16,007
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Commentary on Boldt v. Boldt: Add NOCIRC comment.
There has been a fair amount of commentary on this case.
The 2009 NOCIRC Annual Newsletter commented:
<blockquote>
The US Supreme Court in October turned down a father’s petition in Boldt v Boldt. The boy’s father, who converted to Judaism and wants his son circumcised, was unhappy with the decision of the Oregon Supreme Court to determine the wishes of the child, and appealed to the US Supreme Court, alleging the child’s wishes are irrelevant. Fortunately, the right of the boy was paramount in the court’s decision.
</blockquote>
Dougglas Diekema, a pediatric medical ethicist commented: