Submitted by crinadmin on
Doctors Opposing Circumcision, a US-based NGO which protects children from non-therapeutic circumcision, is currently involved in a male circumcision case at the Supreme Court of the state of Oregon, USA, as amicus curiae.
The father of a 12-year-old boy claims to be in the process of converting to Judaism and wants his son, ‘Misha,’ of whom he has custody, circumcised against both the child’s and the natural mother’s express wishes. This case poses important and unresolved Constitutional issues regarding the practice of male circumcision. Doctors Opposing Circumcision intends to intervene in this case by filing an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court of Oregon. The issue before the Oregon Supreme Court is: "Did the trial court err in refusing to grant an evidentiary hearing?" Doctors Opposing Circumcision has cited material on why the trial court needs to grant an evidentiary hearing. The court has not yet ruled. Doctors Opposing Circumcision initially cited the Convention on the Rights of the Child in their brief, which has not been ratified by the USA, but relied on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which is little used in the United States, although as a treaty it is part of US supreme law. Further information
pdf: http://www.crin.org/docs/DOC_Male_circ_02.pdf