What say should a 12 yr old have?

[uppityperson]

Having the previous topic go off in the direction of discussing circumcision, I'd like to try again, this time focusing on what rights/responsibilities/ decision making is appropriate for a 12 yr old. Is a 12 yr old capable of (as Occam Bandage put it):
"Yes, I believe that 12-year-olds are capable of deciding not to undergo cosmetic surgery."
"No, I believe that 12-year-olds are not capable of making medical decisions for themselves."

I think a 12 yr old's wishes should be taken into consideration, but then started thinking about other cosmetic vs medical things like piercings. What if a 12 yr old WANTS a circumcision, or a piercing? Not just what if says "no" but what if says "yes"?
(and no, am NOT comparing circumcision with piercing, if you want to argue that, please go to here http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2764867&mesg_id=2771078)

Can we look at this as a legal question?



Previous topic:http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2764867

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hauz0PI_3kYdqBNezvr9DhlBbwLwD8UD1M800
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — The wishes of a 12-year-old boy should be considered in a dispute between his divorced parents about whether he should be circumcised, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled Friday.

The father, James Boldt, converted to Judaism in 2004 and wants the boy to be circumcised as part of the faith. The mother, Lia Boldt, appealed to the high court, saying the operation could harm her son physically and psychologically.

The state Supreme Court ruled that earlier court decisions failed to determine whether the boy wanted the circumcision, as his father contended, or opposed it, as his mother alleged.

The Supreme Court sent the case back to the trial court to answer that question.

Longer articles (showing custody issues):
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hauz0PI_3kYdqBNezvr9DhlBbwLwD8UD4N1O0
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/120132152622450.xml&coll=7

[Maddy McCall]

1. The wishes of 12 YOs are taken into consideration in custody cases.

I think that's what the judge is trying to get at here.

I think that the boy should have the final say.

[uppityperson]

4. What if he/she wants to pierce their face?

what about tattoos? I've been thinking more about this and it gets complicated.

[Maddy McCall]

9. The 12 YO should have the right to HALT a cosmetic procedure.

No parent should be able to force a 12 YO child to have his/her ears pierced, tattoos, etc, when it's not medically necessary.

No parent should be able to force a 12 YO child to have his foreskin removed, when it's not medically necessary.

[uppityperson]

16. I agree. What if a 12 yr old wants to?

What if a 12 yr old says "hey, I want to get circumcised" or "hey, I want my ear pierced"?

[Maddy McCall]

22. Then parents can give permission.

Or they can say NO.

But they should not be able to FORCE a 12 YO (who in many courts can choose who should have custody of him/her in divorce hearings) to endure such procedures if the 12 YO does not wish to.

[uppityperson]

26. And what if 1 parent says yes, 1 no? See post #21 &28

It seems this is the legal question. Is a 12 yr old capable of casting the deciding vote? Seems most people are ok with saying 12 yr old is old enough if says "no", but what about "yes"?

Edited to add, check out post #21 &28. I think this is the issue. Maintaining status quo, opinion counts. Changing, opinion counts less.

[Maddy McCall]

29. Then the child's wishes should be paramount in the decision.

[uppityperson]

31. If your 12 yr old really really wanted a tattoo, and you said no, and other parent said yes

and went ahead and got the flaming skull on the back of his hand...then?

And how is the kid these days? Mine is off traveling the world, and I'm relearning what I used to do before kids.

[Maddy McCall]

33. Then I would assume that the parents are stupid for using the child as a pawn...

Even divorced parents, in MOST circumstances, should co-parent. When I see otherwise, I think that the division between the parents is causing the problem for the child...that the child is being used as a gamepiece in their non-resolved relationship problems. I think that this underlies the circumcision case, too.

My kid's doing great! Just turned 14. Couldn't ask for a better kid--he truly is my life's blessing.

What's your son up to? Traveling the world? Awesome!

[Fresh_Start]

2. on this particular situation, it should be the 12-year olds choice

on vital medical procedures, I'm not so sure that the 12-year old should be able to opt out

[Occam Bandage]

3. Well, here's my opinion.

I would say that for any matter of health or safety, the kid gets no say. I would expand that by automatically ignoring the kid's opinion on any matter in which the decision not to proceed would be irreparable; say, if a 12-year-old wants to decline stitches to prevent scarring of a wound, well, he shouldn't be fully capable of making that decision.

