Arrest ordered for woman who fled with son over circumcision
MATT SEDENSKY, Associated Press

DELRAY BEACH, Florida (AP) — A judge issued an arrest order Tuesday for a woman who fled with her son to prevent his circumcision and ignored a demand to appear in court.

Circuit Judge Jeffrey Gillen signed the order in a seven-minute hearing, three days after finding Heather Hironimus in contempt and warning that she would face imprisonment unless she reported to court with the child.

Her attorney, Thomas Hunker, said his client is staying with her 4-year-old son in a shelter for domestic violence victims because the boy was "scared to death" of undergoing the surgery.

Hironimus and the boy's father, Dennis Nebus, were never married but share custody of their child. In a parenting agreement filed in court, the two agreed to the boy's circumcision, but the mother later changed her mind, leading to a long court battle. Circuit and appellate judges have sided with the father, but potential surgeons have backed out after refusing to get the mother's consent or becoming the target of anti-circumcision protesters who side with her.

Although circumcision rates have fallen in the U.S., a majority of boys still undergo the procedure to remove their foreskin. Meanwhile, a movement opposing circumcision has developed, and the case has become a rallying cry for so-called "intactivists" who deride the surgery as barbaric. A small group of those anti-circumcision advocates gathered outside the court to demonstrate in support of Hironimus, and expressed outrage over the judge's order.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-03-11

It's clear that the woman is in contempt of court, and the arrest warrant was correct.....however, sometimes the law is an ass.

I am pro-cut, but the boy is 4, and although a minor, he, apparently, doesn't want the procedure.

In a situation that is irreversible, I would tend to side with the mother and boy.

It's clear that the woman is in contempt of court, and the arrest warrant was correct.....however, sometimes the law is an ass.

I am pro-cut, but the boy is 4, and although a minor, he, apparently, doesn't want the procedure.

In a situation that is irreversible, I would tend to side with the mother and boy.

brouhaha

"brouhaha"

Another Troll wasting everyone's time??

As far as a four year old goes, guess it was not for religious reasons so why do it without the boys agreement. Let him wait until he is old enough to legally decide for himself.

I agree, get the boys opinion. So far he has been afraid of the surgery, doesn't it say something?

I do not know the reason for the procedure, could be Religion or Health concerns. Whatever; A four year old child is too young to make irreversible decisions.

Had this procedure at age 12. Nothing to do with religion, my Mother and I agreed to the procedure.

If there are no pressing medical reasons ( I was circumsized at 3 years of age because of continuous infections) why press it upon the child? Although the mother consented initially, a person is allowed to change their mind, surely!

And as said before, it is irreversible!

Does not take away the fact that I'm very happy with being circumsized, for medical, esthetical and pleasure reasons!

I agree, get the boys opinion. So far he has been afraid of the surgery, doesn't it say something?

I've stated my stance on the matter, but to play devil's advocate for a while...... 4 years old is very young to have an opinion with weight that we should take too seriously. He may not like eating his vegetables or washing behind his ears either, and he may think that it would be cool if Santa Claus became president.

Also, at 4, his opinion could very easily have been influenced by his mother. Very easily.

So I don't think his 4 year old opinion should count for much.

My reference to his age in my earlier post was more with regard to him being conscious of what will happen.....as opposed to a babe in arms.

The U.S. is one of two states only, which have signed the UNCRC, but not ratified it. There lies the problem for the child.

If the boy says no, it is no, after all it is his body.

The father is an ass and a bully and needs an old fashioned attitude adjustment.

The boy will hate him for that for the rest of his life.

The insensitive judge is upholding the law in a black and white manner, there are grey areas where the answer lays.

Barbaric custom for no reason at all. Keep fighting boy, don't let anyone cut anything off!

you god loving people ... so this for you

if god did not want you to have foreskin, he would have made you without

he made you in his image, so god also have foreskin

why go torture a child ? for some stupid belief you have ....

santa claus does not excist, jesus was just a guy, that the church used some fabels, to exploited / enslave people, same as koran

Florida is a State of extremes and political games.

Terri Schiavo was in a vegetative state for 8 years due to a heart attack before her husband petitioned the court to disconnect her life support. In 2001 the court agreed and she was taken off life support. But then doctors feared lawsuits from her death and reconnected the support. Meanwhile, for the next four years the Republican Governor and Republican President Bush attempted to pass laws to keep her on life support indefinitely while filing court appeals - all over the objections of her husband.

It became a political game at the sacrafice of human dignity. Not unfamiliar territory for the Republican Party.

