Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Schmidt v. Niznik

6 bytes removed, 07:50, 4 May 2020
m
no edit summary
{{Construction Site}}
'''Schmidt vs. Niznik{{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.
|first=
|accessdate=2020-05-03
}}</ref> <ref name="appendixone">{{REFweb
|url=https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bbm%3A978-1-4020-9167-4%2F1.pdf
|title=Appendix One
}}</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" />
==Proceedings==
The decision of the trial judge was not appealed to a higher court so the decision of the trial court stands.
''Schmidt vsv. NizniNiznik''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.
[[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]]
administrator, administrators, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators
22,335
edits

Navigation menu