Between Moral Relativism and Moral Hypocrisy: Reframing the Debate on "FGM"

Genital Modifications in Prepubescent Minors: When May Clinicians Ethically Proceed?

When is it ethically permissible for clinicians to surgically intervene into the genitals of a legal minor? We distinguish between voluntary and nonvoluntary procedures and focus on nonvoluntary procedures, specifically in prepubescent minors ("children"). We do not address procedures in adolescence or adulthood. With respect to children categorized as female at birth who have no apparent differences of sex development (i.e., non-intersex or "endosex" females) there is a near-universal ethical consensus in the Global North. This consensus holds that clinicians may not perform any nonvoluntary genital cutting or surgery, from "cosmetic" labiaplasty to medicalized ritual "pricking" of the vulva, insofar as the procedure is not strictly necessary to protect the child's physical health. All other motivations, including possible psychosocial, cultural, subjective-aesthetic, or prophylactic benefits as judged by doctors or parents, are seen as categorically inappropriate grounds for a clinician to proceed with a nonvoluntary genital procedure in this population. We argue that the main ethical reasons capable of supporting this consensus turn not on empirically contestable benefit-risk calculations, but on a fundamental concern to respect the child's privacy, bodily integrity, developing sexual boundaries, and (future) genital autonomy. We show that these ethical reasons are sound. However, as we argue, they do not only apply to endosex female children, but rather to all children regardless of sex characteristics, including those with intersex traits and endosex males. We conclude, therefore, that as a matter of justice, inclusivity, and gender equality in medical-ethical policy (we do not take a position as to criminal law), clinicians should not be permitted to perform any nonvoluntary genital cutting or surgery in prepubescent minors, irrespective of the latter's sex traits or gender assignment, unless urgently necessary to protect their physical health. By contrast, we suggest that voluntary surgeries in older individuals might, under certain conditions, permissibly be performed for a wider range of reasons, including reasons of self-identity or psychosocial well-being, in keeping with the circumstances, values, and explicit needs and preferences of the persons so concerned. Note: Because our position is tied to clinicians' widely accepted role-specific duties as medical practitioners within regulated healthcare systems, we do not consider genital procedures performed outside of a healthcare context (e.g., for religious reasons) or by persons other than licensed healthcare providers working in their professional capacity.

How Canadian Law Shapes the Health Care Experiences of Women with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting/Circumcision and Their Providers: A Disjuncture Between Expectation and Actuality

This study explored how the reproductive health care experiences of women with female genital mutilation/cutting/circumcision (FGC) were shaped. We used Institutional Ethnography, a sociological approach which allows for the study of social relations and the coordination of health care. From qualitatively interviewing eight women with FGC, we learned that they felt excluded within the Canadian health care system because they were unable to access reconstructive surgery, which was not covered by Ontario's universal health coverage (Ontario Health Insurance Plan). We then talked with seven obstetricians/gynecologists (OB/GYNs) and learned that while it was legal to perform certain genital (e.g., female genital cosmetic surgery) and reproductive (e.g., elective caesarean section) surgeries commonly requested by Western-born women, it was not legal for them to perform other genital surgeries often requested by immigrant populations (e.g., reinfibulation), nor were these covered by OHIP (e.g., clitoral reconstructive surgery). From participants' comparison of clitoral reconstructive surgery and reinfibulation to female genital cosmetic and gender confirming surgeries, it became clear that the law and policies within the health care system favored surgeries elected by Western adults over those wished for by women with FGC. We found that the law had an impact on the choices that OB/GYNs and the women they treated could make, shaping their respective experiences. This created ethical dilemmas for OB/GYNs and a sense of exclusion from the health care system for women with FGC.