Finally, I don't think that should be interpreted to mean that children should be able to pursue cosmetic procedures. Rather, I think there should exist a means of limited resistance to cosmetic procedures in cases in which it can be demonstrated that there exists reasonable concern that later quality-of-life may be impacted (even in pure matters of preference, such as circumcision), and in which it can be further demonstrated that failure to undergo the procedure in question would not aversely affect the child.

Mercer for America.

[uppityperson]

11. I am glad we have Mercer to give us balance.

[Occam Bandage]

15. Ah, siglines: the hazards of carrying a discussion over from another thread.

[LiberalFighter]

47. If it is cosmetic how will it be paid? Force the parent to pay for it?

Insurance in most cases does not pay for cosmetic surgery. At what point will it be required for parents to pay for it? In all cases including those barely getting by day to day? Those with an income over $100,000?

There are many decisions that parents must make involving their family. And parents must weigh the pros and cons and what is best for everyone.

Kids should get absolutely no right while under the protection of their parents as long as the parents do not harm the child. If they want a tattoo wait until they turn 18. If they want breast enlargement wait until they turn 18. And they can pay for it for themselves.

[GodlessBiker]

5. This would be like forcing the boy to have his ears pierced. It should be his decision.

[uppityperson]

17. What if a 12 yr old wants to? Should it be his decision?

[GodlessBiker]

21. Nope. It has to do with changing the status quo. The change needs his permission.

[uppityperson]

28. Good point. That seems to be the sticking issue with many of us.

To maintain, if says "no", then status quo. To change something, if says "yes", then is not ok. Thank you.

[karlrschneider]

50. Do you bump into a lot of 12 YO boys who want to get circumcised?

I got the snip when I was seven...some goddamn quack doctor persuaded my parents it was good for "hygiene."

They didn't bother to explain to me just exactly what was involved before it was done. Try explaining that to your playmates...grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

:grr: :mad:

[uppityperson]

52. You are replying to my reply to getting ears pierced.

Discussing if a 12 yr old should be legally capable of saying yes or no here. If you want to argue circs, go on over to other thread. You are replying here to my reply back to getting ears pierced, which is a different part of the body.

That's a pain you getting whacked at 7. I guess you had to explain why wrestling was out of the picture for a while, eh?

[Occam Bandage]

6. FOR EVERYONE INTENDING ON POSTING IN THIS THREAD:

Your penis is fine. It is not problematic. No need to defend it; I'm sure it's quite lovely.

If you are female and heterosexual, your partner's penis is assuredly lovely as well.

[uppityperson]

55. Thank you.

[bluestateguy]

7. Yes, it's the boy's choice. It's his body.

Just like a pregnant 12 year old girl should be free to decide for herself if she is going to have an abortion.

[dkf]

8. Is circumcision plastic surgery now? Who knew?

[Quantess]

10. It's similar to forcing a 12 year old to get an abortion

only worse, in my opinion.

[Teaser]

18. Why worse?

the moral questions do not seem be even the same order of magnitude.

Because the fetus isn't really the girl's body? Most of us say it is these days.

[Occam Bandage]

23. I agree; the quick and generally clean removal

of a practically-vestigial flap of skin is not remotely the same as an invasive, comparatively-risky destruction of a human fetus.

[Quantess]

43. Actually, abortion is safer than childbirth.

I'll get a link later when I have time.

[Touchdown]

75. If you want to restrict the debate to 12 year olds' decisions...

don't use words like "vestigial" when that subject is obviously up to debate.:hi:

[Quantess]

34. It's my personal feeling that no 12 year old should have a baby

An abortion would be best for her own sake. Circumcision is cosmetic surgery, comparatively. Also, with pregnancy, there is the sudden turn of events, and urgency to make a decision quickly, compared to something the boy has had all his life and can keep without consequences.

[Teaser]

70. I have no opinions on what's best for other people

not my business.

[uppityperson]

20. What if a 12 yr old wants to?

If it is ok to say no, is it ok to say yes?

[Quantess]

45. I wonder, in states with "parental consent" or "parental notification"

If I had a pregnant 12 year old daughter, I don't think I would allow her to carry out the pregnancy. If my state had parental consent laws, then I would use the law to that effect.
Disclaimer: I have no children.

[uppityperson]

51. How would you force a 12 year old to get an abortion?

I am curious how you would make it happen? If you had a daughter and she were 12 and pregnant. How would you use a parental consent law to force her into an abortion? Parental consent laws means parents must be informed before an abortion is given to a (depends on state as to age) minor.

