BOYNTON BEACH, Fla. (AP) – An estranged Florida couple’s fight over whether to circumcise their son has become a rallying cry for those who denounce the procedure as barbaric.
The dispute between Heather Hironimus, the mother opposing circumcision, and Dennis Nebus, the father favoring it, has sparked a prolonged court battle, protests and the rapt attention of a movement of self-proclaimed “intactivists.”
Judges have ruled in favor of the father, meaning the surgery is likely to happen, but the possible closure of the legal chapter has done little to mute the case’s most passionate followers. Though many still choose to remove their sons’ foreskins at the suggestion of a doctor, for religious or cultural reasons, or out of habit, opponents have been bolstered by the overall waning popularity of circumcision, and the fact this fight has gone on so long the boy at its center is now 4 years old.
“I couldn’t speak when I was cut, but I can speak now,” said Thomas Frederiksen, a 39-year-old machinist who traveled from Orlando to protest, wearing a red beret and “I (Heart) My Foreskin” T-shirt and speaking breathlessly about the issue.
Volumes of court filings tell the story: Hironimus and Nebus had a six-month relationship that resulted in a pregnancy, the birth of a boy named Chase, and a fight over nearly everything since. Nebus sued to prove his paternity and to get partial custody of the boy and the couple whittled out a parenting plan outlining everything from his surname to his legal address, to whom he calls mommy or daddy and, notably, what becomes of his penis.
In that document, the circumcision of the child was agreed to by both parents. When it came time to schedule the procedure, though, the mother resisted, having researched the subject further. The matter wound its way through circuit court, which ruled in Nebus’ favor, then to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, which refused to overturn the lower court’s ruling. Hironimus could ask for a rehearing in the appellate court, but has made no further legal filings.
“Just the normal thing to do,” the father said of circumcision, according to the court files. “To me, it’s not worth it to put my son’s life at risk for a cosmetic procedure,” the mother said.
The parents entered an agreement on Dec. 24 to not talk to the press and to avoid any other campaigns or actions that might exploit the child. There is no indication in the court documents the circumcision is being done for religious reasons. The attorney that had represented the mother, who lives in Boynton Beach, is no longer being retained and has not been replaced, the lawyer’s office said. The attorney for the father, who lives in Boca Raton, did not respond to requests for comment.
Though circumcision rates have fallen in the U.S., a majority of boys still undergo the removal of their foreskin. A 2013 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found 58.3 percent of newborn boys were circumcised in 2010, down from 64.5 percent in 1979. (The data excluded babies who were circumcised after leaving the hospital – many Jewish boys have the procedure during a ceremony called a bris, eight days after birth.) Meantime, a bubbling anti-circumcision movement has grown.
They have made the boy at the center of this case their cause celebre, as evidenced by one of several small sidewalk protests here featuring signs including “Let Chase Keep His Foreskin,” ”Don’t Cut Chase’s Penis,” ”Don’t You Dare Circumcise Chase!” and “Ethics 101: No Disease, No Consent, No Circumcision.” Some passing motorists honked or gave gestures of support; some looked puzzled or shouted “Who’s Chase?”
Jonathan Friedman, 27, who organized the demonstration as part of his “Saving Chase” campaign, traveled from Chicago for the event and makes anti-circumcision advocacy the focus of his life. He wore a “Children Never Forget Trauma” T-shirt and said he became vocal on the issue when he realized the harm of his own circumcision, which he blames for bleeding, chafing and painful erections.
What has driven supporters to his side, Friedman says, is the age of the boy in this case.
“People are not OK with a 4-year-old boy being circumcised – a conscious, articulate boy. That’s just not OK,” Friedman said. “Not everyone is against circumcisions, but I think everyone is against a 4-year-old’s circumcision.”
Last month, the CDC released a draft of long-awaited federal guidelines on circumcision, stopping short of telling parents they should choose the procedure, but saying medical evidence shows benefits clearly outweigh risks. It can lower a male’s risk of sexually transmitted diseases, penile cancer and even urinary tract infections, the CDC said, potential benefits of which the protesters expressed serious doubt.
Gathered quietly near the office of a pediatric urologist who examined the boy and who may be chosen for the surgery, they said the circumcision should be put off until adulthood, when the patient could decide for himself. To those who view the procedure as minor, they gave a list of reasons they believe shows it is not – from loss of sensation to unseen psychological damage.
