mls@ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP (Michael Schneider) (07/30/85)
Two weeks ago I read in the Jewish Chronicle (an English weekly) that two women had brought lawsuits against Mohels. Not because they did a "bad job," but because they performed Brit Milea in the first place. One of the women was the wife of the Berkeley Hillel Rabbi, so said the article. Is this true? Can anyone provide more information. I know there are cases when Brit Milea is not permitted, but according to the article, the women were saying that performing this mitzva disfigured the baby's body. Before making a comment, I would like more information. Mike Schneider
alan@cae780.UUCP (Alan M. Steinberg) (08/07/85)
>Two weeks ago I read in the Jewish Chronicle (an English weekly) that two women >had brought lawsuits against Mohels. Not because they did a "bad job," but >because they performed Brit Milea in the first place. One of the women was >the wife of the Berkeley Hillel Rabbi, so said the article.I know there are >cases when Brit Milea is not permitted, but according to the article, the >women were saying that performing this mitzva disfigured the baby's body. The report is factual. This caused a barrage of letters to the editor of the Northern California Jewish Bulletin, mainly from supporters of Brit Milah. The rabbi's wife was going to sue as guardian of the baby, because the child was not old enough to make such a decision of religious commitment with the bodily sacrifice. It was claimed that the child's suffering was a traumatic experience which would affect him for life (is that why us male Jews are so strange? :-) ). In the wake of all the negative publicity, the law suits were dropped. -- Alan Steinberg {ucbvax}!decwrl!amdcad!cae780!alan Helllllp, Mr. Wizarrrrrrd!!! I don't want to be a programmer anymoooore..."