Mom in circumcision fight found, jailed

[Hepburn]

36. How could the court make the decision that this is or was medically unnecessary?

At the time the PARENTS made the agreement, there was no issue before the court which claimed this procedure was "medically unnecessary." Courts only have the ability to rule on issues which are before them. If the mother thought this should not be done, she should not have given up her authority to the court to order the procedure. Let's put this where it belongs: On the parent who later did not agreed and not on a court system which could not interfere in the joint decision of the parents made at an earlier date. This surgery is legal -- and it is an option to all parents of minor male children. The court could not over-rule their joint agreement. What if: Parents agree to NOT circumcise a male infant and the court over the agreement of the parents orders the surgery? Would this be OK? I do not see a difference in this scenario over what you propose -- a court simply on its own volition over-rule parents who have made a choice for a legal medical procedure.