Is Circumcision "Necessary" in Islam? A Philosophical Argument Based on Peer Disagreement

In recent years, there has been a resurgence in debates on the ethics of child genital cutting practices, both female and male, including within a Muslim context. Opponents of female genital cutting sometimes assert that the practice is not mentioned explicitly in the Qur'an as a way of implying that it does not have any religious standing within Islam. However, neither is male genital cutting mentioned explicitly in the Qur'an, and yet most people accept that it is a Muslim religious practice. Both practices, however, are mentioned in secondary sources of Islamic jurisprudence, with disagreement among religious authorities about the status or authenticity of some of these sources. This paper considers the religious status of both female and male genital cutting practices within Islam and employs a philosophical argument based on "peer disagreement" to ask whether either practice is necessary (i.e., religiously required) for a devout Muslim to endorse.

Reconsidering the role of patriarchy in upholding female genital modifications: analysis of contemporary and pre-industrial societies

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), customary female genital modification practices common in parts of Africa, South and Southeast Asia, and the Middle East are inherently patriarchal: they reflect deep-rooted inequality between the sexes characterized by male dominance and constitute an extreme form of discrimination against women. However, scholars have noted that while many societies have genital modification rites only for boys, with no equivalent rite for girls, the inverse does not hold. Rather, almost all societies that practice ritual female genital modification also practice ritual male genital modification, often for comparable reasons on children of similar ages, with the female rites led by women and the male rites led by men. In contrast, then, to the situation for boys in various cultures, girls are not singled out for genital modification on account of their sex or gender; nor do the social meanings of the female rites necessarily reflect a lower status. In some cases, the women's rite serves to promote female within-sex bonding and network building-as the men's rite typically does for males-thereby counterbalancing gendered asymmetries in political power and weakening male dominance in certain spheres. In such cases, and to that extent, the female rites can be described as counter-patriarchal. Selective efforts to discourage female genital modifications may thus inadvertently undermine women-centered communal networks while leaving male bonding rites intact. Scholars and activists should not rely on misleading generalizations from the WHO about the relationship between genital cutting and the social positioning of women as compared to men. To illustrate the complexity of this relationship, we compare patterns of practice across contemporary societies while also highlighting anthropological data regarding pre-industrial societies. Regarding the latter, we find no association between the presence of a female initiation rite and a key aspect of patriarchy as it is classically understood, namely, social endorsement of a gendered double-standard regarding premarital sexual activity. We situate this finding within the broader literature and discuss potential implications.

Genital Cutting as Gender Oppression: Time to Revisit the WHO Paradigm

The World Health Organization (WHO) condemns all medically unnecessary female genital cutting (FGC) that is primarily associated with people of color and the Global South, claiming that such FGC violates the human right to bodily integrity regardless of harm-level, degree of medicalization, or consent. However, the WHO does not condemn medically unnecessary FGC that is primarily associated with Western culture, such as elective labiaplasty or genital piercing, even when performed by non-medical practitioners (e.g., body artists) or on adolescent girls. Nor does it campaign against any form of medically unnecessary intersex genital cutting (IGC) or male genital cutting (MGC), including forms that are non-consensual or comparably harmful to some types of FGC. These and other apparent inconsistencies risk undermining the perceived authority of the WHO to pronounce on human rights. This paper considers whether the WHO could justify its selective condemnation of non-Western-associated FGC by appealing to the distinctive role of such practices in upholding patriarchal gender systems and furthering sex-based discrimination against women and girls. The paper argues that such a justification would not succeed. To the contrary, dismantling patriarchal power structures and reducing sex-based discrimination in FGC-practicing societies requires principled opposition to medically unnecessary, non-consensual genital cutting of all vulnerable persons, including insufficiently autonomous children, irrespective of their sex traits or socially assigned gender. This conclusion is based, in part, on an assessment of the overlapping and often mutually reinforcing roles of different types of child genital cutting—FGC, MGC, and IGC—in reproducing oppressive gender systems. These systems, in turn, tend to subordinate women and girls as well as non-dominant males and sexual and gender minorities. The selective efforts of the WHO to eliminate only non-Western-associated FGC exposes the organization to credible accusations of racism and cultural imperialism and paradoxically undermines its own stated goals: namely, securing the long-term interests and equal rights of women and girls in FGC-practicing societies.

Exploring opposition to ritual female genital cutting since the first U.S. federal prosecution: the 2017 detroit case

In the U.S., the 1996 federal law banning medically unnecessary female genital cutting (FGC) of minors was rendered unconstitutional in 2018 in the Nagarwala case. This paper highlights legal developments at the federal and state levels in the U.S. since this trial. It looks at anti-FGC frameworks in other Western countries such as Australia, the UK, France, and Switzerland for comparison. The Australia High Court ruled in favor of a broader interpretation of the words "mutilate" (as in "female genital mutilation" or FGM) and "clitoris" in 2019. In the UK in 2019, a mother of a three-year-old became the first person convicted of "FGM.". In the U.S., 2020 federal legislation strengthened opposition to FGC of minors. Twenty-one U.S. states have developed legislation since 2017 that was enacted to oppose such FGC. The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution affords equal protection under the law without regard to sex or gender, prompting increased inclusion of neonatal male circumcision and normalizing surgery for children with intersex traits in the FGC legislation debate. More widely, the principle of equal application of the law raises questions about the legality of adult female genital cosmetic surgery where adult "FGM" is banned. Tensions between state law and religious law introduce complexities to allowing religious and cultural communities to practice their preferred way of life when this conflicts with human and civil rights afforded to individuals within secular liberal democracies. For consistency, the anti-FGC framework in the U.S. may need to shift towards calls to protect all children, regardless of sex characteristics (i.e., including male and intersex children) from medically unnecessary, non-consensual genital cutting.

Assessing the reliability and validity of attitudes and confidence scales for the care of women and girls affected by female genital mutilation/cutting

Background

Approximately 545,000 women and girls in the USA have undergone Female Genital Mutilation/ Cutting (FGM/C) or have mothers from a country where FGM/C is practiced. Women and girls living with FGM/C in the USA may experience stigma and bias due to their FGM/C, immigration, racial, and language status. Health care provider attitudes toward FGM/C and confidence for related clinical care may affect the quality of care, yet there are no validated instruments to measure these constructs.

Methods

We developed the instruments via review of the FGM/C literature, the development of scale items, expert review, and pre-testing. We validated the instruments using a convenience sample of providers in Arizona and Maryland. We used exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to confirm factor structures, and compared scores between known groups to assess validity.

Results

The EFA revealed a two-factor solution for attitudes, including subscales for Negative Attitudes and Empathetic Attitudes toward FGM/C and those who practice with Cronbach’s alphas of 0.814 and 0.628 respectively. The EFA for confidence revealed a two-factor solution including Confidence in Clinical FGM/C Care and Confidence in Critical Communication Skills for FGM/C Care with Cronbach’s alphas of 0.857 and 0.694 respectively.

Conclusions

Health care provider attitudes and confidence toward FGM/C care may affect quality of care and health outcomes for women and girls. Our study describes the rigorous psychometric analysis to create reliable and valid instruments to assess health care provider attitudes and confidence for the care of women and girls who have experienced FGM/C.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03249649. Registered on 15 August 2017. Retrospectively registered.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-11455-8.

Is Physical Alteration a Sufficient Reason to Prohibit Ritual Infant Circumcision?

European culture and thought have long disfavored ritual child circumcision, which is obligatory to Jews and Muslims. Much opposition to this practice hinges on the notion that it represents an unwarranted unconsented physical assault on the child. This article takes issue with that conclusion. Furthermore, even if one were to grant this conclusion, the offense is not of sufficient magnitude to warrant government action to halt the practice. On the other hand, suppression of ritual child circumcision may represent an attack against cultures and societies in which circumcision is practiced.

