USA: Doctors Can Get Away With Circumcising a Child by Mistake

 

I was lucky I found some time to write yet another post for this blog this month! Hopefully I'll keep finding time to write about this ongoing issue in my home country.

I was scrolling through Facebook this morning, and I ran into this:

This got me thinking about the possibility of parents suing doctors who went ahead and circumcised children without permission from parents.

The problem with suing doctors in the United States is that male infant circumcision is not seen as "harm" by the people there. 80% of men in the United States are circumcised from birth (this is separate from the rate of male infant circumcision, which has fallen to 56.4% as per the CDC), so most men are likely to be circumcised, and most women are likely to be married to circumcised men and/or mothers to circumcised male children. For this reason, and this reason alone, it is more than likely that sitting judges may let doctors who circumcise children "by mistake" off the hook.

In Muncie, Indiana, a doctor circumcised a child "by mistake." The sad part of this case is that the child's family traditionally does not circumcise.

One of the witnesses downplayed the unwanted procedure because "a penis could not be used to read books published in Braille for the sight-impared."

If that's the case, a clitoris can't be used for the same purpose either.

In this case, the jury decided to let the doctor off the hook without paying any damages.

But it's not necessarily the case that a doctor will be let off every time; every once in a while, justice shines through and knife-happy doctors are held accountable.

Take the case in Florida for example.

After a mother, Vera Delgado, had told doctors over and over that she did not want her child circumcised, the child was taken away and circumcised anyway while she was away from the NICU.

In this case, the mother sued for millions of dollars and she WON. 

There have been other cases in the past where doctors faced SOME kind of accountability. I copied and pasted the following comments from the same thread as above:

 

This isn't to say that circumcision cases simply can't be won, either.

In most cases where a circumcision goes beyond acceptable "harm" (destroying any healthy part of the body IS "harm"), parents are successful in suing doctors for millions. (Do a search on my blog for "litigation" and/or "lawsuits." I've posted plenty on here.)

But that's just it; in order for a circumcision to be considered "harmful" it has to go beyond what many doctors and nurses consider "harmless"; for those who perform circumcision, taking a child's foreskin, ripping it from its adhesion to the glans, crushing it in a clamp and then slicing it off, where 99.9% of human males are born with a foreskin, isn't considered "harm."

A circumcision botch where part or all of the glans (AKA "head of the penis"), "that" is "harm."

Are we seriously going to depend on subjective ideas of "harm?

Because whether we like it or not, female circumcision (AKA "FGM") isn't considered "harm" by people in countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Egypt, Sudan and others.

Let's imagine a couple of hypothetical situations.

What if an expatriate had their daughter in one of the above countries, and the daughter was circumcised "by mistake" in a hospital there?

Or what if a doctor from one of those countries immigrates to the United States and circumcises a child "by mistake?"

Could his or her alibi be "Well, I don't consider it harm?"

That is now a thinkable possibility, given the fact that the ban on FGM in the United States has been deemed "unconstitutional" by a judge in a recent case.

What about "parental choice," which is quite possibly one of the greatest defenses of male infant circumcision in the US?

But most of all, what about a person's individual basic human rights to his own body?

From the same Facebook thread as above, a paralegal gave his account of a father who discovered his son was already circumcised after doctors kept asking him and his wife to sign the consent forms. The father demanded to see his child first, and that's how he found out.

 

 

I've heard it be commented before by some mothers, that doctors and nurses told them that they couldn't leave the hospital until the baby was circumcised. From the same thread:

I've also heard of cases where the parents put their foot down on not having their child circumcised, and the hospital billing them for it anyway. Someone commented on this same thread:

Circumcision is a moneymaker, so of course there financial incentive for doctors and nurses to push male infant circumcision on parents, even if it means lying to them about not having a choice in the matter.

As concerned American parents, we have got to stand up and demand to know what's going on here.

What is the AAP telling professionals across the country?

That it's OK to push male infant genital mutilation on parents in whatever which way possible?

There are CONSENT forms that need to be signed.

What's with this "You can't leave the hospital until the child is circumcised" BS?

