Florida Mom Fights Court Order to Circumcise Her 3-Year-Old Son

Categories: Crime

circumcision_emilio_560.jpg
Photo by Deirdra Funcheon

Update, 11 a.m.: The appeals court has granted the emergency order. A copy of the ruling is posted below.

Original story:

A Florida mother is hoping the Fourth District Court of Appeals will intervene and stop a court order that her 3-year-old son be circumcised.

Heather Hironimus of Boynton Beach and Dennis Nebus of Boca Raton had a child together in 2010 and entered into a parenting agreement more than a year later. The agreement clearly stated that the father would be responsible for scheduling and paying for the boy's circumcision.

But now that the boy is 3 and has not yet been circumcised, the mother objects, because, as court documents explain it, the procedure is "not medically necessary and she did not want to have the parties' son undergo requisite general anesthesia for fear of death."

However, Judge Jeffrey Gillen last week ordered that there's no reason the parties shouldn't abide by the parenting agreement and that the father can go ahead and schedule the procedure.

"Putting aside what they agreed to, if you're going to enforce this contract, you have to look in what is the best interest of the child," says Hironimus' attorney, Taryn Sinatra. "The best interest of the child should always trump" any such agreement, she said.

Sinatra says that a pediatric urologist testified at a hearing and was asked what he would do in such a situation, and the urologist said he would not circumcise the boy at this age.

However, the judge's order claims the urologist also testified that "penile cancer occurs only in uncircumcised males " -- which is untrue -- and "uncircumcised males have a higher risk of HIV infection than circumcised males," which is debatable.

Hironimus' case has drawn support from anticircumcision activists around the country who argue that the foreskin is a useful part of the human body and that men should decide for themselves whether to circumcise when they are old enough to research it for themselves and consent.


My Voice Nation Help
79 comments
everyonesucks666
everyonesucks666

Children are never considered sentient beings... they are merely "property" of the parents. This is why it's "ok" to assault them as a from of punishment, mutilate their genitals, pierce their ears, and the least qualified to care for them can pop them out at will, never being made to give up their fertility, because the rights of an abuser, neglecter, or drug addict are greater than those of an innocent child. 

This world is so BACKWARD, and this is another symptom of that. 

hairyarmpits
hairyarmpits

No child should be forced to undergo circumcision.  It has zero proven health benefits, it is extraordinarily painful, and it is a violation of human rights.  Shame on this judge.


Charlie McCollum
Charlie McCollum

Everyone should have the right to decide for themselves whether or not to have their genitals unnecessarily modified, and courts should not be forcing unnecessary genital modifications.

AboutPediatrics
AboutPediatrics

Maybe the judge could have sentenced them to coparenting classes....

anieomousse
anieomousse

Whose Body, Whose Rights? " Whose Body, Whose Rights?", the award-winning children's rights documentary, is now available for online viewing. This is the only circumcision-related video that explores important issues not addressed in other programs and it's now the only video that can be purchased both as a videotape AND viewed online.

http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/

The program is available to both high-speed DSL and 56K Dial-Up users. The viewing format is QuickTime, although a Windows Media Player version will be available soon.

If you have an intact, foreskinned son and are looking for an intact-friendly physician, we recommend the listing of intact-friendly physicians at the Whole Network.


Genital Integrity Policy Statement


To learn more, visit: .circumcisionvideos. com/onlinewbwr. htm

anieomousse
anieomousse

It is often said that a "Plastibell" circumcision is painless and doesn't involve any cutting or blood. Many people say that it is a more "gentle" circumcision without any risks.

 All of these statements are false. No circumcision is painless. 

The foreskin contains thousands of concentrated, specialized nerve endings. It is the most sensitive part of the penis. Any cutting on this part of the body is extremely painful, even with anesthetic (which will never provide 100% pain relief).

All circumcisions involve cutting, tearing and blood (even Plastibell methods). From birth, the foreskin is fused to the head of the penis (like a fingernail is fused to a finger). Before any circumcision begins, the foreskin must be ripped away from the glans. With a Plastibell circumcision, typically the foreskin is slit down the top to allow the insertion of the Plastibell. When in place, a string is tightly tied to necrotize the foreskin. After everything is secured, the excess skin is removed with scalpel or scissors.

