said:
I have no doubt a few might, but i also believe that keeping in line with the demands of the job is a very high priority for most folks in the field. Especially when a if a few doctors get nailed for recommending unnecessary surgery.
Click to expand...

I find it easier to believe that the circumcisions would still be done by a mohel, and that a sympathetic GP would simply turn a blind eye. It is not something that is as easily observed as a dog's tail, after all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom