In recent weeks, a controversial Jewish circumcision practice gained the national spotlight after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that between 2000 and 2011, at least 11 New York infants contracted genital herpes following ritual circumcision. Two of the babies died. This is distressing news to all who are concerned about the health and welfare of children.
The practice, called metzitzah b'peh, or oral suction, is used by a small number of Orthodox mohels (Jewish ritual circumcisers). Many assume this practice is a hallmark of strict religious observance -- for better or worse, the ultimate in adherence to Jewish tradition. What's rarely considered is the way in which metzitzah b'peh conflicts with basic Jewish principles.
Metzitzah b'peh is uncommon even among those Jews who opt for religious circumcision of their sons. Following the circumcision, the mohel takes a sip of wine and quickly removes the blood from the penis through the wine, using his mouth. He then spits the mixture out. Instituted in Talmudic times, long before the germ theory of disease was understood, metzitzah b'peh was once thought to disinfect the wound.
Now that we understand that metzitzah b'peh violates basic sanitary precautions, we must question it from the point of view of Jewish principles. It is a basic tenet of Judaism that human life is infinitely valuable, to be preserved at all costs, even if that means failing to fulfill some aspects of religious observance. Additionally, hazardous medical procedures are strictly forbidden in Judaism unless necessary for preservation of life.
Metzitzah b'peh is clearly hazardous and has no life-saving purpose. And herpes is only one of many diseases that we know can be transmitted orally.
Jewish law is constantly evolving. Our practices change as we learn. If we discover that a previously accepted Jewish tradition is dangerous -- or if we simply learn that there's a more compassionate way to act, one that is more consistent with Jewish principles than the previous interpretation -- it's incumbent on us to modify or discontinue the tradition.
There is ample precedent in Jewish law for change based on new insights. In Talmudic times, for example, the rabbis prohibited deaf Jews from participating fully in Jewish life. Today, deaf people are considered completely equal even among the most observant Jews. That is, Talmudic laws about the deaf are no longer honored even by the Orthodox. Our understanding increased, and our traditions changed.
The practice of Jewish circumcision has evolved over time. Most observant Jews have adopted a modified version of metzitzah, in which blood is removed from the circumcision site with a sterile pipette rather than through oral contact. Another example is the fact that over the last 25 years, many mohels who are also physicians have started administering local anesthesia. This is in response to current data establishing that infants feel pain acutely, as measured by heart rate, respiratory rate and cortisol levels. In both examples, circumcision practice has been modified to accommodate what we've learned.
The last few decades have brought revelations about the drawbacks of circumcision in general. Researchers are beginning to understand the physiological purpose and erogenous nature of foreskin tissue; many argue that the foreskin is a valuable and functioning part of normal male anatomy. Additionally, even without metzitzah b'peh, circumcision carries the risk of complications and death from sepsis, hemorrhage and other causes. All this has led a small number of Jews to question not only how circumcisions are performed, but the very act itself.
It may be tempting for some to defend metzitzah b'peh. Recently, an editorial appeared in EmaxHealth.com suggesting that anti-viral medicine should be considered for the infant as a prophylactic measure. This proposed solution, involving a risky and unnecessary intervention on a newborn, is no substitute for an honest reappraisal of metzitzah b'peh.
To suggest that we should never make changes based on new information is to imply that Judaism cannot withstand inquiry, that it cannot grow. Judaism has evolved and thrived over thousands of years. May it continue to do so.
Rivka T. Cohen: I Was Raised Orthodox, Yet I Am Not Considered 'Jewish Enough' to Keep the Sabbath
Philo of Alexandria (20 BCE –50 CE) , Of the Special Laws:
To these [reasons for circumcision] I would add that I consider circumcision to be a symbol of two things necessary to our well being. One is the EXCISION OF PLEASURES which bewitch the mind. For since among the love-lures of pleasure the prize is held by the mating of man and woman, the legislators thought good to dock the organ which ministers to such intercourse...
The other reason is that a man should know himself and banish from the soul the grievous malady of conceit.
Moses Maimonides (1135 CE - 1204 CE), Guide for the Perplexed:
With regard to circumcision, one of the reasons for it is, in my opinion, the wish to bring about a DECREASE IN SEXUAL INTERCOURSE AND A WEAKENING OF THE ORGAN IN QUESTION, so that this activity be diminished and the organ be in as quiet a state as possible....
The sages, may their memory be blessed, have explicitly stated: "It is hard for a woman with whom an uncircumcised man has had sexual intercourse to separate from him." In my opinion this is the strongest of the reasons for circumcision.
Jews are people who question everything, right? There it is in the Torah, humans arguing with God. Why is this one thing, circumcision, off limits for questioning?
Brent & Kilburn Times (London)
June 22, 2012
Queen's Park baby bled to death two days after being circumcised
Inquest hears 28-day-old tot lost three-quarters of his total blood volume
A one-month-old baby from Queen’s Park bled to death less than two days after he was circumcised, an inquest heard.
Angelo Ofori-Mintah’s operation went according to plan, but a few hours later the incision began to bleed.