Factors Associated with Health Care Provider Attitudes, and Confidence for the Care of Women and Girls Affected by Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting

Background: Female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) is a cultural practice that includes procedures that intentionally alter or cause harm to female genital organs for nonmedical reasons, affecting ∼200 million women and girls globally. Health care providers in the United States often lack confidence to provide appropriate FGM/C-related care, and experience attitudes that may negatively impact quality of care for FGM/C. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of health care providers to explore the associations between health care provider characteristics, awareness of health complications of FGM/C, attitudes, and confidence for FGM/C care. Results: Factors associated with more Confidence for Clinical FGM/C Care include awareness of health complications, ever cared for a woman with FGM/C, being a woman or person of color, and more than 5 years of clinical practice. Increased Confidence in Communication Skills for FGM/C Care was associated with awareness of more health complications for FGM/C. Women endorsed significantly less Negative Attitudes toward FGM/C compared with men; no other factors were associated with health care provider attitudes. Conclusion: Future research should further investigate factors associated with health care provider attitudes toward FGM/C and those affected by the practice to promote quality care. Health providers require adequate training for clinical FGM/C care and in the communication skills that promote patient/provider communication cross-culturally. Trial Registration: Clinical Trials.Gov ID no. NCT03249649, Study ID no. 5252. Public website: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03249649.

Hierarchical modelling of factors associated with the practice and perpetuation of female genital mutilation in the next generation of women in Africa

Despite a total prohibition on the practice of female genital mutilation (FGM), young girls continue to be victims in some African countries. There is a paucity of data on the effect of FGM practice in two generations in Africa. This study assessed the current practice of daughters' FGM among women living in 14 FGM-prone countries in Africa as a proxy to assess the future burden of FGM in the continent. We used Demographic and Health Surveys data collected between 2010 and 2018 from 14 African countries. We analyzed information on 93,063 women-daughter pair (Level 1) from 8,396 communities (Level 2) from the 14 countries (Level 3). We fitted hierarchical multivariable binomial logistic regression models using the MLWin 3.03 module in Stata version 16 at p<0.05. The overall prevalence of FGM among mothers and their daughters was 60.0% and 21.7%, respectively, corresponding to 63.8% reduction in the mother-daughter ratio of FGM. The prevalence of FGM among daughters in Togo and Tanzania were less than one per cent, 48.6% in Guinea, with the highest prevalence of 78.3% found in Mali. The percentage reduction in mother-daughter FGM ratio was highest in Tanzania (96.7%) and Togo (94.2%), compared with 10.0% in Niger, 15.0% in Nigeria and 15.9% in Mali. Prevalence of daughters' FGM among women with and without FGM was 34.0% and 3.1% respectively. The risk of mothers having FGM for their daughters was significantly associated with maternal age, educational status, religion, household wealth quintiles, place of residence, community unemployment and community poverty. The country and community where the women lived explained about 57% and 42% of the total variation in FGM procurement for daughters. Procurement of FGM for the daughters of the present generation of mothers in Africa is common, mainly, among those from low social, poorer, rural and less educated women. We advocate for more context-specific studies to fully assess the role of each of the identified risk factors and design sustainable intervention towards the elimination of FGM in Africa.

Attitudes towards comparison of male and female genital cutting in a Swedish Somali population

INTRODUCTION

In Sweden, the law treats female genital cutting (FGC) differently from male genital cutting (MGC). However, the comparability of the medical, ethical, and legal aspects of genital cutting of girls and boys are increasingly discussed by scholars, although little is known about how practicing communities view these aspects. This study aimed to explore attitudes towards comparison of genital cutting of girls and boys among Swedish Somalis, and to investigate factors associated with considering the two practices to be comparable.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a cross-sectional questionnaire with 648 Swedish Somali men and women from four Swedish cities, descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used for the analysis.

RESULTS

Among the Swedish Somalis, 10% considered FGC and MGC to be comparable practices. A majority (98%) of the participants thought FGC could cause long-term health complications, but only 1% considered the physical health disadvantage of MGC would outweigh the physical health benefits. FGC was perceived to be a violation of children's rights by 60%, whereas this proportion for MGC was 3%. Individuals who had a dominant bridging social capital and those who expressed that performing FGC follows religion were more likely to think that FGC and MGC were comparable practices.