[Quantess]

67. I'm wondering the same.

I don't know if parents can make a 12 year old get an abortion against her will. If parents can forbid a 12 year old to get an abortion, can't they also forbid her from giving birth?

Edit: I have an good friend who told me she got pregnant as a teenager (I can't remember how old she said she was), and she said her "mom made me get an abortion". That was in Oregon, where there have never been parental consent laws. For the record, she said it was a good decision.

[uppityperson]

69. She could run away for a bit, or some such.

Not sure what parental notification of getting an abortion would have to do with forcing her to get an abortion either. Odd. I do not know of any 12 yr olds who would be capable of being a good parent at age 12 or 13. It could happen, and I do know of someone whose grandparents raised their child since they were very young.

[TheFriendlyAnarchist]

12. I would think about it like piercings. If he says no, then it's not happening.

If he says yes, his parents have to be willing to have it done and sign off for it. Sounds reasonable to me.

[otherlander]

44. Yep.

:thumbsup:

[Hydra]

13. When the 12 yo is facing possible damage or undue risk

their POV should certainly be in play.

And the potential for damage should NOT be downplayed.

My POV is based on recommended open heart surgery for me as a child. They said I wouldn't live without it. Shows what they know.

[aquart]

14. The boy doesn't want his dad's new religion.

Judaism doesn't accept forced converts.

[uppityperson]

24. Not asking about religion but is a 12 yr old capable of making a yes/no decision?

It seems most posters are ok if 12 yr old says "no", then don't do it, but what if a 12 yr old says "yes" and 1 parent doesn't want it?

[Radical Activist]

19. It shouldn't be forced on any boy at any age.

[Occam Bandage]

25. While I understand the point, I think that such a stance removes the distinction between

a procedure performed on a neutral, unaware, and uncaring patient vs. a procedure performed on a reluctant, aware, and emotionally-invested patient.

[Radical Activist]

27. the fact that a baby is completely defenseless and unable to object

makes it all that much more disgusting to me.

[cgrindley]

30. A 12 year old should have the right to deny a cosmetic surgery but not

the right to undertake cosmetic surgery without parental approval.

[uppityperson]

I agree.

It has been interesting thinking about all this though, as to why.

[Occam Bandage]

36. Okay, how about this?

Kid gets gashed on the face. Deep, but not wide. He can either get it cleaned and stitched up tight, or simply leave it to heal on its own (assume equal risk of infection). The first will leave a small scar, the second will leave a clearly-visible scar.

This is a cosmetic procedure, and it's about as invasive as an ear-piercing. Do you think a 12-year-old who says that scars are awesome should be allowed to deny that type of procedure?

[uppityperson]

38. In this case, is status quo a scar? How about a child who has a scar?

1 parent says "get it fixed" other parent says no. Child casts deciding vote?

Seems to be not 1 right answer for all cases.

[Occam Bandage]

39. There is no status quo; status quo is an unhealed wound. The situation

will move to a new status soon, regardless of the intent of all parties involved; depending on the actions taken, it will either become a lifelong small scar, or a lifelong large scar.

[cgrindley]

40. I don't think that meets the standard for cosmetic surgery

as it is a surgery to repair an injury. To me, a cosmetic surgery is one that is utterly without medical necessity. A clearly-visible scar is the end result of a medical event in a way that a big nose (like mine) is not.

[Warren DeMontague]

59. I think that belongs in the same silly hypothetical drawer as the folks who will marry box turtles

dogs, or their grandmother the minute gay marriage is legalized.

I think the issues are pretty clear, here. I don't think "allowing" a 12 year old say in whether he wants the tip of his johnson cut off will someone lead to a wellspring of 12 year olds running around with "awesome" scars. If that extremely unlikely eventuality presents itself, just like if people start arguing gay marriage means they can marry their lawnmowers, then maybe those cases can be dealt with at that time.

[ismnotwasm]

32. Ooow.

Honestly? I would hear all augments of a 12 years old, but I believe the decision needs to rest with adults.

I value the input of 12 years olds, and I personally would permit certain piercing. And I would absolutely honor the wishes of a 12 year old who did not want circumcision, but that is personal for me. (See? I get what you mean)

The thing is we are charging children as young as 10 as adults in certain crimes. I know there isn't much relationship between the two, but it creates a certain dichotomy. A 10 year old commits a crime and is expected to go to adult court, with an adult sentence. Presumably, the 10 year old had complete "say" in committed the crime. A 12 year old doesn't want a physically unnecessary surgical procedure and goes to court to get it stopped, and many will want to honor the wishes of the parents. Our legal system is schizoid like that.

