A 12 year old Oregon boy, "Misha," is in danger of being circumcised against his will.
His mother is fighting for her son's right and expressed wish to retain the full sex organ endowed to him by nature, against the custodial father. They now look to the Oregon Supreme Court to follow the precedent set by Circuit Court Judge Jordan Kaplan, who ruled three months ago that a 9 year old boy's right to remain genitally intact trumped the parents power to circumcise him.
Consider bringing this case to the attention of your local media outlet, since there seems to be no coverage yet.
Below the fold is the public appeal for assistance to take the fight to the Oregon Supreme Court.
From John Geisheker of Doctors Opposing Circumcision:
AN URGENT APPEAL FOR YOUR HELP TO PROTECT A BOY
You have a unique opportunity to assist with a legal case in Oregon. An Oregon father, (an attorney), is planning on converting to Judaism and wants his now 12 year-old son, "Misha" of whom he has custody, circumcised against the child's express will. Sadly, a physician / congregant has already been found who is willing to ignore Misha's wishes and oblige the father. The rabbi insists on it. Misha is deeply afraid of his father.
An attorney working pro bono publico has donated more than $20,000 of his time to assisting the mother to block the circumcision in the courts. The case is now on its way to the Oregon Supreme Court after losses at both the trial level and an intermediate appellate court. Judges have affirmed, without reasoning or testimony, that the non-medical circumcision of a 12 year-old is "within the discretion of the custodial parent". There is no medical necessity alleged at all by anyone.
If you want to assist, I urge you to make a tax-deductible donation to Doctors Opposing Circumcision, in Misha's name, to be used solely for his legal fees and costs. I will supply you with much more detail by pdf if you have a sincere wish to help. Even small sums, the cost of a restaurant meal, $25, $50, will help if enough people chip in, but if you can afford more, that would be deeply appreciated by the boy and his mother who cannot afford to oppose the father.
This is the clearest case of a parent's claimed religious beliefs trumping a child's right to an intact body that I have seen in 26 years of practicing law. It fairly screams out for justice, but justice costs.
PLEASE feel free to re-post this to websites and bulletin boards where intactivists and sympathetic souls visit.
PLEASE HELP MISHA BY DONATING TO D.O.C., AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ANYTHING YOU CAN DO.
John V. Geisheker, JD, LL.M.
Attorney-at-Law,
Executive Director,
Doctors Opposing Circumcision
www.DoctorsOpposingCircumcision.org
1727--14th Ave., Suite #5
Seattle, WA 98122
Tel / fax +1. 206. 568. 0566
Cell +1. 206. 465. 6636
This unfortunate legal battle needs to be waged because although there is a specific law guaranteeing that no female minor may be forced to undergo medically non-indicated genital surgery, any male minor may be so forced for any reason, even against his expressed will. A bill submitted to congress would provide equal protection to males.
Since there is (rightfully) skepticism of any appeal for assistance, and little or no media coverage thus far, John provided this in response to a request for authentication:
You may put the attached on Daily Kos for the benefit of Misha (or Mischa, a nickname). The same document will be included on the DOC website as soon as it can be posted.
I can assure readers that the case is real and serious and the boy needs our help, but it also involves a minor and so the file is not as public as might be another legal case. I do not know which portions, if any, are sealed. For verification, (and because it is public knowledge), the case # is and the clerk of court would know:
In re the Marriage of [withheld], Jackson County (Oregon) Case No. 98-2318D3, Appellate Court Case No. A126175.
I am told the Oregon Courts website has the case listed.
THANKS FOR ANY HELP READERS CAN SUPPLY. MISHA NEEDS ALL THE SUPPORT WE CAN MUSTER,
John V. Geisheker, JD, LL.M.
Here is some history on the case, and its present status.
John Geisheker at DOC was contacted recently by Clayton C. Patrick, the attorney who has been representing Misha's mother without pay, asking for help with the case:
Dear John:
Thank you for your prior assistance with this case, and your willingness to assist in the future. I am writing this letter for you to use in your fund-raising efforts.
...
On May 30, 2004, after the child had been living with the father following the custody change, the mother learned that the father was planning on having the child circumcised the next day as part of his plan to convert the child to Judaism (the father is also a recent convert). That morning I got the judge on the phone with the father, and she ordered him to stop his plans until we could have a formal hearing, after the father agreed there was no medical necessity to have it done.
...
I have spoken with Misha myself on the telephone, and he confirmed his desire not to be circumcised.
...
the court concluded that the question of whether the child should have any elective surgery was solely a question for the custodial parent, and that she would therefore deny our motion to change or modify custody without even giving us a hearing. However, she did at least order that the father could not circumcise the child until the matter was resolved on appeal by the issuance of a final "appellate judgment." That judgment won't issue until all of the appellate process has completed, including any petition for review to the Oregon Supreme Court, or a petition for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court.
...
On December 27, 2006, the appellate court affirmed the trial court decision without writing an opinion.
...
now our only recourse is to take this to the Oregon Supreme Court, and failing that to the U.S. Supreme Court. So, not only does this case present the issue of the parent's absolute right to circumcise a twelve year old boy against his wishes, it also raises fundamental due process issues in that we were not permitted to even make our case that this would be harmful to the child.
...
Here is the help I would like from you. First of all, I have put into this case at least $10,000 of my time which I have kept track of, and at least another $10,000 to $20,000 which I haven't kept track of. I have reached the end of my ability to continue to work on this case pro bono, but my sympathies remain strong. That is why I appreciate your group's willingness to help.
...
I also think now is the time to hire an attorney for the child. And, I believe that an amicus brief or two would be in order to assist the court to see that this isn't just your run of the mill domestic dispute.
The right to one's own bodily integrity should not be subject to a parental dispute. Elective amputation of body parts must not be amongst the many choices parents can make for their children. Forcing a child to be circumcised against his will is utterly inhumane. Children have rights even before they are 18 years of age.
Since Misha's right to genital integrity is not explicitly granted to him by law, he is very fortunate that his mother is willing to fight for him. Not every boy has one of his parents to protect him from an assault on his genitals. Not every parent can afford to mount an epic legal battle to protect their sons' bodily integrity rights. Today, Misha needs legal assistance to defend his right to genital integrity; Hopefully mgmbill.org will soon protect all American boys, preventing cases like this.
Finally, here are some of the arguments under consideration for presentation to the Oregon Supreme Court:
1 Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 US Sup Ct 158 (1944):-- "Parents are
free to be religious martyrs themselves, but cannot make their children into martyrs."
2 Bodily integrity of a child who cannot give consent trumps parents religious freedom
3 Judaism does not universally require circumcision and there are
Jewish congregations in the Northwest US who will accept the child as is, including Bar Mitzvah, if he wishes to join. There are also celebrants who will perform a Bris Shalom, a non-cutting, well established, alternative.
4 All branches of Judaism and Jewish law forbid forced conversions.
5 No medical necessity has even been claimed; the child is healthy; the
procedure is wholly cultural; prophylaxis, if any, not worth the
surgical risk.
6 Bioethics forbids forced, non-therapeutic, surgery on minors.
7 The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989, prohibits "harmful
traditional practices" on minors.
8 A child this close to the age of majority can make own choice at age
18 both as to religion and as to surgery without prejudice to the parents or his health. (Recently decided in a similar Chicago case)
Misha is legally protected from unwanted genital cutting while his case is appealed to the Oregon Supreme Court. Please help defend his right to keep his sexual organ as endowed to him by nature. And please support that right for all American boys.