Can circumcision rob you of your, uh, "sexual prowess"?
A South Dakota man thinks so, which is why he has filed a federal circumcision lawsuit against the hospital where he was born. He claims he only recently learned of his missing foreskin, and that doctors misled his mother into believing the procedure was medically necessary.
It gets better. His name is Dean Cochrun. And he's asking for $1,000 and free reattachment surgery.
Cochrun, 28, is currently in prison on a kidnapping conviction, according to the Associated Press. This may explain why he had both the time to file such a strange lawsuit and why he only recently became aware that he was lacking in the foreskin department.
Unnerved by this revelation, he now claims he "was robbed of sensitivity during sexual intercourse." The circumcision lawsuit further states that he lost "the sense of security and well-being I am entitled to in my person."
This is all well and good -- and a little sad, to be honest -- but it's almost certain that a judge will toss Dean Cochrun's suit. Here's why:
- Consent. Cochrun was an infant when he was snipped, which means his mother had the legal right to consent to the procedure. There's no indication that doctors lied to her.
- Statute of limitations. Personal injury lawsuits can't be filed 28 years after the events in question. Sure, some states may toll -- or pause -- the clock and only restart it when the victim first learns of the injury. But it's highly unlikely Cochrun didn't know he was circumcised.
- Lack of jurisdiction. Cochrun lives in South Dakota. The hospital he is suing is in South Dakota. He has filed a state law tort claim. He filed his circumcision lawsuit in federal court. Federal courts have no jurisdiction to hear his claim.
As to this third point, even if Dean Cochrun re-filed his circumcision lawsuit in state court, the first two points will still apply. His lawsuit will undoubtedly be cut short.