|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jun 22, 2017 14:17:51 GMT
This should be interesting. I for one have never been impressed by the dismissing the notion of consent by children for their genital cutting on the basis of 'hygiene' or hallowed 'cultural practice' or 'tradition' etc - even if these reasons are less reprehensible than those commonly made out for FGM. Working against MGM will be a much more fraught, and longer, battle than that against FGM, needless to say.
-------------------
Three people have been arrested by police investigating the circumcision of a three-month-old boy. A 61-year-old man, believed to be the doctor who carried out the procedure, has been arrested on suspicion of grievous bodily harm with intent. The boy's mother complained to police, saying her son was circumcised without her consent while staying with his paternal grandparents in July 2013. A 44-year-old man and a woman, aged 47, have also been arrested. Nottinghamshire Police said they were arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to commit grievous bodily harm. All three people have been released pending further investigation The doctor previously told the BBC: "It would be inappropriate to comment whilst any investigation is ongoing."
He has not publicly clarified whether or not he had been told the mother had consented to the procedure.
The boy was circumcised in Nottingham on 31 July 2013.
His mother originally contacted social services, then contacted police on 24 November 2014.
There was a police inquiry but the force initially deemed it not to be a criminal matter, and the matter was referred to the General Medical Council.
'True suffering'
The boy's mother believes circumcision amounts to MGM, or "male genital mutilation", and is "inhumane".
She says her son, now aged four, has suffered recurring physical problems including inflammation and water infections.
"I am deeply hurt by what has happened to my son and the suffering I have been forced to witness," she said.
"No amount of money in the world could make right what's been done, and my only hope is to raise awareness of MGM and reveal the true suffering this procedure really inflicts on tiny babies.
"My life will never be the same again and I dread my son growing up and learning what happened to him."
Police reopened the investigation after the mother got help from the anti-circumcision group Men Do Complain and leading human rights lawyer Saimo Chahal QC, who wrote to the force. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40358944 |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jun 22, 2017 14:31:04 GMT
One of the guys was also has an additional charge of embezzlement.... Wait for it.... He was taking a little off the top.  |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jun 22, 2017 15:05:29 GMT
4 year old story and still not a lot of info.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2017 20:31:16 GMT
Good. I hope the grandparents and the doctor all get jail time.
|
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
 
|
Post by PanLeo on Jun 22, 2017 20:59:07 GMT
It should be banned outright. It's barbaric. Can you imagine what people's reactions would be if some of us went around cutting little girls genitals?
|
|
|
|
Post by scienceisgod on Jun 22, 2017 21:40:59 GMT
4 year old story and still not a lot of info. Don't worry. It's not a criminal matter because the victim was a male. |
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jun 23, 2017 6:32:29 GMT
This should be interesting. I for one have never been impressed by the dismissing the notion of consent by children for their genital cutting on the basis of 'hygiene' or hallowed 'cultural practice' or 'tradition' etc - even if these reasons are less reprehensible than those commonly made out for FGM. Working against MGM will be a much more fraught, and longer, battle than that against FGM, needless to say.
-------------------
Three people have been arrested by police investigating the circumcision of a three-month-old boy. A 61-year-old man, believed to be the doctor who carried out the procedure, has been arrested on suspicion of grievous bodily harm with intent. The boy's mother complained to police, saying her son was circumcised without her consent while staying with his paternal grandparents in July 2013. A 44-year-old man and a woman, aged 47, have also been arrested. Nottinghamshire Police said they were arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to commit grievous bodily harm. All three people have been released pending further investigation The doctor previously told the BBC: "It would be inappropriate to comment whilst any investigation is ongoing."
He has not publicly clarified whether or not he had been told the mother had consented to the procedure.
The boy was circumcised in Nottingham on 31 July 2013.
His mother originally contacted social services, then contacted police on 24 November 2014.
There was a police inquiry but the force initially deemed it not to be a criminal matter, and the matter was referred to the General Medical Council.
'True suffering'
The boy's mother believes circumcision amounts to MGM, or "male genital mutilation", and is "inhumane".
She says her son, now aged four, has suffered recurring physical problems including inflammation and water infections.
"I am deeply hurt by what has happened to my son and the suffering I have been forced to witness," she said.
"No amount of money in the world could make right what's been done, and my only hope is to raise awareness of MGM and reveal the true suffering this procedure really inflicts on tiny babies.
"My life will never be the same again and I dread my son growing up and learning what happened to him."
Police reopened the investigation after the mother got help from the anti-circumcision group Men Do Complain and leading human rights lawyer Saimo Chahal QC, who wrote to the force. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-40358944 I waded through the entire article wondering what Metro Goldwyn Mayer had to do with this.... |
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jun 23, 2017 9:08:32 GMT
So much of their best work ended up on the cutting room floor..
|
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jun 23, 2017 9:46:48 GMT
If the procedure is legal there I have no clue how it could be called 'grievous bodily harm' for that boy and not others.
|
|
|
|
Post by tickingmask on Jun 23, 2017 11:20:27 GMT
If the procedure is legal there I have no clue how it could be called 'grievous bodily harm' for that boy and not others. I'm guessing it's because it was done without proper consent. Also the boy's "recurring physical problems" suggest it might have been a botched procedure. Was the doctor not suitably qualified, maybe?
In fact, we're not being told much about this case. Where's the father in all of this? What circumstance caused his parents to be looking after a three-month-old baby? Were they the child's legal guardians, or what?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 11:23:26 GMT
If the procedure is legal there I have no clue how it could be called 'grievous bodily harm' for that boy and not others. It's for the same reason that a surgeon who removes your appendix has done nothing wrong - if you have consented to let him. If he does it against your wishes, then it's classed as a serious assault. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jun 24, 2017 15:04:48 GMT
If the procedure is legal there I have no clue how it could be called 'grievous bodily harm' for that boy and not others. It's for the same reason that a surgeon who removes your appendix has done nothing wrong - if you have consented to let him. If he does it against your wishes, then it's classed as a serious assault. A surgeon who removes your appendix if there is nothing wrong with your appendix HAS violated the basic principle of First Do No Harm. That's why doctors do not remove appendices as a routine procedure, because that would by definition be "harmful". Why is the foreskin different in this regard? |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Jun 24, 2017 16:36:41 GMT
It's for the same reason that a surgeon who removes your appendix has done nothing wrong - if you have consented to let him. If he does it against your wishes, then it's classed as a serious assault. A surgeon who removes your appendix if there is nothing wrong with your appendix HAS violated the basic principle of First Do No Harm. That's why doctors do not remove appendices as a routine procedure, because that would by definition be "harmful". Why is the foreskin different in this regard? It tastes different? ::giveup:: |
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jun 24, 2017 18:30:55 GMT
I am disgusted by non-therapeutic circumcision of kids.
|
|
