Difference between revisions of "Illinois - Judge says no to circumcision"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) m (format.) |
m (wikify) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | '''Illinois: Judge Says No to Circumcision for Boy''' is the headline used by the ''New York Times'' on 25 October 2006 for a report on the historic, precedent-setting Schmidt v. Niznik case in Chicago, Illinois in which the court prohibited the [[circumcision]] of a boy until he is old enough to decide for himself. | |
| + | |||
| + | The case represented a victory for the [[genital autonomy]] movement. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The case generated substantial media comment. | ||
{{SEEALSO}} | {{SEEALSO}} | ||
| − | |||
* [[Schmidt v. Niznik]] | * [[Schmidt v. Niznik]] | ||
{{LINKS}} | {{LINKS}} | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
* {{REFnews | * {{REFnews | ||
|title=Circumcision dispute lands in Illinois court | |title=Circumcision dispute lands in Illinois court | ||
| Line 20: | Line 21: | ||
|quote=A clash over of their son's circumcision has landed the parents of an eight-year-old Illinois boy in a U.S. court where there is no apparent precedent. | |quote=A clash over of their son's circumcision has landed the parents of an eight-year-old Illinois boy in a U.S. court where there is no apparent precedent. | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | |||
* {{REFnews | * {{REFnews | ||
|title=Court bans forcing boy's circumcision | |title=Court bans forcing boy's circumcision | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
|date=2006-10-25 | |date=2006-10-25 | ||
|accessdate=2020-06-06 | |accessdate=2020-06-06 | ||
| − | |quote=Because there are no U.S. precedents, other courts could look to this ruling in future cases, said George Hill of Doctors Opposing Circumcision. | + | |quote=Because there are no U.S. precedents, other courts could look to this ruling in future cases, said [[George Hill]] of [[Doctors Opposing Circumcision (D.O.C.)]]. |
}} | }} | ||
| − | + | * {{REFnews | |
| − | + | |title=Illinois: Judge Says No to Circumcision for Boy | |
| + | |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/25/us/25brfs-003.html?_r=1& | ||
| + | |last= | ||
| + | |first= | ||
| + | |coauthors= | ||
| + | |publisher=New York Times | ||
| + | |website=www.nytimes.com/ | ||
| + | |date=2006-10-25 | ||
| + | |accessdate=2020-06-06 | ||
| + | |quote=The judge, Jordan Kaplan of Circuit Court in Cook County, said that the procedure was “an extraordinary medical procedure” for a 9-year-old and that the boy could decide for himself when he turned 18. | ||
| + | }} | ||
* {{REFnews | * {{REFnews | ||
Latest revision as of 10:45, 16 June 2022
Illinois: Judge Says No to Circumcision for Boy is the headline used by the New York Times on 25 October 2006 for a report on the historic, precedent-setting Schmidt v. Niznik case in Chicago, Illinois in which the court prohibited the circumcision of a boy until he is old enough to decide for himself.
The case represented a victory for the genital autonomy movement.
The case generated substantial media comment.
See also
External links
(19 February 2006)."Circumcision dispute lands in Illinois court", http://usatoday30.usatoday.com, USA Today. Retrieved 6 June 2020.
Quote:A clash over of their son's circumcision has landed the parents of an eight-year-old Illinois boy in a U.S. court where there is no apparent precedent.
- Peres, Judy (25 October 2006)."Court bans forcing boy's circumcision", www.chicagotribune.com, Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 6 June 2020.
Quote:Because there are no U.S. precedents, other courts could look to this ruling in future cases, said George Hill of Doctors Opposing Circumcision (D.O.C.).
- (25 October 2006)."Illinois: Judge Says No to Circumcision for Boy", www.nytimes.com/, New York Times. Retrieved 6 June 2020.
Quote:The judge, Jordan Kaplan of Circuit Court in Cook County, said that the procedure was “an extraordinary medical procedure” for a 9-year-old and that the boy could decide for himself when he turned 18.
- Roe, Michael (26 October 2006)."An Example of Joint Custody Medical Decisions", Illinois Divorce Law Blog. Retrieved 6 June 2020.