Government Responses

The responses below are listed in reverse chronological order. For an alphabetical listing by state, please see our Site Map page.

The following letter from Oregon Rep. John Lim was forwarded to us by Ms. Trisha Darner in Medford, Oregon:

Dear Mrs. Darner,

Thank you for your e-mail regarding issues of circumcision. These issues are new and educational for me, and I will look forward to researching them here in the near future. At this time, I have yet to hear of any bills involving matters of circumcision, but would enjoy studying any additional information concerning this issue. I firmly believe that any minors having a circumcision must have written parental approval and will seriously consider your e-mail when a bill of this matter reaches the floor. I have heard of and read many horror stories of this issue and will stand firmly against doctors whom practice in this manner. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any additional questions or concerns. Your time and thoughts are greatly appreciated. I look forward to hearing more from you in the near future.

God Bless,

Representative John Lim

District 50

We welcome Rep. Lim's willingness to research the health and human rights consequences of forced circumcision. Perhaps after doing so, he will realize that parents should not be allowed to legally approve circumcision for their sons any more than they can legally approve circumcision for their daughters.

The following letter from Senator John Warner was forwarded to us by Ms. Kari Kilgore in St. Paul, Virginia:

Dear Ms. Kilgore:

Thank you for sending me a copy of a proposed bill regarding male genital mutilation. I appreciate you making this effort and offering me the opportunity to write to you.

As you know, to date, there has been no legislation related to male genital mutilation introduced in the 110^th Congress. Though I am not a member of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, which would have jurisdiction over this matter, please be assured that I will be certain to monitor any committee hearings or reports, and will keep your thoughts in mind should related legislation come before the full Senate.

In a related matter, you may be interested to know that on January 5, 2007, Congresswoman Jackson-Lee (D-TX) introduced H.RES.32, a resolution denouncing the practices of female genital mutilation, domestic violence, “honor” killings, acid burnings, dowry deaths, and other gender-based persecutions. This resolution was agreed to by a vote of 378-0. To date, no similar legislation has been introduced in the U.S. Senate.

Again, thank you for contacting me.

With kind regards, I am

Sincerely,

John Warner

United States Senator

We appreciate Senator Warner's response and consideration of our proposed bill. We also wish that Rep. Jackson-Lee and Congress had included male genital mutilation in H. RES.32 as a way to draw attention to the 13 million male genital mutilations that occur annually around the world - a number roughly six times greater than the 2 million female genital mutilations that occur each year.

The following letter from Oregon Rep. Tina Kotek's office was forwarded to us by Ms. Trisha Darner in Medford, Oregon:

Dear Ms. Darner,

Thank you for writing Rep. Kotek to voice your concerns about male infant circumcision. Your email is well-argued and well-researched and it is clear that you are very passionate about this issue. I will be sure that Rep. Kotek sees your information. Rep. Kotek's office will look into issue of male infant circumcision for the 2009 session, however, your advocacy would be most effective if you worked closely with your state legislators, Sen.Alan Bates and Rep. Sal Esquivel.

Thank you for your advocacy.

Best regards,

Nellie

Nellie McAdams, Legislative Assistant
State Representative Tina Kotek
North/NE Portland, House District 44

(503) 286-0558
900 Court Street H-285
Salem, OR 97301
rep.tinakotek@state.or.us

As Chair of the Health Care Subcommittee on Health Policy, Rep. Kotek could play a key role in helping to pass the Oregon MGM Bill. We look forward to working with her in 2009.

The following letter from the Chief of Staff for Oregon Senator Alan Bates was forwarded to us by Ms. Trisha Darner in Medford, Oregon:

Ms. Darner -

Thank you for writing our office about your concerns. Male circumcision is not an easy issue, as there are historical, cultural, religious, and personal issues involved. While Senator Bates certainly respects your position and recognizes the risks of any medical procedure (he is a family physician), he would not support a bill that outlaws male circumcision. It is true that we are not gender-neutral in our laws regarding circumcision, but Senator Bates does not believe that female and male circumcision are comparable from a cultural or medical standpoint. Female circumcision has no medical indication and its cultural practice is used primarily to subjugate women. Although there is not consensus about it, there is evidence that circumcision can be medically advantageous and it's cultural practice is not intended to be abusive or a means of subjugation.

Again, thank you for bringing this issue to our attention and I appreciate having this discussion. Unfortunately, as a family physician, this is not a position that Senator Bates can support, both from a medical and a cultural perspective.

Erin Fair
Chief of Staff
Senator Alan Bates
503-986-1703

Female and male circumcision are far more alike than they are different. Female circumcision also has potential medical benefits, and physicians introduced male circumcision in America to suppress masturbation. While MGMbill.org respects each person's right to alter his or her own genitals, we believe that laws must be enacted to protect children from forced circumcision.

The following letter from Oregon Rep. Ron Maurer's office was forwarded to us by Ms. Trisha Darner in Medford, Oregon:

Thank you for contacting our office. It is most effective if you work with the Representative in the district where you live. Your Representative is Sal Esquivel and your Senator is Alan Bates. Rep. Maurer respects your views on this issue but is not interested in sponsoring this legislation as this is in direct conflict with the freedom of religion of the Jewish faith.

Freedom of religion in this country refers to the right of each person to choose his or her own religion. It does not mean that parents may alter the genitals of their children for religious reasons. The Supreme Court ruled long ago in Prince v. Massachusetts that "Parents may be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow they are free, in identical circumstances, to make martyrs of their children before they have reached the age of full and legal discretion when they can make that choice for themselves." Rep. Maurer would serve his constituents well by familiarizing himself with this fundamental legal tenet.

The following letter from Virginia Health and Human Resources Secretary Marilyn B. Tavenner was forwarded to us by Ms. Kari Kilgore in St. Paul, Virginia:

January 17, 2008

Ms. Kari Kilgore

Thank you for your email to Governor Kaine regarding your concerns about unnecessary circumcisions. Since the regulation of health care is within the work of my office, he has forwarded your email to me for response.

I appreciate that you have become quite knowledgeable on the subject and have a global perspective on situations in other cultures as well as in this country. We are not aware of any Virginia law that requires male infants to be circumcised; it is entirely a voluntary decision made by parents based on their own particular views and beliefs. As you are aware, in the Judaic tradition, male infants are to be circumcised on the 8th day after birth; in the wider community, it is a matter of parental choice.

Circumcision is a carefully controlled surgical procedure and should not be equated with the genital mutilation that does occur in some parts of the world. The discussion and opinion about whether it is medically advisable varies from time to time, but no family is compelled or required to circumcise their son.

Again, we thank you for taking the time to write with your concerns.

Marilyn B. Tavenner

Secretary of Health and Human Resources

1111 East Broad Street

Richmond, Virginia 23219

Medically unnecessary circumcision is not voluntary unless the patient gives his consent. The particular views and beliefs of parents are legally irrelevant if they attempt to modify a girl's genitalia, so why is an exception made for boys? Ripping the foreskin away from a child's tiny, undeveloped penis and then amputating it with a scalpel can hardly be called a "carefully controlled surgical procedure", as the victims of both normal and botched circumcisions will readily attest. And the Jewish tradition of circumcision is no longer routine, as Jews continue to turn away from the practice. Unfortunately, more than one million unlucky baby boys are still being mutilated each year in the USA, which is why we need to enact the MGM Bill.

The following letter from Oregon Rep. Vicki Berger was forwarded to us by Ms. Trisha Darner in Medford, Oregon:

November 9, 2007

Dear Trisha,

I respect the rights of individual parents to make these kinds of decisions. I would like the government to stay out of this dispute.

This is my sincere point of view.

Regards,

Rep. Vicki Berger

While we understand Rep. Berger's respect for parental rights, some decisions cross the line. We believe that a child's legal right to body integrity supersedes a parent's wish to perform a medically unnecessary circumcision on an unconsenting minor.

The following letter from Oregon Rep. Peter Buckley was forwarded to us by Ms. Trisha Darner in Medford, Oregon:

August 27, 2007

Dear Trisha Darner:

Thank you for your letter addressing your concerns about infant circumcision. I certainly appreciate your efforts to bring this issue to the public's attention, and my office will look into the matter as per your request. However, in the 2009 session my main health care focus will be on securing health benefits and rights to children with Autism and their families.

If you have any other questions or concerns, don't hesitate to contact my office.

Sincerely,

Representative Peter Buckley

We welcome Rep. Buckley's willingness to research the issue of infant circumcision. Perhaps when his staff members uncover just how much pain and suffering circumcision inflicts on baby boys, he will find the time to focus on two important children's issues instead of just one.

The following letter from Massachusetts Senator Michael Morrissey was forwarded to us by Mr. Charles A. Antonelli in Quincy, Massachusetts:

I am writing today regarding your legislation dealing with genital mutilation in the Commonwealth. The legislation's bill number is Senate Bill No. 966 and has been referred to the Joint Committee on the Judiciary.

You can also track legislative histories on the internet at the General Court website at http://www.mass.gov/legis. In addition, I have enclosed a copy of the contact information for the House and Senate Chairpersons of the Joint Committee on the Judiciary for your reference. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Congratulations to Senator Morrissey on his courageous and historic decision to introduce our Massachusetts MGM Bill to the 185th General Court! We look forward to working closely with the members of the Joint Committee on the Judiciary in the coming weeks as they prepare to debate Senate Bill No. 966.

