Illinois - Judge says no to circumcision
Illinois: Judge Says No to Circumcision for Boy is the headline used by the New York Times on 25 October 2006 for a report on the historic, precedent-setting Schmidt v. Niznik case in Chicago, Illinois in which the court prohibited the circumcision of a boy until he is old enough to decide for himself.
The case represented a victory for the genital autonomy movement.
The case generated substantial media comment.
- (19 February 2006)."Circumcision dispute lands in Illinois court", http://usatoday30.usatoday.com, USA Today. Retrieved 6 June 2020. "A clash over of their son's circumcision has landed the parents of an eight-year-old Illinois boy in a U.S. court where there is no apparent precedent."
- Peres, Judy (25 October 2006)."Court bans forcing boy's circumcision", www.chicagotribune.com, Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 6 June 2020. "Because there are no U.S. precedents, other courts could look to this ruling in future cases, said George Hill of Doctors Opposing Circumcision."
- (25 October 2006)."Illinois: Judge Says No to Circumcision for Boy", www.nytimes.com/, New York Times. Retrieved 6 June 2020. "The judge, Jordan Kaplan of Circuit Court in Cook County, said that the procedure was “an extraordinary medical procedure” for a 9-year-old and that the boy could decide for himself when he turned 18."
- Roe, Michael (26 October 2006)."An Example of Joint Custody Medical Decisions", Illinois Divorce Law Blog. Retrieved 6 June 2020.