“They think it’s just a little snip and it’s not,” said Jennifer Blanchard, 34, of Miami. “It’s a big deal.”
___
Follow Matt Sedensky on Twitter at http://twitter.com/sedensky
was done to me when i was born. no ill effects that i know of.
“I couldn’t speak when I was cut, but I can speak now,” said Thomas Frederiksen, a 39-year-old machinist who traveled from Orlando to protest, wearing a red beret and “I (Heart) My Foreskin” T-shirt and speaking breathlessly about the issue.”
SERIOUSLY???
GET OVER IT, LOSER!!! (yes… heh, heh, heh…)
There’s an “anti-circumcision movement”? Are these people out of their minds, or do they just have nothing better to do with their time?
With all that’s going wrong in this world, it seems absurd to me that people would band together to protest foreskin removal. Where did this movement begin? How did these lunatics meet each other? It sounds like something out of a comedy skit. I’d have to question if any of this is really happening.
What a bunch of d1ckh €@D’s?!
Agreed.
As a nurse I saw this done and believe me it is barbaric to say the least.
You’re absolutely correct.
Also, guess who pushed this stupidity on the goyim?…Yep that’s right.
Probably so they could hide amongst us.
I could go on and on about how stupid it is.
-flek
Agreed G&B. Male circumcision is as barbaric and cruel as its counterpart – female genital mutilation. Just watch one pediatrician performing circumcision on a baby boy and you’ll agree.
From http://codenamemama.com/2010/06/10/circumcision-newborn/: “Over 80% of parents regret their circumcision decision in the first six months of their sons’ lives.” It’s painful and traumatic and disrupts breastfeeding, sleep, and bonding.
From http://www.lifepassages.net/Foreskin.html: “The foreskin has numerous protective, sensory, and sexual functions.” And, “Studies performed at the University of Colorado School of Medicine showed that circumcision is followed by prolonged, unrestful non-REM (rapid-eye-movement) sleep. In response to the lengthy bombardment of their neural pathways with unbearable pain, the circumcised babies withdrew into a kind of semi coma that lasted days or even weeks.”
From http://www.noharmm.org/advantage.htm: “The “prepuce” (foreskin) constitutes 50% or more of the skin system of the penis [1].” “…history suggests that it dates back to around 3000 B.C., when it was performed in ancient Egypt as a mark of slavery and as a religious rite.” This article, not long, is a good read. Bet you didn’t know that the foreskin does all this. The foreskin does not actually mature, and often does not even fully separate from the glans, until after puberty.
And from http://birthofanewearth.blogspot.com/2012/09/circumcision-is-evil-men-without.html: “Those foreskins bind the male to that female at an alchemical level – an alchemical component of love that is absent with that foreskin gone…”
Genital Mutilation !!!
This is a totally unnecessary surgical procedure in this day and age. And they don’t do it for free. Its a leftover of a religious application that was once common, but no longer has any medical reason for continuing.
I’m going to do something I rarely do… play the Devil’s advocate here.
Many years ago, I read any article that basically made a case for circumcision on the basis of cleanliness. It said that bacteria had a tendency to accumulate inside the folds of the foreskin, which could/has led to health problems.
I am by no means claiming this to be true, but it does have a certain logic to it. It could also just as easily be another jew lie (wouldn’t be the 1st, or 2nd, or 3rd… ad infinitum) If anyone here has information pertaining to this aspect, please feel free to post it.
From http://www.lifepassages.net/Foreskin.html:
“Protection: Just as the eyelids protect the eyes, the foreskin protects the glans and keeps its surface soft, moist, and sensitive. It also maintains optimal warmth, pH balance, and cleanliness. The glans itself contains no sebaceous glands – glands that produce the sebum, or oil, that moisturizes our skin. The foreskin produces the sebum that maintains proper health of the surface of the glans.
“Immunological Defense: The mucous membranes that line all body orifices are the body’s first line of immunological defense. Glands in the foreskin produce antibacterial and antiviral proteins such as lysozyme. Lysozyme is also found in tears and mother’s milk. Specialized epithelial Langerhans cells, an immune system component, abound in the foreskin’s outer surface. Plasma cells in the foreskin’s mucosal lining secrete immunoglobulins, antibodies that defend against infection.”
Thanks, Enbe.
Hence the disclaimer. 😉