CONCLUSIONS

The increased global attention and emphasis on the comparability of genital cutting of boys and girls was not reflected in this study among Swedish Somalis. Rather, attitudes reflected the common description of the two practices in global public health campaigns, portraying FGC as a harmful practice violating children's rights, while describing MGC as a public health measure. Social interactions and separation of FGC from religion could explain why FGC and MGC were not considered comparable.

Male or female genital cutting: why 'health benefits' are morally irrelevant

The WHO, American Academy of Pediatrics and other Western medical bodies currently maintain that all medically unnecessary female genital cutting of minors is categorically a human rights violation, while either tolerating or actively endorsing medically unnecessary male genital cutting of minors, especially in the form of penile circumcision. Given that some forms of female genital cutting, such as ritual pricking or nicking of the clitoral hood, are less severe than penile circumcision, yet are often performed within the same families for similar (eg, religious) reasons, it may seem that there is an unjust double standard. Against this view, it is sometimes claimed that while female genital cutting has 'no health benefits', male genital cutting has at least some. Is that really the case? And if it is the case, can it justify the disparate treatment of children with different sex characteristics when it comes to protecting their genital integrity? I argue that, even if one accepts the health claims that are sometimes raised in this context, they cannot justify such disparate treatment. Rather, children of all sexes and genders have an equal right to (future) bodily autonomy. This includes the right to decide whether their own 'private' anatomy should be exposed to surgical risk, much less permanently altered, for reasons they themselves endorse when they are sufficiently mature.

Attitudes towards female genital cutting among adolescents in rural Burkina Faso: a multilevel analysis

OBJECTIVE

Despite decades of abandonment efforts, female genital cutting (FGC) prevalence rates in Burkina Faso remain high. We present updated prevalence data from rural adolescents and examine factors associated with FGC receipt and attitudes, testing predictions of social convention and modernisation theory regarding the abandonment process.

METHODS

We interviewed 1644 adolescents aged 12-20 years from 10 villages and one sector of Nouna town in the Nouna Health and Demographic Surveillance site in late 2017. Response-weighted prevalence for self-reported FGC receipt, beliefs about religious requirements, and attitudes about abandonment were calculated. We used bivariate regression and two-level hierarchical models to test whether social convention or modernisation theory-related factors predicted current FGC attitudes.

RESULTS

43% of women in our sample reported having undergone FGC; 74% of women and 76% of men believed FGC should be abandoned. The strongest predictors of FGC receipt were religion, ethnicity, the village's FGC rate and mother's education. The strongest predictors of FGC abandonment attitudes were religion, ethnicity, belief that FGC is religiously required, and own FGC status.  Males' attitudes were less determined by community factors than females'; females' attitudes were more strongly influenced by factors linked to modernization, such as maternal education and household wealth.

CONCLUSIONS

FGC continues to be common in rural and small-town Burkina Faso, and our analysis suggests that social conventions play an important role in its continuation. However, modernisation-related factors were stronger predictors of abandonment attitudes than of FGC status, particularly in adolescent women. The changes these relationships suggest may benefit the next generation of girls.

Current critiques of the WHO policy on female genital mutilation

In recent years, the dominant Western discourse on "female genital mutilation" (FGM) has increasingly been challenged by scholars. Numerous researchers contest both the terminology used and the empirical claims made in what has come to be called "the standard tale" of FGM (also termed "female genital cutting" [FGC]). The World Health Organization (WHO), a major player in setting the global agenda on this issue, maintains that all medically unnecessary cutting of the external female genitalia, no matter how slight, should be banned as torture and a violation of the human right to bodily integrity. However, the WHO targets only non-Western forms of female-only genital cutting, raising concerns about gender bias and cultural imperialism. Here, we summarize ongoing critiques of the WHO's terminology, ethicolegal assumptions, and empirical claims, including the claim that non-Western FGC as such constitutes an extreme form of discrimination against women. To this end, we highlight recent comparative studies of medically unnecessary genital cutting of all types, including those affecting adult women and teenagers in Western societies, individuals with differences of sex development (DSD), transgender persons, and males. In so doing, we attempt to clarify the grounds for a growing critical consensus that current anti-FGM laws and policies may be ethically incoherent, empirically unsupportable, and legally unsustainable.