The following letter from Florida Division of Family Health Services Director Annette Phelps was forwarded to us by Ms. Nicole Blythe in Stuart, Florida:

Thank you for your January 8 letter to former Governor Jeb Bush expressing your position regarding male circumcision. I have been asked to respond on behalf of the Department of Health.

Male circumcision is a clinical practice issue and parent decision, most practice issues are governed by the clinical practice guidelines of care for medicine. In the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), Circumcision Policy Statement it is stated, "Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. In circumstances in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child. To make an informed choice, parents of all male infants should be given accurate and unbiased information and be provided the opportunity to discuss this decision. If a decision for circumcision is made, procedural analgesia should be provided."

Therefore, the AAP recommends physicians discuss the potential harms and benefits of circumcision with all parents or legal guardians considering this procedure for their newborn son.

Director Phelps's reply illustrates how the current AAP Circumcision Policy Statement interferes with a man's right to control his own body. Even though the AAP policy does not recommend circumcision, it still allows parents to cut their son's genitals for any reason. No such allowance is made for female genital cutting.

The AAP is now in the process of updating their Circumcision Policy Statement, and public input is encouraged by sending comments to Ed Zimmerman (Co-Director, Department of Practice) and Alison Baker (Staffperson, Committee on Bioethics).

The following letter from Florida Office of Family Safety Director Patricia Badland was forwarded to us by Ms. Nicole Blythe in Stuart, Florida:

Thank you for your recent letter to the Governor's Office about your proposal of the Florida Prohibition of Human Mutilation Act. Governor Charlie Crist asked me to respond to you on his behalf.

Florida appreciates your concern for wanting to ensure all children are protected from child abuse. You raised some interesting points in your letter about circumcision of male infants. Circumcision is a common procedure typically done with newborn males once they are medically stable after birth. Debate exists whether there are no medical benefits or if there are some slight medical benefits. The American Academy of Pediatrics has considered this issue for years. Currently, the Academy neither recommends for or against this procedure.

Unlike female circumcision done in unsafe circumstances elsewhere in the world, male circumcision is a carefully done hospital procedure, usually involves pain control, and does not cause appreciable loss of sexual sensation or pain in adulthood.

A difference of opinion exists on the merit of this procedure. However, the Academy and others have never considered this to be physical abuse. An interpretation that is child abuse would be unique, be at variance with mainstream medical opinion, and result in an assertion that most parent of boys are participating in child abuse.

Thank you again for writing to Governor Crist and for your concern for the safety and well-being of Florida's children.

Director Badland's letter has many inaccuracies. As of this writing, the AAP does not recommend circumcision, stating that "data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision". And although most circumcisions in the USA are carried out in a hospital environment, female circumcisions in other countries are often performed in hospitals, too - particularly in Egypt. Furthermore, many circumcisions are still performed without anesthesia, and circumcised men do in fact report an appreciable loss of sexual sensation in adulthood.

The following letter from Illinois House Republican Leader Tom Cross was forwarded to us by Mr. Ron Low in Northbrook, Illinois:

Thank you for contacting me regarding legislation concerning genital mutilation.

Your views are very important to me and I appreciate your taking the time to write. I always welcome and consider the opinions I receive when making decisions in Springfield.

Thank you again for your letter. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.

As the primary sponsor of the 2007 Illinois Criminal Aggravated Domestic Assault Bill, Rep. Cross is well aware of the painful consequences of domestic violence. Unfortunately, his bill makes no reference to the most common form of domestic violence in the Unites States today: circumcision of male infants.

This month another new study published in BJU International has confirmed that circumcision removes the most sensitive parts of the penis. Shouldn't cutting off part of a child's genitals by force be included as a form of assault in Rep. Cross's bill? We believe that it should.

The following letter from Minnesota Senator Mike Jungbauer was forwarded to us by Ms. Brianna Johnson in Waseca, Minnesota:

Unfortunately, I cannot support or sponsor this bill. As an Ordained Minister, I have strong feelings about certain social issues like abortion and gay marriage. However, in this case I do believe that the decision of circumcision should be made by the parents. Until that child is 18 years of age, he/she does not have the same rights as an adult. We allow the parents to make decisions concerning the well being of their children in many other areas and to pass this bill would only open up a proverbial can of worms.

It is very concerning to hear an elected government official say that children do not have the same human rights as adults. Infants are the most vulnerable members of our society, and government has a responsibility to protect those who cannot protect themselves.

