Difference between revisions of "Indiana - Wrongful circumcision"

From IntactiWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (remove extra blank lines)
(Add SEEALSO section)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
In a 2003 '''Indiana wrongful circumcision''' case, the jury found that no harm was done to the boy so no damages were awarded.
 
In a 2003 '''Indiana wrongful circumcision''' case, the jury found that no harm was done to the boy so no damages were awarded.
 +
{{SEEALSO}}
 +
 +
[[Foreskin#Physiological_functions| Physiological functions of the foreskin]]
  
 
{{LINKS}}
 
{{LINKS}}

Latest revision as of 22:44, 15 September 2022

In a 2003 Indiana wrongful circumcision case, the jury found that no harm was done to the boy so no damages were awarded.

See also

Physiological functions of the foreskin

External links