After hearing about the unnecessary and tragic deaths of two infants who contracted herpes after undergoing a circumcision ritual in New York, I couldn't help but be appalled and heartbroken for those poor parents who trusted their mohels to perform the procedure safely. The mohels used a circumcision method called metzitzah b'peh, in which the mohel uses his mouth to stop the bleeding after the baby's foreskin is removed. In addition to the two babies who died after contracting herpes from their mohel, two others were left with devastating brain damage from the disease.
And now that there are Ultra-Orthodox rabbis who say they will defy a law (if it goes into act) that requires parental consent when this particular method of circumcision is going to be used, I'm absolutely outraged. Because those parents have every right to know exactly how their baby sons are going to be circumcised before allowing the ritual to take place.
I've attended a briss before, so I know just how important the circumcision ceremony is to Jewish parents. And even though the Ultra-Orthodox sector may have used the oral-suction circumcision method safely in the past, due to the recent deaths, parents should be the ones to decide how the mohel will perform the ritual on their son.
There have already been several complaints from parents who were unaware that oral-suction was going to be used during their sons' circumcisions. And if this new law goes into effect, they will be required to sign a consent form before allowing the method to take place.
And according to Rabbi David Neiderman, "This is the government forcing a rabbi practicing a religious ritual to tell his congregants it could hurt their child." He insists that the practice is safe, and also feels that the consent form forces parents to go against their belief system. He said, "Don’t force parents to sign something that is against their religious beliefs."
Ok, I'm a little bit confused. I'm no genius, but don't you think the parents who decide to sign the consent form are probably ok with the mohel using the oral-suction method of circumcision? The proposed law isn't being suggested to force anyone to go against their beliefs -- it's an effort to protect parents who are understandably worried about the health and safety of their infant and do not under any means want oral-suction used during their baby's circumcision.
It's not like this law would make the ritual illegal, it would simply make having the parents' consent a prerequisite. Since when is having the parents' permission before performing any sort of surgery a foreign thing? If anything, having the consent form will only protect the mohels should anything go wrong during the circumcision. The law is a win-win for everyone involved, especially for parents who want to honor their religion, yet protect their babies at the same time.
Do you think there should be a law requiring parental consent for this method of circumcision?
Image via handmaidenbymaria/Flickr
Kim and Kanye's Baby Name Predictions!
Moms Love Birthday Parties, Too!
Father Knows Best - Happy Father's Day!
Are Cheaters Entitled to Privacy? - A...
Comments 48
I am Jewish, albeit extremely extremely reform. I must say I personally believe the Ultra-Orthodox Community gives the rest of the Jewish community a bad name. These archaic practices are disgusting and dangerous. I must also say that I believe that brisses are inhumane. I just want the non-Jewish community to know that the majority of the Jewish community in no way condones this practice.
Yeah, I'm more disturbed by the actual ritual than the fact that government is trying to regulate it. That just screams inappropriate to me. I believe that circumcision is a parent's decision, since it often has very deep-rooted religious ties to it. But this is just wrong. I'm not Jewish and I don't pretend to know the hard (or easy?) decision it is to have my baby circumcised, but I would have serious concerns about anyone placing their mouth on my son's genitals. Totally inappropriate. I don't care who you are. And I'd have serious reservations about an adult who would feel this was an appropriate way to stop bleeding. This may have been the only way back in the day, but now we have things like gauze pads. Which don't carry a risk of herpes or scream "sexual abuse."
@Ethansmomma, I would have no issue signing a consent form before having my baby baptized. Why would anyone care, lol. It's just a damn signature. Not exactly a giant hoop to jump through there.
why in the world would anyone put thier mouth on a babys penis. I would shoot anyone for doing that for any reason if they did that to my infant.
I had grown up in a jewish community in crown heights brooklyn. not all brits were performed this way but the mohel that gave the boy herpes was from that area and it was well known in that community that a lot of rabbis were molesting little boys. there were even jewish girls being raped by rabbis and it would go un reported so I am not surprised that some jewish fanatics would want to put their mouths on new born boys private parts. I also dated a guy from israel and jews from israel were not fond of the jews from crown heights.Just as someone had stated above, dont judge the religion as a whole over a few nutty fanatics but just know that there are jewish parents that think that mohels and rabbis can do no wrong so even if they had to sign a consent form they would gladly do it blindfolded.
A religion that allows anyone to put their mouths on a child's private areas needs to be stopped. I don't believe government should be allowed in church. However, in this case that is purely sick and just wrong there should be an exception to separation of church and state. And, this goes for any other religion that does their immoral things. There are plenty of other safe and moral ways to help stop bleeding after a circumsion is completed. Parents signing a paper to allow the mouth suctioning is just allowing their child to be sexually assaulted! Disgusted!!!