A video of a Plastibell infant circumcision can be seen below:

Rough to watch  here:

 http://www.thewholenetwork.org/twn-news/the-dangers-of-plastibell-circumcisions-graphic

`

dialate
dialate

Are we really arguing over a childs's foreskin. This is some redneck sht. I mean replace circumcision with "tattoo" and it does not change the level of tribal ignorance going on here.

Elective body modification is an ADULT activity. End of story.

nhale1955
nhale1955

There are very strong views on circumcision. Most of which seem to come from women. There are very valid reasons for circumcision. The rate of STDs is higher, not debatable, because there is extra tissue to hide microorganisms under.

Sure there is a risk of death from general anesthesia, but the there is 3x greater likelihood of getting struck by lightning. …..and a 15 fold increase of death from driving to the hospital. Therefore the child should never go to school due to the risk of death....right? Of course not.

The procedure is elective however. Both parents need to agree. Otherwise let the boy choose for himself. Or wait until he gets a nasty infection and needs one at an older age when nerve endings don't regrow and he does loose sensation to the head of his penis.

arnaux
arnaux

Since circumcision is a crime against the helpless child there is no justifcation for the procedure. Any boy can get himself circumcised when he is an adult but we all know that very few opt for this.

Religious grounds is a bogus reason but muslims and jews can do what they want to their own followers.

In America, circumsicion is foisted on unaware and trusting mothers who opt out when they obtain information on the procedure. Docters tell them that it is safe and harmless and prevent infection, cancer, aids etc. etc.but htis is a lie. IT IS AN OPERATION!!!

We can be assured that there is a place in hell for those people who prefer to charge thousands of dollars to the unaware parents as well as introducing the baby to life on Earth as painful.

 Fathers should be ashamed of themselves for letting this happen to their sons.

Ness
Ness

Circumcision is a Hebrew custom, going back to ancient times. Personally, as a member of the tribe, I would rather only Hebrews follow this custom. It actually should be a non-issue. Let's focus on something important. Tune in to Infowars.com and see what's really going on, folks.

jrossouw
jrossouw

Circ slices off between 75% and 85% nerve endings. Pepending on procedure. Blood rich foreskin secretes anti biotics and protects the glans. According to Maimonides   writes in For The Perplexed the real reason  for circ is to cut blood supply,growth and pleasure for both parties.Objective , become more cerebral.

hollywoodnun
hollywoodnun

This could be a huge turning point in our country.  It will be cases like these that will draw attention to the ethics and legal issues surrounding male circumcision.  If it ain't broke, why fix it?  When children are ill, parents are placed in the difficult decision to give consent to all kinds of medical procedures, but that is because of the real likelihood that doing nothing would result in serious injury or death of the child.  Circumcision is not like this at all!  In fact, even if all the medical benefits were true (and evidence from the vast majority of men who were never circumcised is evidence that these claims are untrue), it would still not be enough for me to choose for my son.  I don't consider myself to have made a choice not to circumcise.  I made the choice to ignore people who said it WAS my choice and decided my job is to protect HIS right to choose. 

jackoper
jackoper

Of course it is a violation of the child’s right (the human right) when over 3 feet of arteries, veins and capillaries and thousands of nerve endings (well above 10,000) are cut from the persons body.  The child (the human) has a right to all of his nerves, a right to all of his sensory system.  Of course cutting the parts off leads to sexual DYSFUNCTION.  The parts that are cut off are some of the most highly innervated parts of the human.

It is such an obvious human rights violation that the practice will soon end EVERYWHERE!

jackoper
jackoper

EVERY HUMAN (male and female) has the RIGHT (a human right) to reach adulthood with all of the tissue (particularly all of their erogenous tissue) that THEIR genetic code provides.

nocirc
nocirc

Both this boy's father and the judge demonstrate the harmful consequences of circumcision by their ability to deny the consequences of the harm done to their penises and the damage done to their psyches--damage that would allow them to inflict the same harm on a perfectly normal little boy. Personal preference, cultural norms, and/or religious affiliations do not trump the rights of a child to his own body and self-determination. Everyone else, hands and conjured up legal mandates off the boy's body. It belongs to him! His body, his rights!

