As we reported last week - Daas Torah - Direct Metzitza - official rabbinate position the official position of the Israel Rabbinate is that metzitza is a valid procedure. As they clearly state the parents have the option of either direct oral contact or using a tube. This was clearly described on the Rabbinate Web site in great detail. The fact that the guidelines are dated from a year ago clearly indicates that despite - some mistaken assertions to the contrary - the Rabbinate has not changed its position. All they have done is offered clarifications which some have misunderstood to indicate that they changed their guidelines.
Arutz 7 In an official letter published by the Director of the Britot (Circumcisions) Department of the Chief Rabbinate, Rabbi Moshe Morciano clarified that the position of the Rabbinate supports traditional circumcision procedure which includes "metzitza bepeh" (oral suction). This is done to ensure the health of the baby. The procedure is conditional upon the good health of the mohel himself, and the agreement of the family should be obtained by the Mohel (Circumciser).
Arutz 7 In an official letter published by the Director of the Britot (Circumcisions) Department of the Chief Rabbinate, Rabbi Moshe Morciano clarified that the position of the Rabbinate supports traditional circumcision procedure which includes "metzitza bepeh" (oral suction). This is done to ensure the health of the baby. The procedure is conditional upon the good health of the mohel himself, and the agreement of the family should be obtained by the Mohel (Circumciser).
> The procedure is conditional upon the good health of the mohel himself, and the agreement of the family should be obtained by the Mohel (Circumciser).
ReplyDeleteAren't these requirements exactly what the Agudah is vigorously opposing in New York?
Try again Garnel
DeleteJust one question for Rav Tzadok. Would you allow a moyal who has tested positive for herpes perform mbp on an infant?
DeleteNow suppose one takes heed to whatever risks that are inherent with MMR vaccines. There are still risks to weigh in not using this vaccine. However what are the inherent medical risks in avoiding using MBP?
Just one question for Rav Tzadok. Would you allow a moyal who has tested positive for herpes perform mbp on an infant?
DeleteSee Rabbinut guidelines. In short just because one is a carrier does not mean that one is communicative.
However what are the inherent medical risks in avoiding using MBP?
You have to empirically prove that there are risks associated with it. That hasn't been done yet. While MBP may be a common factor in X number of infections per year, none of the studies done to date have EVER tested the mohelim in question to see if they are even positive for the virus. The methodology so far has been to attribute neonatal herpes to MBP if has been done. Despite the fact that it can be transferred other ways.
No, seriously, Rav Tzadok, in New York they want the mohel to get a written consent before performing direct MBP and the Agudah is freaking out over it, acting as if the Czar and his Cossacks are coming over the next hill. And then Rabbanut says that there needs to be agreement.
DeleteIs the rabbinut urging guidelines for periodic blood tests for the moyals to confirm that they are in good health? Also does a blood test help deturmine if one has herpes when it is dormant?
ReplyDeleteLink to the original doc please?
ReplyDeletethe link is at the top of the post
Delete