Nebus v. Hironimus: Difference between revisions
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) Wikify. |
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) m Add SEEALSO section. |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|} | |} | ||
'''Nebus vs. Hironimus''' | '''Nebus vs. Hironimus''' was a 2012-2015 case in South Florida where two parents had a long drawn fight over the [[genital integrity]] of their child. | ||
C.R.N.H. was born in 2010. The parents, [[Dennis Nebus]] and [[Heather Hironimus]], were never married. In December of 2010, Nebus filed for paternity. | C.R.N.H. was born in 2010. The parents, [[Dennis Nebus]] and [[Heather Hironimus]], were never married. In December of 2010, Nebus filed for paternity. | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
== State case == | == State case == | ||
In 2014, Nebus decided to move ahead with the [[circumcision]]. By then, Hironimus had researched the topic of circumcision and decided that she didn't want her son to be subjected to the procedure. Hironimus claimed that in a previous surgery C.R.N.H. had problems waking from the anesthesia, and she feared that the mandatory general anesthesia could cause the child's death. C.R.N.H. had also shown to have scarring issues, which also create a concern for the circumcision. | In 2014, Nebus decided to move ahead with the [[circumcision]]. By then, Hironimus had researched the topic of [[circumcision]] and decided that she didn't want her son to be subjected to the procedure. Hironimus claimed that in a previous surgery C.R.N.H. had problems waking from the anesthesia, and she feared that the mandatory general anesthesia could cause the child's death. C.R.N.H. had also shown to have scarring issues, which also create a concern for the circumcision. | ||
Nebus claimed that C.R.N.H. wet his leg during [[urination]], something he attributed to [[phimosis]] and expected to cure with the circumcision. | Nebus claimed that C.R.N.H. wet his leg during [[urination]], something he attributed to [[phimosis]] and expected to cure with the circumcision. | ||
A medical expert, Dr. Charles Flack, testified that C.R.N.H. had no need for the circumcision. Flack also listed some of the common benefits, including the (incorrect) statement that penile cancer only occurs on [[uncircumcised]] males, and the claim reduction of [[HIV]] infection. | A medical expert, Dr. Charles Flack, testified that C.R.N.H. had no need for the [[circumcision]]. Flack also listed some of the common benefits, including the (incorrect) statement that penile cancer only occurs on [[uncircumcised]] males, and the claim reduction of [[HIV]] infection. | ||
On May of 2014, Judge [[Jeffrey Dana Gillen]] sided with the father, suggesting that the procedure can be performed with local anesthesia (which is not the case) and ignoring an important change in circumstances: at 3 and 1/2 years, C.R.N.H. is already aware of his body and afraid of a surgery, which increases the risk for [[trauma]] and psychological harm. | On May of 2014, Judge [[Jeffrey Dana Gillen]] sided with the father, suggesting that the procedure can be performed with local anesthesia (which is not the case) and ignoring an important change in circumstances: at 3 and 1/2 years, C.R.N.H. is already aware of his body and afraid of a surgery, which increases the risk for [[trauma]] and psychological harm. | ||
| Line 178: | Line 178: | ||
Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Jessica Ticktin (replacing Judge Gillen since June 1st) denied the motion on June 9th. | Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Jessica Ticktin (replacing Judge Gillen since June 1st) denied the motion on June 9th. | ||
{{SEEALSO}} | |||
* [[Informed consent]] | |||
* [[Surrogate consent]] | |||
* [[Wrongful circumcision]] | |||
{{LINKS}} | {{LINKS}} | ||