Joanie Caldwell-Kenoshmeg
Joanie Caldwell-Kenoshmeg

WHAT? He NEEDS to be circumsized? God don't make mistakes. That is as crazy as the culture of some middle eastern countries that say young woman NEED to have their clitoris cut off when they hit puberty.

jackoper
jackoper

A legal system should not be able to forcibly mandate cutting off erogenous tissue from ANY human. The government requiring the cutting of nerves from his brain, shutting down part of the little boys sensory system and changing HIS future sexual function and sexual pleasure, without his consent, is just So wrong.

saricupcake
saricupcake

A baby dies every three days from this barbaric procedure. It is horribly traumatic for even a newborn... imagine multiplying that many times over because he is 3 and will remember. Even if it went perfectly and he didn't remember, it is completely unethical to amputate healthy tissue from an unconsenting minor. All the fictional reasons given to justify this have been disproven over and over. The foreskin has numerous important functions including protection from diseases (despite the fact that some doctors and hospital claim the opposite). Any doctor who performs this is blatantly ignoring their oath to do no harm and is torturing an mutilating children for profit. There is absolutely no ethical reason for this. He can decide on his own, at the age of consent, whether he would prefer to have cosmetic surgery. No one has the right to alter his body except himself.

DSTNYC
DSTNYC

If anything, the role of the court should be to protect an innocent child from having essential, healthy genital tissue amputated before he is old enough to give his fully informed consent. Actually, I can't believe this is happening in the United States of America in 2014. I am sad, angry and disgusted. For shame!

dejahofmars
dejahofmars

How can the US court system in any way ORDER a non-emergency, cosmetic procedure be done on a child that can't offer consent and that be legal? I would refuse. I would leave the state. I would fight till the bitter end. But what to expect from a state that had to make a law against having sex with porcupines?

rsvanhowe
rsvanhowe

The more basic legal issue is whether the portion of the contract signed by the parents that applies to circumcision is valid as they are conspiring to what will amount to a battery. Can a stipulation in a contract to commit a crime be valid?

Mandate
Mandate

This is vile, Criminal Assault, and inhumane.

Why: This agreement, among other things, is Unconstitutional and suggestive of 18 U.S. Code § 373 - Solicitation to commit a crime of violence. Genital cutting, without being medically necessary, demanded by a third party, and definitely, WITHOUT CONSENT Is defined under Criminal Assault, Sexual Assault and Child Abuse. It violates the USA Constitution Amend 14. The Court has wasted its time. This is not a legitimate case!

trybrow
trybrow

sick child abusing f**kers

idw5
idw5

circumcised men get penile cancer, and since america is the only developed nation to perform circumcision, and we also have three times the rate of HIV of other first world countries it would appear it spreads HIV rather than keeping it from being transmitted. i really think this is more about the judge not wanting to admit that his penis, or his children's were mutilated.

danbollinger
danbollinger

A contract between two people cannot obliterate the child's Constitutional right to his own body. The judge over stepped his authority with this ruling.

waagtod1
waagtod1

@hairyarmpits  You are completely wrong. I got a circumcision at 19 because of infections that I had since childhood even though I was always scrupulously clean. Afterwards no infections. I have heard other problems from other people that  had the same late procedure and all were improved after circumcision. And you know what? It wasn't particularly painful and sex is better. Stop commenting when you have zero knowledge.

dwizzle2009
dwizzle2009

seriously, why is this still in my feed? this religious nutcase needs a copy of the bill of rights and a nice quiet room until she can coherently justify the concept of " altering the creator's image " and how it's not a sin. until then criminally insane life.

Hugh_Intactive
Hugh_Intactive

@nhale1955 The causes of STDs and how to protect against them are well known (and the claim that circumcision offers any protection IS debatable - a large cohort study in Dunedin, New Zealand, followed men from birth for 32 years and found NO significant difference).
If one parent's consent for non-therapeutic, non-essential, un-self-consented surgery is not enough, why should two be, when, as you say, the boy and the man can choose for himself. He'll almost always choose to keep it all.
His chance of a "nasty infection" is very low, and he'll lose sensation to the head of his penis at whatever age it is done.

markymark2112
markymark2112


@arnaux When you are an adult the operation destroys sensitivity. It should be done when they are babies, end of story. My girlfriend and her friends tell me they would never date an uncircumcised man, and it does prevent transmittable diseases. 

markymark2112
markymark2112

@Ness Infowars wahahahaha. Yes the media is controlled by a few people who decide which lies we should hear but Infowars is a bunch of nutso crap.

albert37
albert37

@hollywoodnun How about the ethics and legal issues surrounding a child s right to life which surely trumps any concerning circumcision. You defend this child rights now and all who do so should also defend a childs right to life even more! You cannot give the mother right over life before birth and then change your mind afterward. The CHILD ALWAYS comes first !