Legally, a 12 year old needs to be protected. If the child feels threatened enough to go to court, I also believe the child has the right to be heard, especially when it comes to surgical procedures.

[Warpy]

35. I think 12 is quite old enough to refuse any unnecessary

invasive procedure, medical or cosmetic. I don't think a 12 year old is old enough to approve an unnecessary invasive procedure because he doesn't have all the facts.

Before the fetus police chime in, let me say that the medical consequences of childbirth in children under 16 are serious enough that abortion could be termed a necessary invasive procedure, one the child herself knows to be necessary and should be able to approve without interference. The fact that she has become sexually active demonstrates she has taken control of her own body and should be able to protect it from the danger of early childbirth.

[BuyingThyme]

37. When I was about ten, my mother gave the okay for a doctor to

remove a little bump from my gums (in my mouth).

When she realized that she hadn't first taken the time to discuss it with me before moving forward, she pretty much broke down in front of me, totally disappointed with herself. (I was in the chair when she gave the okay.)

I can't imagine a mother giving an okay to cut off a piece of a twelve-year-old's penis against his will.

I'm apparently one of the lucky ones.

[TahitiNut]

41. What say should a woman have in circumcision?

Should it be the equivalent 'say' that a man (the father) has in an abortion? Why? Why not?

:evilgrin:

:hide: :hide:

:popcorn:

[uppityperson]

42. Ah, ah, ah. 12 yr old rights.

Popcorn goes elsewhere.

[adadem]

46. I've faced this scenario, sort of

though our son was 10. He was adopted (age 7) and was not circumcised. My husband stressed how he must keep himself clean and showed him how to do it (when he started bathing alone). Over two years he had numerous infections and one ER visit for a very bad one.

We talked about it with him, stressing how he must keep himself clean. The urologist recommended circumcision and we decided to leave it up to him. It's his penis, after all, and he must live with it.

So my answer is yes...a 12 year old should and must have the final say.
There are some things that they are mature enough and able to decide. I think this is one of them.

Our son (with my husband) decided to go for the circumcision. If not for the repeated infections and the especially bad one where his penis swelled double...we would not have addressed this.

[LiberalFighter]

48. That's fine

But a child deciding on their own is not.

[adadem]

53. If he wanted it

to "be like the other boys" I doubt we would have done it unless it was causing psychological problems...which it never did.

But I do think a child should have a say in a religious ritual. Even the final say. Especially if that child is not embracing that religion. It is the boys body and he must live with it...not the father.

I was forced to go to a fundie church until I was 18 (and even then the pressure was unbelievable).
I knew by the age of 9 that I didn't buy their beliefs.

[NashVegas]

49. They've Been Arguing Over This for Three Years - Kid Doesn't Want It. Court Ruling Is Here!

A 9 year old boy in his father's custody is old enough to tell his mom the truth of whether or not he wants to join his father's religion and get cut.

A 12 year old boy - which he is now - is old enough to tell his mom definitively he wants to be circumsized.

The father in this case is being crazy selfish in this case. If the kid wants to get cut at some point down the road, it can happen.

http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S054714.htm

FILED: January 25, 2008

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

In the Matter of the Marriage of

JAMES H. BOLDT,

Respondent on Review,

and

LIA BOLDT,

Petitioner on Review.

Look at these, from the court filings:

On June 1, 2004, mother filed a motion for a temporary restraining order to prevent father from having M circumcised that evening. The trial court held a telephonic hearing on mother's motion that afternoon. Mother testified that, the day before, she had learned from M that father was planning to have M circumcised against M's wishes. She acknowledged that she had known about the possibility of the circumcision for nearly a month, but asserted that she had not known it would happen so soon. She also stated that she had not previously known that M objected to the procedure. Father responded that the court lacked jurisdiction because M had been living with him in Washington for almost two years. He also contended that, as sole custodian of M, he had the authority to make the decision to have M circumcised. Finally, father asserted that (1) M wanted to be circumcised because M wanted to convert to Judaism; (2) M's doctor also had recommended circumcision for medical reasons; and (3) M's doctor would perform the circumcision. Following the telephonic hearing, the trial court entered a temporary restraining order prohibiting M's circumcision until such time as mother had filed a written motion to change custody and the court had held a hearing to consider the jurisdictional issue.

