Israeli Woman Fined $140 Per Day For Refusing To Circumcise Son


Pictured above: A Plastibell device which can be used to circumcise young boys. Photo by David Levene


An Israeli woman who refused to "physically harm her son" by having the now one year old circumcised has been sentenced by a religious court to pay a fine of $140 per day until the procedure is performed. 

According to a report by Haaretz, the child's mother Elinor stated:

"The baby was born with a medical problem, so we couldn’t circumcise him on the eighth day as is customary. As time went on, I started reading about what actually happens in circumcision, and I realized that I couldn’t do that to my son. He’s perfect just as he is.”

We wish the story was as simple as a mother sticking up for her kid, but unfortunately, things get a little tricky (and messy)…

According, to Elinor, her husband originally supported the decision to not circumcise their son, but as they began discussing their divorce in rabbinical court (part of Jerusalem's justice system that oversees matters of religion, including marriage and divorce), he changed his mind. However, Jerusalem court judges believe that Elinor could be using the infant (and his boy parts) as a pawn in making headway in the divorce proceedings. 

By Jewish Law, if one parent wants their son to be circumcised, the other parent can't prevent it from taking place unless it's medically dangerous for the child. 

This case is the first time a religious court has slapped a fine on a parent for refusing the procedure that is in line with Jewish Law. 

Elinor, whose fine is now up to $700, plans to appeal the case to High Court of Justice in an effort to annul the rabbinical court's decision. 


Let's hope they can reach a resolution soon! This is one procedure that most men would prefer to not have memory of. 

Tell us Instincter's, which side of the knife are you on in this debate?


Image Source. (H/T:


13 thoughts on “Israeli Woman Fined $140 Per Day For Refusing To Circumcise Son”

  1. The elephant in the hospital.

    The elephant in the hospital…

    This is a blood sacrifice to YHWH, the god of the jews.  BTW, was Moses even cut?  This mom is a saint in the making and not the only jewish parent against this genital mutilation of boys who have no say in the matter.

    Female genital mutilation?

    Foot binding?

    Of course not, that would be inhumane.

    Watch this vid, you will be glad you did.

  2. Circumcision alters sex

    Circumcision alters sex dramatically.  HIS body, HIS decision. 

    The logic of the court is so faulty it's silly.  "Every" boy does not get cut obviously.  3% of Israel's Jewish families do not circumcise.  In places like Sweden only 40% of Jewish families circumcise.  

    And to say it's been done for long time, like that's a reason?  NOT circumcising has been for a lot longer time, by the vast majority of humans.  

    Hundreds of thousands of men are enduring a multi-year process of non-surgical foreskin restoration to undo some of the sexual damage of forced circumcision.  

  3. What about separation of

    What about separation of church and state? No parent should be forced to perform surgery upon a healthy child's penis because god says so!

      • I’m not American. Most

        I'm not American. Most civilized countries in the world are not run on religious rules. Europe, the America's,  most African countries, Australia, china… 

  4. It’s his body, so he should

    It's his body, so he should be the one to decide if he wants irreversible genital surgery or not.  His private parts are exactly that – they don't belong to his parents or to the rabbinical court.  His body, his decision.

  5. Are you confusing Jewish

    Are you confusing Jewish religious law with Israeli civil law? Where is the Haaretz link you sort of kind of copy, pasted and plagiarized this so-called article?

  6. This is an issue of a person

    This is an issue of a person's right to privacy.  Parents as the legal guardians of the child should be given the right not to be forced to have their son circumcised.  The state's role as parens patriae only steps in when the parent is obviously not capable of rearing for his child.  I believe the mother was exercising what is for the best interest of his child in accordance with international standards and human rights, particularly the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and as well as the Convention on the Rights of the Child.  Israel is a party to both treaties and it could be seen as violating both by forcing the parent to have the son circumcised and for fining her.

  7. It’s not a matter of

    It's not a matter of circumcision or not circumcision. The matter is about a religious court imposing punishments on citizens for not following religious rules.  And that's not just a problem with Israel; in muslim countries it is more widely spread and the punishments are much worse (such as beheading).


Leave a Reply to Ron Low Cancel reply