Featured Article: Gender Bias in Pediatric Pain Assessment

OBJECTIVE

Accurate assessment of pain is central to diagnosis and treatment in healthcare, especially in pediatrics. However, few studies have examined potential biases in adult observer ratings of children's pain. Cohen, Cobb, & Martin (2014. Gender biases in adult ratings of pediatric pain. Children's Health Care, 43, 87-95) reported that adult participants rated a child undergoing a medical procedure as feeling more pain when the child was described as a boy as compared to a girl, suggesting a possible gender bias. To confirm, clarify, and extend this finding, we conducted a replication experiment and follow-up study examining the role of explicit gender stereotypes in shaping such asymmetric judgments.

METHODS

In an independent, pre-registered, direct replication and extension study with open data and materials (https://osf.io/t73c4/), we showed participants the same video from Cohen et al. (2014), with the child described as a boy or a girl depending on condition. We then asked adults to rate how much pain the child experienced and displayed, how typical the child was in these respects, and how much they agreed with explicit gender stereotypes concerning pain response in boys versus girls.

RESULTS

Similar to Cohen et al. (2014), but with a larger and more demographically diverse sample, we found that the "boy" was rated as experiencing more pain than the "girl" despite identical clinical circumstances and identical pain behavior across conditions. Controlling for explicit gender stereotypes eliminated the effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Explicit gender stereotypes-for example, that boys are more stoic or girls are more emotive-may bias adult assessment of children's pain.

Clitoral Reconstruction After Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: A Review of Surgical Techniques and Ethical Debate

INTRODUCTION

Clitoral reconstruction (CR) is a controversial surgical procedure performed for women who have undergone medically unnecessary, often ritualistic genital cutting involving the clitoris. Such cutting is known by several terms; we will use female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C). Treatments offered to women affected by complications of FGM/C include defibulation (releasing the scar of infibulation to allow penetrative intercourse, urinary flow, physiological delivery, and menstruation) and CR to decrease pain, improve sexual response, and create a pre-FGM/C genital appearance.

AIM

In this study, our aim is to summarize the medical literature regarding CR techniques and outcomes, and stimulate ethical discussion surrounding potential adverse impacts on women who undergo the procedure.

METHODS

A broad literature review was carried out to search any previous peer-reviewed publications regarding the techniques and ethical considerations for CR.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The main outcome measure includes benefits, risks, and ethical analysis of CR.

RESULTS

While we discuss the limited evidence regarding the risks and efficacy of CR, we did not find any peer-reviewed reports focused on ethical implications to date.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

CR can be indicated as a treatment for pain and potential improvement of associated sexual dysfunction when these have not responded to more conservative measures. Women must be appropriately informed about the risks of CR and the lack of strong evidence regarding potential benefits. They must be educated about their genital anatomy and disabused of any myths surrounding female sexual function as well as assessed and treated in accordance with the current scientific evidence and best clinical practices.

STRENGTH & LIMITATIONS

This is the first formal ethical discussion surrounding CR. This is not a systematic review, and the ethical discussion of CR has only just begun.

CONCLUSION

We present a preliminary ethical analysis of the procedure and its potential impact on women with FGM/C. Sharif Mohamed F, Wild V, Earp BD, et al. Clitoral Reconstruction After Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: A Review of Surgical Techniques and Ethical Debate. J Sex Med 2020;17:531-542.