Westminster Coroner’s Court heard it eventually stopped and his mother Maame Abrafi, who lives in Ashmore Road, thought he was fine.
However the following day he became cold and pale and was rushed to hospital with dangerously low oxygen levels.
He suffered a cardiac arrest and died in the early hours of February 17.
Tests revealed he had lost about three-quarters of his total blood volume and died as a result of an acute haemorrhage due to circumcision.
... Deputy Coroner Shirley Radcliffe [said]...
Rabbi Cohen was entirely blameless for the tragedy.
Directing her comments to Mrs Abrafi, Mrs Radcliffe said: “This is simply a tragic accident, an unforeseen consequence of the surgical procedure that this baby undertook.
[What's unforseen? "If you cut me, do I not bleed?" The baby didn't "undertake" anything.]
Verdict: Accidental death.
(And, so what. There's slavery in the bible, too. But modern humans realize that slavery is a human rights violation. And so is cutting off healthy, normal parts of other people.)
(60% less chance of male being infected - 12 test programs. 80% males agreed and more of women for their men and children. Both concerned only of costs. WHO sponsers now and there is a map on site showing which countries have been done. Clinton was one of the instigators of the plan.
Women genital disfiguration is a Crime Against Humanity - stipulated. See WHO.
You guys have to faces; you do not mind parents letting their kids do tattoos, piercings, having sex, undergo apportions and much more. But it bugs you that Jews circumcise their kids.
Do we need to evolve? You need to evolve with the “modern” degenerate western society of people with no values.
You are right about two faced though, I and other Americans, GIVE Israel billions of dollars each year, then criticize you. We should stop giving you the cash and not be hypocrites, and let you defend yourself If we need a base in the mid east we have Iraq, and it's got oil, plus you guys have ticked off so much of the world is starting to become unsafe. Circumcision doesn't protect from bombs.
http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/magazine/even-in-israel-more-and-more-parents-choose-not-to-circumcise-their-sons.premium-1.436421#
This is a wise and compassionate choice.
"An informal online survey conducted in 2006 by the Israeli parenting portal Mamy found that of 1,418 parents of boys, 4.8 percent did not have them circumcised. The reasons given: 1.6 percent were not Jews; 2 percent objected to disfiguring the body; and 1.2 percent refrained because the act is painful.
The survey also found that nearly a third of the parents would prefer to forgo circumcision but nevertheless have it done for social reasons (16.6 percent), health reasons (10.4 percent) and because it is important for the grandparents (2.1 percent)."
Judean Priests who wrote Genesis 17 (P text) 13 centuries after Abraham's putative lifetime that called for male circumcision of infants. A initiation rite not so much for the infant but of the father who must circumcise his son himself for he is cognizant of the event whereas the infant is not. These type of circ.s were the cutting off the acroposthion (the part that hangs past the glans). No damage of tearing the foreskin from the glans (thus results scarring from the cut up to the tip of the glans) and no amputating the part covering the glans. The radical circ.,medically penile reduction, as we do happens centuries later. The Torah says not to mark the body, the original Covenant jives with the earliest Judea.
Nowhere in the Torah is there any mention that brit milah requires that the freshly circumcised penis be in contact with anyone's mouth. Metzitzah B'peh is a weird human custom, and not a divine commandment by any stretch of the imagination. It can be outlawed, and in light of what has been happening among the haredim in greater New York, it MUST be banned.
Turning brit milah into a free adult choice, and convincing Reform and Conservative rabbis to completely accept uncircumcised male congregants, are goals that we can work towards over the balance of this century.
I'm glad you feel this way. So then let's stop the very uncompassionate slicing of human penises which belong to babies who cannot consent, and for whom this ritual has no meaning other than brutal pain.
" It is a basic tenet of Judaism that human life is infinitely valuable, to be preserved at all costs, even if that means failing to fulfill some aspects of religious observance. "
Some babies die from circumcision. Some babies lose their penises (and sometimes raised as girls). Some are permanently maimed. Many have problems from being circumcised, often ones they don't even know are from circumcision. If we are to follow the precautionary principle, it follows that we should ditch circumcision altogether. After all, how much risk to a baby's life is acceptable, in the name of tradition?
I f dont get a reponse this means you are a little biased and maybe with another agenda. I little apology would suffice.
I havent personally heard of anyone in my family , friends or in the IDF but accept that it could happen. ( I guess some Christian babies are drowned.)
More important is the genital (clitoris or much more) disfirgamentation of Arab Muslim or Arab women or Muslim women , mainly at a late age (11) held down by family, against will, using stones for cutting and without anaesthetics. NOT religous act. There are today 69million who have gone trough this . The WHO calls this a Crime against humanity.
Nobody seems to object and I believe there is one org. working on this but have no funds and I couldnt google it.
Suspiciously soon after that, the whole circumcision campaign was a done deal, complete with handbooks laying out the smallest details. Somehow VOLUNTARY ADULT circumcision has morphed into mass infant circumcision without the slightest smidgin of evidence that cutting babies has ever had the slightest effect on HIV/AIDS.
So it is no use to wave the WHO or UNAIDS at us as if they had just down from a mountain with tablets of stone.