On Performing Reinfibulation in Catholic Hospitals

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-92
Author(s):  
Addison S. Tenorio ◽  

Female genital mutilation/cutting is a multifaceted, culturally entrenched issue. In response to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ resources dealing with the issue of FGM/C, this paper explores what resources sexual ethics can provide Catholic hospitals facing this issue, specifically with regards to the request for reinfibulation (the restoration of infibulation, also called FGM Type III). FGM/C ought not to be treated as a univocal medical practice; rather, in natural law evaluations of the act, the practice of reinfibulation ought to be separately acknowledged. Reinfibulation cannot be properly considered a mutilation in the same way that other types of FGM/C are. Thus reinfibulation should be performed in Catholic hospitals for those women who request it, as part of delivering culturally competent care, justifiable through the principle of material cooperation.

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (14) ◽  
pp. 1760-1770
Author(s):  
Mariya Taher

Sahiyo Stories brought together women from across the United States to create personalized digital stories narrating the experience of undergoing female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C). FGM/C continues because people believe that if a girl does not undergo it, she will not grow up to be a “good woman.” For centuries, then, women have been afraid to speak about FGM/C for fear of ostracization from their communities, getting loved ones in trouble, and other reasons. Sahiyo Stories shatters this silence and the digital stories collection is woven together by a united sentiment to protect future generations of girls from this harm.


2016 ◽  
Vol 131 (2) ◽  
pp. 340-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Howard Goldberg ◽  
Paul Stupp ◽  
Ekwutosi Okoroh ◽  
Ghenet Besera ◽  
David Goodman ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 628-633
Author(s):  
Judith Ormrod

This qualitative study aims to explore and analyse the experiences of women living with female genital mutilation (FGM) who have sought help from healthcare providers within the NHS. Nine women aged 20–46 years were recruited from support organisations in the north-west of England and interviewed about their experiences of NHS care and if any screening had taken place in relation to the consequences of living with FGM. The interviews were undertaken in English, audiotaped, transcribed and analysed using a framework analysis method. Eight of the women had given birth and the main contact with the NHS had been with midwifery, gynaecology and paediatric services. Three key themes emerged from the qualitative data: involvement with healthcare professionals; silent suffering; and compassionate communication. Findings highlight the importance of sensitive and culturally competent communication nurses require to support women and refer them to appropriate services.


2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Els Leye ◽  
◽  
Nina Van Eekert ◽  
Simukai Shamu ◽  
Tammary Esho ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Although Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) is internationally considered a harmful practice, it is increasingly being medicalized allegedly to reduce its negative health effects, and is thus suggested as a harm reduction strategy in response to these perceived health risks. In many countries where FGM/C is traditionally practiced, the prevalence rates of medicalization are increasing, and in countries of migration, such as the United Kingdom, the United States of America or Sweden, court cases or the repeated issuing of statements in favor of presumed minimal forms of FGM/C to replace more invasive forms, has raised the debate between the medical harm reduction arguments and the human rights approach. Main body The purpose of this paper is to discuss the arguments associated with the medicalization of FGM/C, a trend that could undermine the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 5.3. The paper uses four country case studies, Egypt, Indonesia, Kenya and UK, to discuss the reasons for engaging in medicalized forms of FGM/C, or not, and explores the ongoing public discourse in those countries concerning harm reduction versus human rights, and the contradiction between medical ethics, national criminal justice systems and international conventions. The discussion is structured around four key hotly contested ethical dilemmas. Firstly, that the WHO definition of medicalized FGM/C is too narrow allowing medicalized FGM to be justified by many healthcare professionals as a form of harm reduction which contradicts the medical oath of do no harm. Secondly, that medicalized FGM/C is a human rights abuse with lifelong consequences, no matter who performs it. Thirdly, that health care professionals who perform medicalized FGM/C are sustaining cultural norms that they themselves support and are also gaining financially. Fourthly, the contradiction between protecting traditional cultural rights in legal constitutions versus human rights legislation, which criminalizes FGM/C. Conclusion More research needs to be done in order to understand the complexities that are facilitating the medicalization of FGM/C as well as how policy strategies can be strengthened to have a greater de-medicalization impact. Tackling medicalization of FGM/C will accelerate the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goal of ending FGM by 2030.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document