Do American parents have to simply always be watching their children like a hawk?

It seems that's what we've got to do, because even if we refuse to sign the circumcision consent forms and demand doctors not mutilate our children, there's nothing we can do legally.

From the same thread:

For any parent interested in litigation against doctors, nurses or hospitals that circumcised their children against their consent and express wishes, there is one group of lawyers that I know you should contact, and that's Attorneys for the Rights of the Child, AKA "ARCLaw." Google them, or click on the link down under "External Links." (Or, click here.)

 
In a country where doctors can get away with mutilating your child's genitals, parents need to be warned and forearmed.

David Llewellyn: "The Circumcision Lawyer"
On the same thread above, an attorney can be seen commenting.

 That attorney is none other than David J. Llewellyn.

 
He is an unsung hero of the intactivist movement. One of his specialties is male infant circumcision. He is in fact the same David J. Llewellyn who sued Mogen out of business in a 11-million dollar lawsuit. A news article regarding this lawsuit can be read here. He has handled other million-dollar lawsuits as well. If there is anyone who knows about litigation involving male infant circumcision, it's this man. He has a Facebook page here, as well as his own website, at thecircumcisionlawyer.com.

Related Posts:
Muncie Circumcision Case: HIGHWAY ROBBERY

DETROIT: Federal Ban on FGM Declared Unconstitutional

When Someone Says It's Not the Money...

External Links:
NBC Miami: Lawsuit Over Baby's Unwanted Circumcision 

Attorneys for the Rights of the Child

Atlanta lawyer wins $11 million lawsuit for family in botched circumcision

David J Llewellyn: The Circumcision Lawyer

AFRICA: NGO's Taking Children from School to Circumcise Them Without Parents' Knowledge

In a post I published earlier this year, I talked about a case where US-funded organizations taking the liberty of simply kidnapping children off the streets and circumcising them without their parents' awareness or their consent.

This happened in Chipakuza Village, T/A Lundu in Chikhwawa, where a 9-yo boy had lost his entire penis, and his angry father was seeking to sue the Malawi Ministry of Health for damages.

It appears that NGOs are now simply going to schools and taking children away to have them circumcised, again, disregarding their parents' knowledge, consent, and/or cultural background; in some cases, parents are from a cultural background where the tribe traditionally does not circumcise.

It is not clear here whether the NGOs were being US-funded or not, in this case, although it could be assumed, given that "mass circumcision campaigns" are being funded and pushed by American organizations, and it's happened in the past.

UPDATE (8/3/2016):

Apparently the NGO responsible is Baylor Uganda and it is being sponsored by the CDC/PEPFAR, so this NGO is definitely being US-funded. Baylor Uganda's website can be accessed here.

Are the WHO and UNICEF aware that this is happening?

What is happening here is anything but "voluntary."

The original article can be accessed here.

Trouble after school circumcises pupils without parents consent

By Violet Namatsi, Citizen Digital

Published on  1 August 2016

Parents at Shikomari Primary School in Navakholo Constituency, Kakamega County are up in arms after the heat teacher of the institution allowed a non-governmental organisation to circumcise their children without their consent.

According to the parents, the NGO has been visiting the school since last week and circumcising their children aged 5 and above without informing them.

Led by Joseph Otieno and Marygoeti Onbonyo, the parents claim that the school’s management went against their culture and tradition and now want the Ministry of Education to intervene in the matter.

The parents now claim that the issue could lead to a breakdown of their marriages, giving the example of one boy who was disowned by his father, a Bukusu, for being circumcised while at his in laws’ place.

“You cannot do anything you want to my child without asking me first. I am from the Luo community and in my culture we don’t allow circumcision,” one parent lamented.

“He is turning away parents using abusive language instead of explaining what exactly happened. Next week they have exams and the students can’t sit exams while in pain,” another parent commented.

A woman, who is a parent at the school, said the female pupils were separated from the male pupils, and then the male pupils were inspected to find out whether or not they were circumcised. The male pupils were then told to get into a vehicle and transported to the place where the circumcisions were done.