From sameness to difference: Swedish Somalis' post-migration perceptions of the circumcision of girls and boys

In every society where non-therapeutic female circumcision (FC) occurs, so too does non-therapeutic male circumcision (MC). In the past few decades, the norm in Euro-American societies has been to distinguish between the practices: FC is banned, while MC is condoned or encouraged. We explored Somalis' post-migration perceptions of FC and MC, while considering that they once lived in a society where both practices were widely accepted and now live in a society where there is a legal ban on FC alongside acceptance of MC. Eighteen individual interviews and seven focus group discussions were conducted with Somali men and women in three Swedish cities. There seemed to be a continuity of values across male and female forms of genital cutting concerning being a good Muslim, not inflicting harm and upholding respectability. Following migration, however, a renegotiation of how these values relate to MC and FC resulted in a conceptual split between the two: MC was perceived as an unquestionably required practice, but FC was viewed as a practice that can be adapted or abandoned. In a new cultural context after migration, perceptions of ideal male and female genitals, and what kinds of inscriptions on the body are desired, seem to have changed.

False beliefs predict increased circumcision satisfaction in a sample of US American men

Critics of non-therapeutic male and female childhood genital cutting claim that such cutting is harmful. It is therefore puzzling that 'circumcised' women and men do not typically regard themselves as having been harmed by the cutting, notwithstanding the loss of sensitive, prima facie valuable tissue. For female genital cutting (FGC), a commonly proposed solution to this puzzle is that women who had part(s) of their vulvae removed before sexual debut 'do not know what they are missing' and may 'justify' their genitally-altered state by adopting false beliefs about the benefits of FGC, while simultaneously stigmatising unmodified genitalia as unattractive or unclean. Might a similar phenomenon apply to neonatally circumcised men? In this survey of 999 US American men, greater endorsement of false beliefs concerning circumcision and penile anatomy predicted greater satisfaction with being circumcised, while among genitally intact men, the opposite trend occurred: greater endorsement of false beliefs predicted less satisfaction with being genitally intact. These findings provide tentative support for the hypothesis that the lack-of-harm reported by many circumcised men, like the lack-of-harm reported by their female counterparts in societies that practice FGC, may be related to holding inaccurate beliefs concerning unaltered genitalia and the consequences of childhood genital modification.

Self deinfibulation during unassisted home delivery: a hitherto unknown dimension of female genital mutilation?

The severe scarring and distortion which follows genital mutilation may make subsequent childbirth difficult or traumatic. Deinfibulation has been advocated and practiced in hospitals. We present a patient who deinfibulated herself during a successful home delivery, and presented to hospital thereafter.

Medicalized Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: Contentious Practices and Persistent Debates

Purpose of Review

Female genital cutting/mutilation (FGM/C) performed by health care professionals (medicalization) and reduced severity of cutting have been advanced as strategies for minimizing health risks, sparking acrimonious ongoing debates. This study summarizes key debates and critically assesses supporting evidence.

Recent Findings

While medicalization is concentrated in Africa, health professionals worldwide have faced requests to perform FGM/C. Whether medicalization is hindering the decline of FGM/C is unclear. Factors motivating medicalization include, but are not limited to, safety concerns. Involvement of health professionals in advocacy to end FGM/C can address both the supply and demand side of medicalization, but raises ethical concerns regarding dual loyalty. Ongoing debates need to address competing rights claims.

Summary

Polarizing debates have brought little resolution. We call for a focus on common goals of protecting the health and welfare of girls living in communities where FGM/C is upheld and encourage more informed and open dialog.

In defence of genital autonomy for children

Arora and Jacobs (2016) assume that liberal societies should tolerate non-therapeutic infant male circumcision, and argue that it follows from this that they should similarly tolerate-or even encourage-what the authors regard as 'de minimis' forms of female genital mutilation (as defined by the World Health Organization). In this commentary, I argue that many serious problems would be likely to follow from a policy of increased tolerance for female genital mutilation, and that it may therefore be time to consider a less tolerant attitude toward non-therapeutic infant male circumcision. Ultimately, I suggest that children of whatever sex or gender should be free from having healthy parts of their most intimate sexual organs either damaged or removed, before they can understand what is at stake in such an intervention and agree to it themselves.