New York City's regulation of a Jewish tradition does little more than add to a growing aura of hostility and ignorance surrounding a health decision.
In 2011, San Francisco placed a proposal to ban circumcision on its November ballot. In June 2012, a court in Germany issued an order banning circumcision. And this September, the New York City Health Department voted to regulate a practice called "metzizah b'peh," practiced by many Jews of Eastern European origin, in which the blood from the incision is removed by direct oral suction.
Normally this last, which mandates a consent form outlining the possible (albeit disputed) risks of oral suction, might be seen as a fairly harmless move -- little more than an expression of Mayor Bloomberg's general fondness for regulation. However, in the atmosphere created by the previous two attempted bans, it will do little more than add to a growing aura of hostility toward circumcision. In the minds of many, it will be lumped together with the previous two proposed bans as a direct attack on religious practice.
Nor will anyone's concerns be assuaged if they are brave enough to read the comments to any of the articles on the subject, which always include a slew of opinions calling circumcision "child abuse" and suggesting that its practitioners should be thrown into prison. To select one relatively mild comment on a New York Times article, which was at one point the top "readers pick" comment: "Should the authority of parents over the life of their child extend to making permanent and unnecessary changes to their child's anatomy based solely on their own whims (even if those whims are based in religious beliefs?)"
As a parent, it seems to me that most of these outraged people are unaware of the actual extent of "the authority of parents over the life of their child," including the authority and responsibility to make life-changing decisions for them.
An example: When my daughter was two years old, she developed what is called a pyogenic granuloma -- a benign red skin growth -- in the middle of her forehead. The growth can be removed by laser under general anesthesia, which is what my pediatrician as well as the two specialists I consulted recommended. Despite my discomfort with putting a two-year-old under, my husband and I opted to have the operation performed.
We did not consult our daughter about the matter, nor did we wait until she was old enough to decide for herself. Granulomas often grow and shrink over time, stretching the skin in a way that surgery can not correct. We opted to perform the procedure at the age of two rather than take that risk. We made that choice for our daughter, and every single doctor we spoke to not only thought we had that right but urged us to make that decision.