See? It is concerning when one key element of the story is intentionally left out by most of the mainstream media reporting on it.
Gawker reports
here
My response:
Absent
from your report is the reason the mother mentioned in court to change
her mind, that is that at this age it has to be done with general
anesthesia, which means an extra risk of death.
Apparently the
judge didn't find the mother's fear of her son dying to be compelling
enough, compared to the possibility of not satisfying the father's wish
for matching genitalia.
Apparently, most of the people reporting on this issue are afraid to mention the risk of death.
Apparently
many people still think that the retention or unnecessary amputation
of normal healthy parts of the bodies of children can be subject to
contractual negotiation between former couples.
No comments:
Post a Comment