Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking
Circumcision pre-dates local anaesthesia by centuries, if not millennia. What proportion are performed under that level of medical supervision even nowadays. In this case, had local anaesthesia been used, it wouldn't have made any difference. as the death was caused by loss of blood.
|
I'm not sure what your point about anaesthesia is? The baby died because both the procedure and the after-care were done appallingly badly. That much is established fact. But proving that negligence reached the point of unlawful killing is an awfully high legal bar to attain and is what the current court case is about.