Changes

}}</ref> The Mogen clamp's name derives from the Hebrew word "magain," or shield, and it was invented in an effort to standardize [[circumcision]] equipment then in use by both doctors and mohels ''mohelim'' without medical training who perform the procedure in private homes and other locations.<ref name="hennessy-fiske2011" /> The device is designed to "shield" the [[glans]], as the name implies, while the [[mohel]] slices off the [[foreskin]].<ref name="kaweblum1984">{{REFjournal

}}</ref> A user must first rip the [[foreskin ]] from the [[glans]], then pull it through the clamp and slices it off with a single motion.<ref name="hennessy-fiske2011" /> Some orthodox Jews only recognize circumcisions performed with devices based on the traditional design,<ref name="hennessy-fiske2011" /> and for this reason it is preferred by traditional [[mohel| mohelim]]s.<ref name="hennessy-fiske2011" />

The Mogen clamp has a critical design flaw: It does not allow doctors or mohels ''mohelim'' to see what they are cutting.<ref name="hennessy-fiske2011" /> As far back as August 2000, the [[FDA|U.S. Food and Drug Administration]] issued a public health notice about the Mogen and [[Gomco]] clamps<ref name="hennessy-fiske2011" /> after receiving approximately 20 injury reports a year since 1996,<ref name="hennessy-fiske2011" /> including lacerations, hemorrhaging, penile [[amputation]] and urethral damage.<ref name="hennessy-fiske2011" /> Instead of recalling the devices, the [[FDA]] advised users to make sure they were using the clamps according to manufacturer's specifications.<ref name="hennessy-fiske2011" /> In the 11 years following the FDA warnings, the agency had received 21 reports related to Mogen clamps, all but one of which involved injuries.<ref name="hennessy-fiske2011" /> Mogen continued to publish in its instructional brochure that "no injury to the glans is possible, even after other glans [[amputation]]s were reported.<ref name='Law.com 2010-07-29'>{{REFnews

|quote=She noted an instructional brochure accompanying the Mogel Mogen clamp stating that "no injury to glans is possible," even though other [[amputation]]s had been reported.

Mogen went out of business in July of 2010<ref name="tagami2010" /> after losing a 10.8 million dollar law suit,<ref name="tagami2010" /> after a [[mohel]]<ref name="tagami2010" /> severed the end of a baby's glans<ref name="tagami2010" /> using one of their clamps. Mogen claimed that injury was impossible with its use.<ref name="tagami2010" /><ref name='Law.com 2010-07-29'>{{REFnews |last=Hayes Tucker |first=Katheryn |url=http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202464033969&Atlanta_Lawyer_Takes_on_Botched_Circumcision_Claims_Nationwide&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1 |title=Atlanta Lawyer Takes on Botched Circumcision Claims Nationwide |publisher= |website=Law.com |quote=She noted an instructional brochure accompanying the Mogel clamp stating that "no injury to glans is possible," even though other [[amputation]]s had been reported. |date=2010-07-29 |accessdate=2011-04-08}}</ref> The injury behind a prior lawsuit in Fulton County Superior Court had already put Mogen on notice about the danger of the device,<ref name="tagami2010" /> and they were already in default on a $7.5-million judgment in Massachusetts.<ref name="hennessy-fiske2011" />