Schmidt v. Niznik: Difference between revisions

Line 1:

'''~~Schmidt vs. Niznik~~''', Cook County Illinois, NO. 00 D 18272 (2006) is a court case about the proposed circumcision of an eight-year-old boy in Chicago.

'''{{FULLPAGENAME}}''', Cook County Illinois, NO. 00 D 18272 (2006) is a court case about the proposed circumcision of an eight-year-old boy in Chicago.

Mr. Niznick and Ms. Schmidt were formerly married. They had a son. They divorced and the former Mrs. Niznick received custody of the boy. The divorce agreement required her to consult with Mr. Niznick regarding any non-emergency health care services for the child.

Line 10:

|first=

|accessdate=2020-05-03

}}</ref> <ref name="appendixone">{{REFweb

}}</ref><ref name="appendixone">{{REFweb

|url=https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bbm%3A978-1-4020-9167-4%2F1.pdf

|title=Appendix One

Line 18:

}}</ref>

Mr. Niznick only found out about the circumcision a few days before it was to occur in February 2006 when his son told him during a scheduled visitation that he was to have surgery on his penis.<ref name="appendixone" />

Mr. Niznick only found out about the circumcision a few days before it was to occur in February 2006 when his son told him during a scheduled visitation that he was to have surgery on his penis.<ref name="appendixone"/>

==Proceedings==

Line 34:

The decision of the trial judge was not appealed to a higher court so the decision of the trial court stands.

''Schmidt vs. ~~Nizni~~''k (2006) is believed to be the first American legal case to recognize the right of a male child to genital autonomy — the right to decide for one's self about surgical operations and reconfiguration of one's genital organs.

''Schmidt v. Niznik'' (2006) is believed to be the first American legal case to recognize the right of a male child to genital autonomy — the right to decide for one's self about surgical operations and reconfiguration of one's genital organs.

[[Doctors Opposing Circumcision]], cited this case as a precedent in an [https://pool.intactiwiki.org/images/2007-04_BoldtReviewBrief.pdf| ''amicus curiae'' brief] filed with the Oregon Supreme Count in the case of [[Boldt v. Boldt]] in 2007.

[[Category:'... v. ...']]

[[Category:USA]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Construction Site}}
-'''Schmidt vs. Niznik''', Cook County Illinois, NO. 00 D 18272 (2006) is a court case about the proposed circumcision of an eight-year-old boy in Chicago.
+'''{{FULLPAGENAME}}''', Cook County Illinois, NO. 00 D 18272 (2006) is a court case about the proposed circumcision of an eight-year-old boy in Chicago.
 Mr. Niznick and Ms. Schmidt were formerly married. They had a son. They divorced and the former Mrs. Niznick received custody of the boy. The divorce agreement required her to consult with Mr. Niznick regarding any non-emergency health care services for the child.
@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
   |first=
   |accessdate=2020-05-03
-}}</ref> <ref name="appendixone">{{REFweb
+}}</ref><ref name="appendixone">{{REFweb
   |url=https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bbm%3A978-1-4020-9167-4%2F1.pdf
   |title=Appendix One
@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 }}</ref>
-Mr. Niznick only found out about the circumcision a few days before it was to occur in February 2006 when his son told him during a scheduled visitation that he was to have surgery on his penis.<ref name="appendixone" />
+Mr. Niznick only found out about the circumcision a few days before it was to occur in February 2006 when his son told him during a scheduled visitation that he was to have surgery on his penis.<ref name="appendixone"/>
 ==Proceedings==
@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 The decision of the trial judge was not appealed to a higher court so the decision of the trial court stands.
-''Schmidt vs. Nizni''k (2006) is believed to be the first American legal case to recognize the right of a male child to genital autonomy — the right to decide for one's self about surgical operations and reconfiguration of one's genital organs.
+''Schmidt v. Niznik'' (2006) is believed to be the first American legal case to recognize the right of a male child to genital autonomy — the right to decide for one's self about surgical operations and reconfiguration of one's genital organs.
 [[Doctors Opposing Circumcision]], cited this case as a precedent in an [https://pool.intactiwiki.org/images/2007-04_BoldtReviewBrief.pdf| ''amicus curiae'' brief] filed with the Oregon Supreme Count in the case of [[Boldt v. Boldt]] in 2007.
 {{REF}}
 [[Category:'... v. ...']]
 [[Category:USA]]