Another parent stated that in their culture the circumcised child must return home with the foreskin, but in this case she was called to pick up her child from the school while already circumcised, a matter that angered the child’s father.

“I don’t know who to ask for the foreskin and I don’t know what to answer as the child’s mother about where the skin is,” she lamented.

Speaking to Citizen Digital, a Standard Four pupil said that the members of the organisation went to the school and circumcised them, adding that his wound is infected.

“They came to the school and took us where they circumcised us and called my mother to come pick me up. Right now the wound is infected,” he said.

However, speaking to Citizen Digital on phone, the school’s head teacher John Musungu rubbished the parents’ claims saying the NGO had registered the pupils who wanted to be circumcised following an agreement with their parents.

“We have an NGO that circumcises the children for free but only for willing parents and willing children. So they came and registered the pupils in school. However one pupil lied that his parents had given consent,” he said.

The head teacher attributed the issue to propaganda by enemies of the school saying: “Some people who don’t like the school have blown up the issue to the point of making phone calls using different numbers to create the impression that there are many complainants,” he said.

Related Posts:

MALAWI: USAID-Funded Program Kidnapping Children for Circumcision - Boy Loses Penis

MASS CIRCUMCISION CAMPAIGNS: The Emasculation and Harassment of Africa

Where Circumcision Doesn't Prevent HIV

Where Circumcision Doesn't Prevent HIV II

INTACTIVISTS: Why We Concern Ourselves

JAMA: Lead Article is a "Study" on Bribing Men to Get Circumcised

AFRICA: Creating Circumcision "Volunteers"

AFRICA: Boys Circumcised at School Without Parents' Knowledge

As if it weren't enough that male circumcision is being promoted in Africa under the dubious pretext of HIV prevention using questionable "research", and as if it weren't enough that parents are being brainwashed to have their children circumcised, organizations in Africa are taking the liberty of going to schools and circumcising children without their parent's knowledge.

Since "mass circumcision" campaigns began to be rolled out across Africa, promoters of male circumcision were careful to really push that the circumcision of males would be "voluntary," where it can mean that, at least theoretically, men would not be circumcised without their fully informed consent. 'Voluntary" can also mean that parents could "volunteer" their children to be circumcised. (Intactivists, such as myself, contest that a child forcibly circumcised without his own consent is no "volunteer.") "Voluntary Male Medical Circumcision", or "VMMC", it was called, for short.

But now, it seems that "voluntary" doesn't even matter anymore, and organizations are taking it upon themselves to visit schools and circumcising male students without even consulting parents on the matter.

In a recent case, at least 25 boys were circumcised at Oderai Primary School in Soroti sub-county, Soroti District, prompting furious protest by parents, some who were extremely distraught that their children were circumcised without their permission. The boys were circumcised at Soroti Health Centre III in an exercise that was facilitated by NGO Baylor Uganda.

District medical workers came, and a woman filling in for the head teacher (she was away on sick leave) simply authorized them.

When queried, the official in charge of the facility where the boys were circumcised, Harriet Amuat, insisted they were carrying out a government programe and Soroti District administration had signed a partnership with Baylor Uganda to fund the circumcision exercise in Teso sub-region.

The question is, who gave the go-ahead with a "circumcision exercise" that would forcibly circumcise healthy, non-consenting children, completely sidelining their parents?

Who held these talks?

Who made the preposition that children were to be circumcised without informing their parents?

Who accepted?

That's what I'd like to know.

Incidentally, Baylor Uganda is funded by none other than PEPFAR and the CDC. The CDC, a strong partner and supporter of BIPAI’s efforts in Uguanda, provides a majority of the Baylor-Uganda $24 million annual budget, through the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief.

American organizations are essentially bankrolling the forced circumcision of healthy, non-consenting children. Some may argue that "parents can give consent," but in this case even parents were disregarded.

Not the first time
This might be dismissed as a "one-time accident," but unfortunately, this is not the first time this has happened; a similar case happened recently in Eldoret, Uasin Gishu, just this April.

