New York, NY – Report: Agudath Israel Plans To Sue NYC Over Metzitzah B’peh

    32

    New York, NY – Agudath Israel is making plans to sue the City of New York in the event that the Department of Health approves the measure requiring parents to sign an informed consent document prior to the performance of metzitzah b’peh, according to an e-mail obtained by The Jewish Week (http://bit.ly/UHwTxM). DOH is set to vote on the proposal this Thursday.

    Join our WhatsApp group

    Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email


    In the e-mail, Agudath Israel’s general counsel, Mordechai Biser writes that the organization is seeking a New York-based law firm to work pro-bono or on “a reduced rate basis” to bring “a lawsuit against the City of New York to prevent the City from issuing a regulation that would require written parental consent for an aspect of bris milah (‘metzitzah b’peh’).”

    The legal premise for the lawsuit is “that this regulation is unconstitutional on the grounds that it interferes with both freedom of religion and speech (the latter, because it requires the mohel to distribute certain information to parents).” The e-mail continues, “We are concerned that if this regulation goes into effect, the next step will be further regulation of bris milah.”

    Mr. Biser did not respond to requests for comment.


    Listen to the VINnews podcast on:

    iTunes | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Stitcher | Podbean | Amazon

    Follow VINnews for Breaking News Updates


    Connect with VINnews

    Join our WhatsApp group


    32 Comments
    Most Voted
    Newest Oldest
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    Ben_Kol
    Ben_Kol
    11 years ago

    Agudah is suing for the right to continue inserting saliva into a baby’s open wound, an act that has caused death, permanent brain damage, and disease. Many years ago I bought a lifetime membership in the Agudah. I now wish to leave.

    FredE
    FredE
    11 years ago

    They have reached true insanity. Is anyone here thinking of something objective, like reducing infection risks? What a tremendous Chillul Hashem on Agudah’s part.
    Not to mention the fact that they will lose.

    YGeller
    YGeller
    11 years ago

    can someone explain to me how this any different than signing consent for any medical procedure?

    bubii
    bubii
    11 years ago

    They are bringing anti-semitism on the jewish population,the nerve they have to sue is beyond comprehention they know they are 100 per cent wrong and they have the audacity to open their mouth ,they are beyond the pale.

    shalomke
    shalomke
    11 years ago

    If Mohalim would agree to an annual medical exam registered with the city none of this would be neccesary.

    Aryeh
    Aryeh
    11 years ago

    The government shall make no law interfering with the free practice of religion. There are no documented medical risks to MBP, not a single study, not one confirmed case of infection subject to peer review. There are however, great risks, well documented, that show a far greater chance of complications resulting from physician performed circumcisions.

    11 years ago

    I am no Constitutional lawyer, but I fail to see how this would be an abridgement of free speech. I think Mr. (Rabbi?) Biser does not understand that the first amendment prohibits censure. Requiring speech is not illegal. In fact, it’s required all the time. Check just about any product in the store or your house and you will find warning labels. On food packaging you will find nutritional information.

    It also does not interfere with religion in the sense that it prohibits the practice thereof. And even if it did, there’s legal precedent for that too.

    And on top of all that, he has the Chutzpah to be looking for a lawyer to work for (almost) nothing! If this is a real issue, pony up the money yourself!

    abeytt03
    abeytt03
    11 years ago

    This is a chillul hashem and I am uneasy about the Agudah being a voice for our community. Nobody is threatening bris milah, rather they are simply asking for our community to conform to recognized safety measures which ensure the safety of children.

    This is a losing issue for the Agudah, and will further marginalize the Agudah as a representative body for klal yisroel. I hope they cut their losses and stop this lunacy now.

    ithegenius
    ithegenius
    11 years ago

    First of all mbp has been around longer than any of us so don’t claim health issues. Second I don’t trust mohalim these days as much as my parents did when I was 8 days old so I think we should always practice safety and have them checked out or with a current Dr. Note. Third is lawsuit is just for awareness, we don’t want awareness we want privacy so agudath Israel is being counter productive

    My2Cents
    My2Cents
    11 years ago

    It’s not like they banned it. Whats wrong with signing a consent that you’re aware of the possible risks as low percentage that they might be, just that you’re aware. Stupid Lawsuit, Agudah is doing more harm than good lately.

    FredE
    FredE
    11 years ago

    Actually, IMHO mbp should be totally illegal. End of story. Its not m’akeiv
    in the brit and it costs at least some lives. As far as studies, there have been a few. They show infection rates for herpes from this at 1 in 4000. But if your baby is that 1, he is toast.

    This is avoidable. Now that we know the science, what heter do you
    have to endanger even that 1 in 4000 for a …minhag? Whats wrong
    with you people?

    my4amos
    my4amos
    11 years ago

    What bothers me slightly is that the Agudah “is seeking a New York-based law firm to work pro-bono or on “a reduced rate basis”.” I hope that such firm will prove to be effective but have my own thoughts about pro-bono or sliding scale services. If the Agudah is serious about pursuing the lawsuit, I will approach my friends of means about contributing towards Agudah’s retaining the best possible representation. Any reader here wishing to contribute knows how to contact the Agudah. Thank you.

    kehati
    kehati
    11 years ago

    I come from a segment from K’lal Yisrael that does not practice mbp and there are probably some health risks involved ;however, I find it to be the height of hypocrisy that the NYC administration not only allows but actually glorifies toeivah and allows anyone, to participate in it without “consents” despite the inevitable horrendous public health (as well as financial ) costs resulting from it.

    RachelJD
    RachelJD
    11 years ago

    I wish people would stop spewing words without understanding them. Neither the federal government nor a state may limit or demand, or punish a religious belief. However, religious PRACTICE may be regulated or limited Since freedom of relligion is a fundamental right, the government must have a compelling interest for the regulation. However, the regulation of the practice must be done in the least restrictive manner possible. NYC is NOT trying to stop Brit Milah. It is seeking to protect infants’ health, which is a compelling state interest. Handing a piece of paper with some information does not prohibit them from proceeding with the brit.
    If Agudah believes this to be such a serious issue, then pay the legal fees required instead of looking for freebies.

    Bacteria is normally present on the surface of our skins and in our mouths. It usually causes no problems unless there is a cut and the bacteria enters the blood stream. So what if people claim the risk is minimal to the baby from the mohel using his mouth to suction the blood of the cut. If it were my child, I would not want to take the risk. Use a pipette

    DavidCohen
    DavidCohen
    11 years ago

    What baffles me is that we do already have a precedent whereby medical advances are used in brisim. If that were not the case, we’d not be using sharp metal blades, but stones as Tziporah did. Evidently it is indeed permissible to learn from and leverage medical knowledge and advances. And now that we know how dangerous oral bacteria is to an open wound on a newborn, we should have the brains to leverage that knowledge, too.

    It is worth noting that the Rambam (a greater baal halacha than anyone in the Agudah, and a physician) states that blood should be removed from the wound so as to not introduce danger (obviously referring to the chance of infection). He makes no mention of oral suction whatsoever. Rambam provides the specific reason for removal of the blood, it is nothing to do with kaballah or hiddur mitzvah or anything spiritual, it is simple to prevent infection. Before we had plastics and pipettes, and before we knew about how infection spreads, many realized that removing excess blood was a priority that demanded even oral suction. But now that we know better, we can still adhere to the Rambam’s ruling, without having to endanger even one child.