Support for LAist comes from
We Explain L.A.
Stay Connected
Livestream event happening now: AirTalk LIVE: COVID Doctors Retrospective Larry Mantle and the AirTalk COVID doctors reflect on 3 years of living through a pandemic.

Share This

This is an archival story that predates current editorial management.

This archival content was written, edited, and published prior to LAist's acquisition by its current owner, Southern California Public Radio ("SCPR"). Content, such as language choice and subject matter, in archival articles therefore may not align with SCPR's current editorial standards. To learn more about those standards and why we make this distinction, please click here.


Family Wins $4.6M in Lawsuit After Circumcision Gone Wrong

Santa Monica Considers Ban on Male Circumcision / Read the post here.
Support your source for local news!
Today, put a dollar value on the trustworthy reporting you rely on all year long. The local news you read here every day is crafted for you, but right now, we need your help to keep it going. In these uncertain times, your support is even more important. We can't hold those in power accountable and uplift voices from the community without your partnership. Thank you.

As San Franciscans gear up to vote on whether or not circumcision should be banned, those opposed to the procedure may have a new victory to point to. After a botched circumcision in 2003 at a Los Angeles medical clinic, a family will receive $4.6 million in damages and lawyers' fees, reports the Long Beach Press Telegram.Melanie Hall, the mother of the boy who's circumcision went wrong, filed a lawsuit in 2007 against Miltex Inc. and its parent company, Integra Life Sciences Holding Corp., a company that makes devices used by doctors to perform circumcisions. In the suit, Hall alleged that the company was at fault for producing a product that didn't work properly, resulting in 85% of the tip of her son's penis being removed instead of only the foreskin:

"Because of the defective design of the circumcision clamp, there was no protection for the head of the penis and Dr. Pickett was unable to visualize the (head) when excising the foreskin," according to the plaintiffs' court papers filed regarding the settlement. "For this reason, an amputation to the (head) of plaintiff's penis occurred."

The boy is now eight, and according to court documents is going to need ongoing medical and psychological treatment.

Most Read