On June 4, 2004, mother filed two motions. The first was a motion for temporary custody under ORS 107.139, (3) or in the alternative, for an order prohibiting father from having M circumcised. The second was a motion to change custody under ORS 107.135. (4) In support of both motions, mother submitted an affidavit in which she alleged that father intended to have M circumcised against M's wishes. She asserted that she was not concerned that M might convert to Judaism, but was concerned that the conversion required him to be circumcised. She alleged that M had told her the day before the planned circumcision that he did not want to be circumcised. She also asserted that M had said that he was afraid to contradict his father regarding the circumcision. Mother averred that, "I hope that ultimately the court will be able to interview in chambers so that his true feelings about this can be determined." Finally, mother expressed concern that a flawed circumcision could result in permanent injury to M.

In his response to those motions, father argued that the court lacked jurisdiction under ORS 109.744(1)(a), (5) because M had lived with father in Washington State since 2002. Father also argued that the court lacked authority to grant mother's motions because (1) granting the motions would violate father's freedom of religion under the religion clauses of the United States and Oregon constitutions; (2) there had not been a substantial change of circumstances since the October 9, 2002, modification justifying a change in custody; (3) it would not be in M's best interest to change custody; (4) the circumcision was medically advisable independent of the religious reasons for it; and (5) although M's wishes were "legally irrelevant," M wanted to be circumcised. Father's response included affidavits from M's half-brother and father's domestic partner. Each of those affidavits stated that M wanted to be circumcised so that he could convert to Judaism. Father also submitted an affidavit from M's urologist, Dr. Ellen. Ellen stated that he had met with M and discussed the procedure with him, that M understood the procedure and had stated that he wanted the circumcision so that he could convert to Judaism. According to Ellen, M did not appear to be coerced. Ellen also stated that there were medical concerns that were sufficient cause for recommendation for the procedure. Ellen averred that circumcision is a safe procedure, that there would be some minor discomfort for about three days that would not prevent M from carrying on normal activities, and that M's circumcision would greatly reduce M's risk of penile cancer and certain infections.
.....

In response, father, joined by amicus curiae American Jewish Congress, American Jewish Committee, Anti-Defamation League, and Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America (collectively, AJC), argues that the trial court did not need to hold an evidentiary hearing, because M's attitude about whether he wants the circumcision is not legally significant. Father asserts that a child is not the decision-maker on such questions, any more than an infant who is circumcised. If the legislature had wanted a male child to have a say in whether he is circumcised, he contends, it could have adopted a statute to that effect, as it has done in other statutes such as ORS 109.610 (giving minors the right to consent to treatment for venereal disease without parental consent). Father also contends that the health risks associated with male circumcision are de minimus. In any case, father maintains that the affidavits he supplied to the trial court demonstrate that M does want to be circumcised.

Finally, father and AJC argue that father has a constitutionally protected right to circumcise his son. They maintain that American Jews must be free to practice circumcision because it is and has been one of the most fundamental and sacred parts of the Jewish tradition. Father concludes that, if this court requires the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing, we would usurp the role of the custodial parent and violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

However, in this case, mother has averred in her affidavit that M objects to the circumcision. (8) In our view, at age 12, M's attitude regarding circumcision, though not conclusive of the custody issue presented here, is a fact necessary to the determination of whether mother has asserted a colorable claim of a change of circumstances sufficient to warrant a hearing concerning whether to change custody. That is so because forcing M at age 12 to undergo the circumcision against his will could seriously affect the relationship between M and father, and could have a pronounced effect on father's capability to properly care for M. See Greisamer, 276 Or at 400 (illustrating proposition). Thus, if mother's assertions are verified the trial court would be entitled to reconsider custody. As to that inquiry, however, we think that no decision should be made without some assessment of M's true state of mind. That conclusion dictates the outcome here.

We remand the case to the trial court with instructions to resolve the factual issue whether M agrees or objects to the circumcision. In order to resolve that question, the trial court may choose to determine M's state of mind utilizing means available to it under the relevant provisions of ORS 107.425. (9) If the trial court finds that M agrees to be circumcised, the court shall enter an order denying mother's motions. If, however, the trial court finds that M opposes the circumcision, it must then determine whether M's opposition to the circumcision will affect father's ability to properly care for M. And, if necessary, the trial court then can determine whether it is in M's best interests to retain the existing custody arrangement, whether other conditions should be imposed on father's continued custody of M, or change custody from father to mother.

The decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed. The supplemental judgment of the circuit court is reversed. The case is remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings.

[uppityperson]

58. If 12 yr old WANTS circumcision, is DU consensus that it's ok?

Thank you for posting that since it seems most assume he's being forced INTO having one, not DENIED having one. According to Dad. It is off to figure out what the kid wants, separate from parents.

So, if he wants one, and 1 parent says no, should he be able to?

[adadem]

61. Yes n/t

[NashVegas]

71. Yeah, But

It *looks* like those who were assuming were assuming correctly.

In the previous hearings, no court took into consideration the boy's own testimony about what he wanted, because he was never brought to testify. You'd think that if his father was able to talk him into a circumcision, he'd expedite things by having him say so directly to a judge or social worker.

[Warren DeMontague]

54. There's a difference -a big one- between initiating something and refusing it.

That seems to be the consensus, and I agree.

[LWolf]

56. A 12 year old should not have to undergo cosmetic surgery

if he or she doesn't want to. Forcing a human to have an unnecessary and invasive procedure against their will is not okay any way you look at it.

That doesn't mean that a 12 year old should be choosing TO have cosmetic surgery, either.

Piercings, circumcision, etc. should require parent permission until a child reaches legal adulthood, but should never be a parent or culture-mandated procedure.

[Withywindle]

57. My God, what will they do to the poor kid if the court rules in the father's favor?

Strap him down kicking and screaming until the anaesthetic kicks in?

saying the operation could harm her son physically and psychologically.

Ya think?

[uppityperson]

60. If it rules in dad's favor, it means court decided kid says yes.

This is the issue going on now, did the kid say yes or no. If he says no, I think we all agree that he shouldn't be forced into one. But dad says he said yes, and what if court finds out kid DOES WANT one?

[SoCalDem]

62. Depends on the maturity of the child.. Our son decided on surgery when he was 8

he had already had 29 surgeries by that time..and the life-altering surgery he eventually had at age 8 was MOSTLY his decision.

We let him choose because HE was the one who had to undergo all the prior "experimental" surgeries that had all failed.

He loved and trusted his doctor and was always kept in the loop about his condition, and by the time he was 8, he had a very "old" soul.

He knew that we tried EVERYTHING, and the surgery he ended up with "could: have been done while he was a baby, but he was glad to have a say in the decision...and he knew that we literally HAD tried everything possible.

Not the same as circumcision, but kids sometimes should be consulted when it involves THEIR body :)

[uppityperson]

63. Wow

was he, is he, ok?

[SoCalDem]

65. Yep.. he's 34 now, married, successful

and he's thanked us many times for allowing him to decide..

He ended up having a urostomy, and has always managed quite well, but if we had "done that" TO him as a baby, her would have always wondered why we did not 'try everything" to avoid it.

By the time he decided, he was tired of the midnight emergency surgeries when something sprang a leak..and the never-ending worry about the integriity of his kidneys.

he hated being "different" from the other kids, but it made him strong and determined to succeed, in spite of what he had to deal with..

[dysfunctional press]

64. just because the father converted to judaism...

does it automatically mean that the kids are converted as well?

and wouldn't it be the MOTHER who would have to convert, in order for the children to be considered jewish?

[Orsino]

66. No doctor should perform elective surgery...

...without the consent of the patient and the parents/guardians.

[uppityperson]

68. Both parents? All guardians?

What if 1 parent is guardian and other one isn't? Just asking questions here.

[Orsino]

72. I'd include only parents with legal custody.

Trickier still is: at what age can a child give consent for a procedure?

[bean fidhleir]

73. Many 12yos have shouldered adult responsibilities. So they should have a huge say

in questions that concern them.

[Touchdown]

74. It's the 12 y/o's body. He's got to live the rest of his life with the decision.

So that decision should not be up to someone who is only a parent for another six years. Ultimately the question comes down to ownership of one's own body (not unlike a woman's right to control her own body and reproductive choices). I believe Parents are only temporary stewards of a baby, child, teen, and that ultimately nothing unnecessary be done to that human until he/she is an adult and can make their own choices. He's a son, not property.

This is not an emergency. This boy is not in any medical danger by keeping his foreskin another 6 years until he's an adult. If it's made for him, then he lives with it for the rest of his life, and Dear Old Dad suffers nothing from it, which could lead to resentment, or much worse.