Children may not be able to vote, Senator Jungbauer, but they do have human rights. The most basic human right of all is the right to be free from physical harm. Forced circumcision violates that right in a most painful and unnecessary way.

The following letter from Florida Rep. Gayle Harrell was forwarded to us by Ms. Nicole Blythe in Stuart, Florida:

Thank you for taking the time to write and express your concerns regarding the Florida Prohibition of Human Genital Mutilation Act and providing me with a copy of the wording submitted to the Florida State Legislature on January 8, 2007.

As Chair of the Health Care General Committee and a member of the Health & Families Council, Rep. Harrell is well positioned to work with other state lawmakers on the issue of circumcision. We hope that she uses her influence to help protect Florida children from forced genital cutting.

The following letter from Senator Bill Nelson was forwarded to us by Ms. Nicole Blythe in Stuart, Florida:

As you are probably aware, the 109th Congress adjourned on December 9, 2006. Any legislation still pending before the House and the Senate must be reintroduced in the 110th Congress, which convened in early January.

I am aware of your interest in this issue and will be sure to keep your views in mind should the Senate consider similar legislation. I appreciate your taking the time to be active and involved in the political process. Your communication helps me serve you better in the Senate.

As we responded to his counterpart, Mel Martinez, simply keeping our views in mind won't protect boys from forced circumcision. What's needed now is action, and Senator Nelson can begin the process by introducing the MGM Bill to the U.S. Senate.

The following letter from Maryland Delegate Wendell Beitzel was forwarded to us by Mr. James Pinkley in Bel Air, Maryland:

This is a subject that I am inclined not to seek legislative change nor will I support any efforts to do so. These type of decisions are best left to the parents of children and their religious and moral convictions.

Freedom of religion does not mean that parents have the right to forcefully cut off part of a boy's body for medically unnecessary reasons, and court decisions are beginning to address this. In an October 2006 ruling, a Cook County, Illinois, circuit court judge presiding over a parental dispute ordered that a 9-year old boy not be circumcised, writing that "the injury to the child as a result of an unnecessary circumcision would be irreversible."

By misconstruing the meaning of our constitutional guarantee to freedom of religion, Delegate Beitzel is closing his ears to the cries of innocent Maryland boys who need his help.

The following letter from Senator Mel Martinez was forwarded to us by Ms. Nicole Blythe in Stuart, Florida:

Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing from you and would like to respond to your concerns.

I am proud and humbled to serve as Florida's thirty-third United States Senator. Through your correspondence, I am informed of the issues that are important to you and am better able to serve your interests in the Senate. I understand your concerns regarding circumcision.

Like you, I realize that our current decisions have ramifications that reach far into the future. While there is currently no legislation that has been introduced relating to your concerns, rest assured that I will keep your concerns in mind as we proceed in the 109th Congress.

Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. If you have any additional questions or comments, please do not hesitate to let me know. In addition, for more information about issues and activities important to Florida, please sign up for my weekly newsletter at http://martinez.senate.gov.

We appreciate this response from Senator Martinez. Instead of just keeping our concerns in mind, though, Senator Martinez can make a real difference in the lives of male children by introducing the MGM Bill himself. Because for every day that he waits, another 3,300 American boys are sexually mutilated through forced circumcision.

The following letter from Texas Speaker of the House Tom Craddick was forwarded to us by Ms. Michelle Richardson in Fort Worth, Texas:

Thank you for your letter regarding issues with male circumcision. I understand your point of view on this matter.

At this time, no committee assignments have been made in the House. I recommend that you contact members of the House Public Health Committee. You may identify those through the House website, http://www.house.state.tx.us/committees

Thank you again for your communication and involvement in the process of our state government.

We welcome Speaker Craddick's reply and advice. As he suggests, our Texas state office will stay in contact with members of the Public Health House Committee to make them aware of the need to introduce and enact the Texas MGM Bill.

The following letter from California Assemblymember Mark DeSaulnier was received by Matthew Hess, President of MGMbill.org:

Thank you for your recent letter expressing your concerns on male circumcision and your inclusion of a legislative proposal to address it. I am sure you will agree that this issue is one that reaches across many spectrums - health, religious and cultural among them, as you have noted.

Judging by your address, I see that you are represented in the San Diego area by Assemblymember Lori Saldana as well as Senator Christine Kehoe. I encourage you to work through your local legislative delegation as I will look to them for leadership on this issue.

Should any proposal related to this issue come before the legislature, I will certainly take your concerns and comments into consideration.

We appreciate Assemblymember DeSaulnier's reply, and we have already contacted Lori Saldaña and Christine Kehoe on multiple occasions. What we really want to know is what Mark DeSaulnier thinks about forced circumcision of male infants. Surely he must have an opinion of his own - why not share it with us?