16,035
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→State case: Wikify.
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.
Gillen ordered Hironimus to sign the consent forms, and stated that if she did not sign, Nebus signature would suffice to perform the procedure. Gillen also ordered Hironimus not to express in any way to C.R.N.H. her disagreement with the circumcision.