Difference between revisions of "Jurisprudence"
(Created page with "At the moment there is a split legal situation regarding the genital mutilation of minors: While female genitalia (not only of girls, but also of women) are virtually protecte...") |
m |
||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
|language=German | |language=German | ||
|accessdate=2019-09-25 | |accessdate=2019-09-25 | ||
| + | }}</ref> Meanwhile, it became known that the verdict was due to an inappropriate legal opinion only because the boy has a mental disorder.<ref>{{REFweb | ||
| + | |url=https://hpd.de/artikel/beschneidung-nur-bagatelle-17296 | ||
| + | |title=Beschneidung nur eine Bagatelle? - Junge entgeht nur aufgrund psychischer Störung der Genitalverstümmelung | ||
| + | |trans-title=Circumcision only a bagatelle? - Boy escapes genital mutilationonly because of mental disorder | ||
| + | |language=German | ||
| + | |date=2019-10-11 | ||
| + | |accessdate=2019-10-11 | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
Revision as of 11:35, 11 October 2019
At the moment there is a split legal situation regarding the genital mutilation of minors: While female genitalia (not only of girls, but also of women) are virtually protected against mutilation by corresponding concrete laws worldwide, male genitals are hardly anywhere explicitly protected against mutilation. Although genital mutilation is fundamentally a personal injury against the will of the person concerned, not only politicians, but also many courts bow to the pressure of religious interest groups or follow outdated information from physicians.
Here are a few examples of specific case law related to male genital mutilation:
Work in progress: The following information does not claim to be complete. More content will be added gradually.
Germany
- 2012: The so-called Cologne circumcision court judgment of 7 May 2012 has definitely gone down in history, but it has triggered a short, heated circumcision debate in Germany and the German-speaking neighboring countries, on 12 December 2012 to hasty adoption of the so-called German Circumcision Act led to the repeal of the Cologne circumcision court judgment.
- 2019: In Ascheberg, a 43-year-old Syrian surgeon was sentenced to a prison sentence of 2.5 years on 10 October 2019 for failing to carry out the foreskin amputation of a six-month-old infant and others in a professional manner.[1]
Switzerland
- In 2019, the Zurich Supreme Court ruled that a Muslim boy should not be cut off the foreskin, although the mother wishes to do so. The circumcision would harm the child's well-being and was also not medically indicated.[2][3][4] Meanwhile, it became known that the verdict was due to an inappropriate legal opinion only because the boy has a mental disorder.[5]
References
- ↑
(11 October 2019). Säuglinge beschnitten: Arzt wegen gefährlicher Körperverletzung verurteilt
[Infants circumcised: doctor convicted of dangerous bodily harm] (German). Retrieved 11 October 2019. - ↑ Feusi, Alois (24 September 2019).
Zehnjähriger Bub soll dereinst selber über Beschneidung entscheiden
[Ten-year-old boy will one day decide about circumcision itself] (German), NZZ. Retrieved 25 September 2019. - ↑
Eine Mutter will ihren Sohn beschneiden lassen. Die Kesb ist dagegen. Wie entscheidet das Gericht?
[A mother wants to have her son circumcised. The kesb is against it. How does the court decide?] (German). Retrieved 25 September 2019. - ↑
Zehnjähriger darf seine Vorhaut behalten
[Ten year old may keep his foreskin] (German). Retrieved 25 September 2019. - ↑ (11 October 2019).
Beschneidung nur eine Bagatelle? - Junge entgeht nur aufgrund psychischer Störung der Genitalverstümmelung
[Circumcision only a bagatelle? - Boy escapes genital mutilationonly because of mental disorder] (German). Retrieved 11 October 2019.