I BTW am circumcised and am so thankful to my parents for it.


ABORTION IS MURDER !

markymark2112
markymark2112

Yes God makes mistakes, look at all the birth defects. There is no such thing as God and boys should be circumcised as babies.

anieomousse
anieomousse

@rsvanhowe Excellent  question. Sned money to the  fund for  atty  fees. An atty  should work pro bono for this  but they would still need research  funds.

luca.sopranzetti.ms
luca.sopranzetti.ms

It specifically says in the U.S. Code that you provided "Genital cutting, without being medically necessary, demanded by a third party..." Do you know who would be a "third party" in this scenario? Well, the judge would be considered a third party in regards to this case. Therefore, this is very much a legitimate case and if he's demanding the child get circumcised then you just did the judge a favor by posting this law. THIRD PARTY - Someone who is not a party (plaintiff or defendant) to a lawsuit, agreement, or other interaction, but is in some way involved or affected by it; someone other than the principles to an agreement or a lawsuit. Judges, Mediators and Arbitrators are all third parties in legal disputes. You only proved the judge right.

annaham
annaham

@idw5  Not being funny but it is moderately common here in Australia too (although not as much as the US and I believe it is in decline here too). Just saying, cos we're a first world country too. Shameful. 

luca.sopranzetti.ms
luca.sopranzetti.ms

18 U.S. Code § 373 - "Solicitation to commit a crime of violence. Genital cutting, without being medically necessary, demanded by a third party..." Do you know who would be a "third party" in this scenario? Well, the judge would be considered a third party in regards to this case. THIRD PARTY - Someone who is not a party (plaintiff or defendant) to a lawsuit, agreement, or other interaction, but is in some way involved or affected by it; someone other than the principles to an agreement or a lawsuit. Judges, Mediators and Arbitrators are all third parties in legal disputes.

pavonharten
pavonharten

@markymark2112 @arnaux Funny how STD rates in America are still high, and we have a higher rate of HIV than Europe despite vouching for circumcision all the time. Results of surveys in favor of medical reasoning are bogus because they come from Africa, a largely poor continent with a sky-high HIV rate, so of course for THEM it makes sense to do it for health reasons (though still debatable as to how much it will help), but certainly not in a developed first world country like the US where we have at least decent healthcare, antibiotics, and condoms. In Europe, obviously no one complains about foreskins and in fact would probably be more likely to complain about the lack thereof. And I'm sorry, but your girlfriend and her friends are shallow and gravely misinformed.   

rg121
rg121

@albert37 @hollywoodnun  Curious: Why are you "thankful"? Your sexual feelings are diminished and you don't know it.

Hugh_Intactive
Hugh_Intactive

@luca.sopranzetti.msYou misread the law. It says this is criminal assault, sexual assault and child abuse. It is of course, intended to outlaw female cutting demanded by third parties such as imams and mullahs, but there is no reason Mandate's reading of the law should not apply in this case and that is exactly how this judge is acting..

Hugh_Intactive
Hugh_Intactive

@annaham @idw5The rate has fallen to 10-12% in Australia - one boy in 8 to 10. Not common at all. It's much better in New Zealand; non-therapeutic "medical" circumcision is virtually a thing of the past - and there have been no outbreaks of any of the ailments it was supposed to be good against. A generation of men has grown up looking different from their fathers, with no problems there, either.

waagtod1
waagtod1

@bradsofafeather @waagtod1 @hairyarmpits 

I guess this is like when men tell women what is right for them, unwanted advice from someone without a clue. Brad, I don't need my foreskin to chew, or for anything else for that matter. It is like an appendix, OK if you have it but you don't miss it if you don't. 

Now Trending

Miami Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...