General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRabbi Sued After Baby Injured During Circumcision
PITTSBURGH (KDKA) A local rabbi is being sued after allegedly botching a bris, the traditional Jewish circumcision ritual, and severing a newborn boys penis.
The incident detailed in the lawsuit happened at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Squirrel Hill within the last year.
--clip
Sometime during the bris, according to the lawsuit, Rosenberg severed the baby boys penis. The baby was rushed to Childrens Hospital, where doctors performed emergency microsurgery.
If your finger, your thumb was cut off and was put back on, that is pretty exciting, said renowned UPMC plastic surgeon Dr. Joe Losee.
--clip
But our sources say it took eight hours. The baby needed six blood transfusions and was hospitalized for nearly two months. Sources describe the reattachment procedure as successful.
more...
http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2013/12/27/rabbi-sued-after-baby-injured-during-circumcision/
Glassunion
(10,201 posts)Ouch!
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Lost_Count
(555 posts)Purveyor
(29,876 posts)"they" have done to him.
And no, the parents should NOT have the right to sue and reap a windfall. It is their fucking fault this barbarity took place in the first place.
Drahthaardogs
(6,843 posts)I thought it was one rabbi.
Boudica the Lyoness
(2,899 posts)That's why the poster said "they".
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)dhill926
(16,315 posts)and a whimper...
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Prophet 451
(9,796 posts)In a very few cases, circumcision becomes medically necessary during childhood. For example, heavy scarring can make the foreskin too inflexible to be retracted.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Unless its medically necessary...
Prophet 451
(9,796 posts)I'm British and very few people are circumcised here (and we have a statistically normal level of STDs). Barring medical necessity, I think it shouldn't be done on anyone below, say, 16.
EDIT: Actually, how old are kids when they have bar mitzvahs? 13, IIRC. So let's say it's a minimum of 13.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)The only reason it's done is because babies can't articulate an objection.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)It would have far greater meaning and import if it was CHOSEN by men when they were able to make that informed choice.
Rather than have it done to unconsenting infants.
Fwiw I'm a firm believer that any cosmetic body modification wait til the child can make up their own mind. Including ear piercing
PCIntern
(25,490 posts)So it's circumcision this week, is it? what's next: Paraphrasing Pat Buchanan?
just asking...
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)PCIntern
(25,490 posts)Purveyor
(29,876 posts)HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)presstv and The Future of Freedom Foundation must not have anything anti-Semitic to bring to DU today.
Sid
madinmaryland
(64,931 posts)Response to madinmaryland (Reply #16)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
tblue37
(65,227 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)What are those women thinking? Feeding their baby? In public.
Personally, I find the mocking of the "controversy" pathetic.
Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #28)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Perhaps we are all now good with it as we are with marriage equality. Thus, I'd like to see it dropped as a DU mocking meme.
Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #37)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)madinmaryland
(64,931 posts)Response to madinmaryland (Reply #25)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)PCIntern
(25,490 posts)You have any context at all to make that comment? I do...
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)That's the context of my comment. What's yours?
spanone
(135,795 posts)waddirum
(979 posts)... should not be performing elective surgery on infants.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)It's barbaric.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)not a majority, by any means, but I think there's more open-mindedness around not doing it than there used to be.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)The broader culture has undoubtedly influenced the increased questioning among American Jews about circumcision.
Since 1979, the national rate went down 10 percent overall (or 6 percentage points, to 58 percent). The region with the steepest drop by far was the West, where the overall percentage of newborns circumcised went down 37 percent, to 40 percent.
Especially in the Northeast and Midwest, circumcision has been the mainstream American thing to do. American Jews didnt have to consider as a factor the possibility that their sons would stand out.
While its unclear if the rates will drop further, or rise, the mere possibility raises the question: Would this highly assimilated group of Americans, who in high numbers reject other barometers of religiosity like synagogue membership and belief in God, continue circumcising if they knew it would make their sons look different?
Id bet my house on this: As America goes, so will circumcision. If America starts turning against this, give it one generation, said Shira Stutman, rabbi at the millennial-focused D.C. synagogue, Sixth & I.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/if-fewer-americans-circumcise-will-jews-be-willing-to-stand-out/2013/12/25/f636b5d8-69be-11e3-8b5b-a77187b716a3_story.html
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I don't think you'll see monolithic movement either way.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)doc03
(35,299 posts)of mine but he died 60 years ago. I got short changed on that deal.
Crunchy Frog
(26,578 posts)And some DU "progressives" sniggering like it's some kind of schoolyard joke.
Sick society.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Wallach is among a small but growing number of Jews who are slowly altering what has for millennia been considered perhaps Judaisms core rite. The Bible says an adult Abraham circumcised himself to mark the covenant between him, his descendants and God. Any male who doesnt circumcise, God says in Genesis, that soul will be cut off from its people; he has broken My covenant.
Many of these Jews, according to rabbis and the ritual circumcisers known as mohels, are rejecting the classic festive circumcision ceremony, called a brit milah, or bris. For thousands of years, Jews have performed the ritual removal of the penile foreskin on the eighth day of a boys life, sometimes at the cost of death during periods of anti-Semitism.
A very small percentage, including Wallach, are not circumcising at all. Others, uncomfortable with the joyous, public ceremony around an intimate surgical procedure, are circumcising their sons in the hospital and crafting new baby-welcoming ceremonies days or weeks later for family and friends. Some are having no public service at all.