In this case, 30 children were forcibly circumcised by NGO Impact Research Development Organisation (IRDO) based in Kisumu, which has a clinic in Eldoret. Apparently the children were lured by strangers into cars with sweets.

Here too, parents protested the fact that their children had been forcibly circumcised without their knowledge.

It appears here too, the NGO has ties with PEPFAR, as evidenced by the "about" tab on their Facebook Page.

In yet an even earlier incident, high school students were being targeted at Embakwe High School.

Here too parents were furious to find that their children came home circumcised.

I cannot find any reference as to who gave the go-ahead, and who financed it in the linked article.

Wrong on so many levels
First off, the "mass circumcision" roll-outs are based on questionable material.

Even if the so-called "research" could be lent any credibility, circumcision would still be considered so ineffective at preventing HIV, that circumcised males and their partners must be urged to wear condoms. There is not a single doctor or "researcher" that can deny this fact.

If adult men wish to be circumcised, even being fully informed, that's one thing, but it is despicable that the procedure is being presented to parents as a "decision."

But lastly, it is simply horrific that children are being forcibly circumcised, completely disregarding their parents, and something needs to be done about it.

Was this an accident?

Or was it deliberate?

Those who authorized programs that go to schools and circumcise children without their parents' knowledge ought to be investigated and held responsible.

Relevant Links:

Parents protest forced circumcision of children

Anxiety in Eldoret after NGO ‘forcibly’ circumcises 30 boys

School circumcises pupils without parents knowledge

Muncie Circumcision Case: HIGHWAY ROBBERY

So apparently, a doctor can just simply get away with doing what he wants with your son. He could just cut off part of his penis, with or without your consent, and you're supposed to just live with it.

"Oops, I'm sorry" is somehow supposed to cover permanent damage.

One doctor Michael R. Burt was recently indicted in a lawsuit for circumcising a boy against his parents' express wishes.

What is sad is that the boy comes from a family where circumcision is not practiced, the parents believe circumcision is genital mutilation and they were making it a point to make sure this didn't happen to their children. Now, the boy will have to live being different than his family members.

Well, it looks like the jury has decided this doctor should get off the hook without paying any damages.

Burt's attorneys acknowledged their client had made an honest mistake, but insisted "no evidence was presented to indicate being circumcised would prevent the youth from having a happy and productive life."

As if resilience from abuse were even relevant.

With the proper counseling, victims of rape and child abuse grow up to have happy and fulfilling lives, but this does not excuse the actions of the perpetrator.

No amount of counseling is going to give this child his normal intact organs back.

He's going to have to live with permanently marred organs for the rest of his life, and his parents are going to have to live with the fact that a doctor abused them and their child, and there is legally nothing that they could do about it.

For whatever reason, one witness thought it gracious to downplay the sensitivity of the penis by stating that "a penis could not be used to read books published in Braille for the sight-impared."

For that matter, a clitoris can't be used for the same purpose either.

On the commentary pages for the articles linked to above, many defend this doctor for being "wonderful, caring and gracious," and that the child will be "just fine."

NOBODY KNOWS THIS FOR SURE.

Nobody knows that the child would indeed not resent the fact that he was forcibly without his consent, even against his parents' express wishes.

Dr. Burt may be wonderful, caring and gracious, but the court is pardoning him for being completely irresponsible.

Whether or not this boy will be OK or not is secondary. The fact of the matter is, the doctor went strictly against the parents' express wishes. Any way you slice it, circumcision is a permanent removal of part of a person's body.

A sad day in America it is when doctors simply aren't expected to be responsible for their actions.

This doctor is being completely irresponsible, and the courts are a disgusting shame for absolving him.

EDIT (same day): An afterthought I had:

Said one of the doctor's lawyers, "Let's pay (the boy) $15 a day until he dies? That's nonsense! [That would] open the courthouse door to every kid who's been circumcised."

Well, at least the children whose circumcisions were performed against the express wishes of the parents.

In other words folks, practicing justice is unfathomable because it would set an inconvenient precedent.

Heaven forbid doctors be held liable for reaping profit from non-therapeutic surgery on healthy, non-consenting individuals...