Why would you wait until the kid is 4 years old? If you really see a need to have it done I would think it's best done as an infant!

So mom is hiding in a shelter, must be more to this story. I wonder why they did not due this when the boy was a baby ? I do not see how a court could order this procedure to be done either.

Maybe need to let child decide when he is old enough.

I agree with the previous post. What if it was a little girl that didn't want the Muslim female circumcision? Would the court have the same ruling? The Father should have no rights in this matter due to the fact their is no legality through marriage. I assume there are no support arrangements being made outside the court. if not, she has full custody, and decisions made in this issue is hers.

The boy is only a child.

I hope sensible people around the boy and for that matter in all of the US, stand up and protect the boy against this idiot custom, and particular against his father.

Since when is authority deciding what to do with some boy's penis. If only could the boy defend himself. And you mother keep going and defend the boy with your life. And you judge you ought to be ashamed of yourself, you in the first place have to protect the rights of a 4 year old, and not some idiot father, who does not care about the welfare of his son.

If the boy says no, it is no, after all it is his body.

The father is an ass and a bully and needs an old fashioned attitude adjustment.

The boy will hate him for that for the rest of his life.

The insensitive judge is upholding the law in a black and white manner, there are grey areas where the answer lays.

In response to your 1st comment - would you apple the same reasoning to him brushing his teeth?

As someone who had to get circumcised in my mid 20s I can only say that in the long run the dad would be doing him a big favour by getting it done now.
Even better would be in the first few months after birth.

An early unkind cut.

I put it along with "clit pealing" where the clitoris hood is removed surgically. Ask women if they approve of that very similar operation.

I do not know the reason for the procedure, could be Religion or Health concerns. Whatever; A four year old child is too young to make irreversible decisions.

Had this procedure at age 12. Nothing to do with religion, my Mother and I agreed to the procedure.

Why You had it done?

It's clear that the woman is in contempt of court, and the arrest warrant was correct.....however, sometimes the law is an ass.

I am pro-cut, but the boy is 4, and although a minor, he, apparently, doesn't want the procedure.

In a situation that is irreversible, I would tend to side with the mother and boy.

I am uncut and the g/f says she gets a little extra sensation. The drawback is you get a build up of head cheese if you do not keep it clean.

So female circumcision is against the law in most civilized countries,

but this poor lad is been forced to have it done by his father and the

courts.

regards Worgeordie

This really is a job for a good judge.

If I were the judge I'd have issued an arrest warrant as well. Once mother and child presented themselves in court and if no urgent reason to have the procedure was obvious, I'd then have said, "Come back and see me in a year". In some cases the procedure is urgently required. If not urgent, it's called elective surgery... unless religion is involved.... then it's called fundamentalist nonsense.

In Scandinavia they have laws against cutting the tails on young puppy dogs, this because it's cruel. What more with 4 year old boy's foreskins.

It's clear that the woman is in contempt of court, and the arrest warrant was correct.....however, sometimes the law is an ass.

I am pro-cut, but the boy is 4, and although a minor, he, apparently, doesn't want the procedure.

In a situation that is irreversible, I would tend to side with the mother and boy.

I am uncut and the g/f says she gets a little extra sensation. The drawback is you get a build up of head cheese if you do not keep it clean.

Never heard of something like that.. but girls would say a lot to please their meal ticket.

I am uncut and if we were meant to be cut then we would be born like that.

I thaught this thing went out with the dark ages in the civelised world same as woman genatalia mutilation now an ilegal practice in the UK, well done to the mother stick up for what you believe in obviously your son comes first in your life.

I am so glad I am not circumsiced,and that after 78 years.Of course it is necessary to keep ones dick clean,cut or not. Hygene,right ? then shave off the pubes,male and female..

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

If the boy says no, it is no, after all it is his body.

The father is an ass and a bully and needs an old fashioned attitude adjustment.

The boy will hate him for that for the rest of his life.

The insensitive judge is upholding the law in a black and white manner, there are grey areas where the answer lays.

In response to your 1st comment - would you apple the same reasoning to him brushing his teeth?

NO !!

I don't get this circumcision thing.

If it is a mutilation for females it also is a mutilation for males.

To my knowledge it is not done in Europe.

I don't get this circumcision thing.

If it is a mutilation for females it also is a mutilation for males.

To my knowledge it is not done in Europe.

What I heard (and I can be wrong) in the past it was done to curb sexual desire and masturbation in men. The US always was a bit prude maybe that was the reason.

And I could be wrong don't all fall over this comment.