Meanwhile, there is an unprecedented level of debate among friends, grandparents and couples about whether to circumcise and how. Given that the topic merges sex, religion, identity, culture, gender equity, health politics and anti-Semitism, such discussions can grow intense or acrimonious.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/a-small-but-growing-number-of-jews-are-questioning-the-ancient-ritual-of-circumcision/2013/12/25/d24c5a4e-6403-11e3-aa81-e1dab1360323_story.html
Nobody You Know
(33 posts)And find it a bit tragic. I, too, am a victim of a botched circumcision (the rabbi accidentally poked a second hole but it's been deemed surgically unneccesary to repair, just a bleed), but I am not complaining. My parents made the choice for me, and I appreciate it. I live with the minor scab.
I did that for my son, and I chose a rabbi that was the most experienced of all the rabbis locally (there are 3 mohels serving in my area) and he did a superb job. Explained the whole thing - babies do not have nerves in their penis until they are at least two weeks old, and my son cried, but not from the shock of the circumcision, but the equipment used is very cold (it's all metal, and you wouldn't want to stick that thing when it's cold on your body), but was immediately calmed by a drop or two of wine after the blessings. Rabbi also said Neosporin for the first three days will heal the scar, and boy it did - in three days it was all done.
My guess is the rabbi in the OP stuck the penis incorrectly in this device:
And chopped it off. You're only supposed to expose the foreskin, not the penis.
Boudica the Lyoness
(2,899 posts)I can imagine what my sons would say to me now (the oldest one is almost 40) if I told them I was going to force them to have their penis's cut to suit me. They love their 'as nature intended' willies.
I always say, "Do what you want with your own penis. Leave other people's alone".
Crunchy Frog
(26,578 posts)The newborn penis certainly does have nerves in it, and certainly does experience sensation, no matter how uncomfortable that fact may be from a religious perspective. This is backed up by plenty of scientific and histological studies. Also, if he didn't have nerves there, then how could he feel the cold? And if it's only the instruments being cold that bothers the baby, then why not just warm them up and solve the problem?
I would never trust a religious official to give accurate scientific information. I don't believe in creationism either.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)This isn't true. Male babies have nerves in their penises. Saying otherwise is a bizarre claim. I am guessing it is a religious belief, but I don't really know the origin of this myth.
I personally circumcision to be offensive, but I guess offense is irrelevant in both of our cases.
Crunchy Frog
(26,578 posts)if they can convince themselves that the baby isn't feeling any pain. I don't think it's so much a religious belief as a comforting fairy tale.
In you're going to cut off part of your child's genitals, you'll feel much better about it if you believe there are no nerves in them. Or at least I know I would.
It's not just a religious myth either. Until recently, doctors were convinced that babies couldn't feel pain, and happily reassured new parents that there sons wouldn't suffer at all. They even carried out major surgeries (like heart surgery) with nothing but a paralytic, and nothing at all for the pain that they didn't believe existed.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Ms. Toad
(33,999 posts)Your rabbi is wrong about this:
"babies do not have nerves in their penis until they are at least two weeks old, and my son cried, but not from the shock of the circumcision, but the equipment used is very cold (it's all metal, and you wouldn't want to stick that thing when it's cold on your body)"
That was the line which was used to justify medical circumcision without anesthesia, as well, and has been thoroughly debunked.
JI7
(89,241 posts)elleng
(130,744 posts)Thank goodness my grandson's procedure was done in the hospital, w/o ritual. It was done voluntarily, daughter & son in law not practicing any religious anything. I didn't ask, but obviously there's a reason they elected to do this.
loudsue
(14,087 posts)for their OWN body, and not for anybody else's body. Parents, religions, society....NOBODY....has the right to make that kind of decision for a baby, a child, a teen. Only an adult should have the authority and CHOICE about what to do with their own bodies. Genital mutilation should be a CHOICE an adult makes.
Oakenshield
(614 posts)It should be a no-brainer. Would you want someone to start cutting away at you without your explicit consent? I should freaking hope not!
unblock
(52,126 posts)i don't go around calling anyone else's religious/traditional rituals barbaric and i would appreciate it if others would kindly refrain from insulting those of us who view this tradition as important. babies don't consent to many, many things and parents are called upon to do what they believe to be in their best interests in many contexts every day. those here you would never consider circumcision for themselves or their sons are more than welcome to express their view that this tradition/procedure is not for them, but please don't insult me and my wife, my parents, my grandparents, and my ancestors going back many generations, based on your intolerance for the traditions of others.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1298129/Baby-dies-minutes-immersed-times-baptism.html
Priest accused of drowning six-week-old boy during a BAPTISM as family looked on
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER
UPDATED: 07:37 EST, 28 July 2010
A priest has been accused of accidentally drowning a six-week-old boy as he baptised him in Moldova.
Witnesses claimed the baby died after Father Valentin failed to cover his mouth and nose when he immersed him in water three times.
Film shot by relatives shows the youngster moving after being taken out of the font, but then suffering difficulty breathing as he is dressed.
Twenty minutes later, he started bleeding from his nose and mouth and died.
...
Doctor Sergiu Raileanu, who examined the tiny tot, confirmed that the baby had drowned.
Police said they have launched a manslaughter investigation. If found guilty, the priest faces up to three years in jail.
Crunchy Frog
(26,578 posts)I don't care about the tradition. It's obviously unsafe for the babies.
This is not the first such incident that I've read about.
Harmony Blue
(3,978 posts)is only prevalent in the United States. Outside of the U.S. it isn't as common thankfully.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)But I don't think I could watch....eek