17,052
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
* {{REFdocument
|title=BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE, DOCTORS OPPOSING CIRCUMCISION,IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION FOR REVIEW
|url=https://pool.intactiwiki.org/images/2007-04_BoldtReviewBrief.pdf
|contribution=
|last=Geisheker
|first=John V.
|publisher=Doctors Opposing Circumcision
|format=PDF
|date=2007-04
|accessdate=2020-04-22
}}
* {{REFdocument
|title=BRIEF ON THE MERITS OF ''AMICUS CURIAE'', DOCTORS OPPOSING CIRCUMCISION
|url=https://pool.intactiwiki.org/images/2007-07-31_BoldtAmicusBriefMerits.pdf
|contribution=
|last=Geisheker
|first=John
|publisher=Doctors Opposing Circumcision
|format=PDF
|date=2007-07
|accessdate=2020-04-23
}}
* {{REFdocument
|title=Boldt and Boldt, (CC No. 98-2318-D(3); CA A126175; SC S054714)
|url= https://law.justia.com/cases/oregon/supreme-court/2008/s054714.html
|contribution=
|last=
|first=
|publisher=Oregon Supreme Court
|format=
|date=2008-01-25
|accessdate=2020-04-19
}}
* No. 07–1348. Boldt v. Boldt. Sup. Ct. Ore. Certiorari denied. 555 US 814 Reported below: 344 Ore. 1, 176 P. 3d 388. (2008).
Add text.
}}</ref>
His mother, Mrs. Lia Boldt, filed suit in the [https://www.courts.oregon.gov/courts/jackson/Pages/default.aspx Jackson County Circuit Court] for an injunction to prohibit the circumcision ann and for change of custody, which was denied (No. 98-2318-D(3)), however the court granted the injunction against the proposed circumcision. Lia Boldt then filed an appeal of the circuit court's decision with the [https://www.courts.oregon.gov/courts/appellate/coa/Pages/default.aspx Oregon Court of Appeals] (OCA).<ref name="svoboda2010" />
The OCA rejected Lia Boldt's appeal. She then appealed to the [https://www.courts.oregon.gov/courts/appellate/supreme/Pages/default.aspx Oregon Supreme Court] (OSC) in 2007. It was at that point that [[Doctors Opposing Circumcision]] entered the case. Doctors Opposing Circumcision realized that the ORS needed information about circumcision and about the child's rights under Constitutional and international human rights law, so it filed an ''amicus curaie'' brief to help the Court understand why it should accept the case. The brief stated in part:
</blockquote>
The father, James Boldt, then appealed the decision of the OSC to the United States Supreme Court, however writ of certiorari was denied.<ref>555 US 814. No. 07–1348. Boldt v. Boldt. Sup. Ct. Ore. Certiorari denied. 555 US 814 October 6, 2008. Reported below: 344 Ore. 1, 176 P. 3d 388. (2008).</ref>
A long-running legal case in the United States, finally resolved in 2009, when courts in the state of Oregon ruled that a parent could not compel a child over which he had custody to get circumcised against the boy's will. The case is of interest in its potential to limit the power of parents to impose circumcision and similar physical alterations on children and in its implicit recognition that children have their own rights – to physical integrity and freedom of conscience and religion – independently of their parents' belief.
{{LINKS}}
* {{REFweb