Search This Blog

Showing posts with label AAP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AAP. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

A Cut That Divides



September 20, 2010
Tara Bannow
Minnesota Daily

Members of the Somali community are torn over whether to condone a mild form of female circumcision as a rite of passage. Some believe U.S. doctors should be allowed to perform the procedure. Others are happy to do away with it.

Amina Ahmed had always been afraid of needles.

Now, as an 8 year old, she thought someone was going to use one in a place nobody was supposed to touch.

The quivering girl stood next to her younger sister and cousin. The oldest of the three, Ahmed was up first.

Just then — she ran.

An hour and a half later, her uncle and brother found her hiding in a nearby marketplace and brought her back to the small clinic in Mogadishu, Somalia.

Her clitoris was pricked and blood dripped out.

"All kids will cry, especially the little kids," Ahmed, now a 24-year-old University of Minnesota graduate, said. "But afterward, it was something to be proud of."

Much about the young woman, whose family fled the Somali civil war for a life in the United States when she was 13, speaks to her adherence to traditional Somali culture. She’s loyal to her Islamic faith, never goes outside without her headscarf and is dedicated to her vow of celibacy until marriage.

But to Ahmed’s dismay, she won’t be able to pass onto her future daughters a practice she considers sacred, as U.S. law has banned all forms of female circumcision since 1996, and Minnesota law has banned it since 1994.

The World Health Organization estimates that between 100 million and 140 million girls and women have undergone various forms of the procedure and another 3 million girls, most of them under the age of 15, undergo it each year.

Members of the Somali community in the Twin Cities disagree on whether to support the mild form of circumcision some refer to as a "clitoral nick," where a woman’s clitoris is poked and allowed to bleed, a practice that’s believed to render her "clean."

While some, like Ahmed, believe they should be able to practice the long-standing tradition, others are equally passionate about leaving it behind.

On par with ear piercing

Widespread discussion around the topic resurfaced in May of this year when the American Academy of Pediatrics Bioethics Committee reviewed a 1998 policy which banned any female circumcision. The committee recommended that the AAP approve what it called a "ritual nick," arguing it’s on par with ear piercing and "much less extensive than routine newborn male genital cutting," or circumcision.

Douglas Diekema, chairman of the AAP’s Bioethics Committee at the time, has long believed that pediatricians should be able to perform a nick as an alternative to a more dangerous procedure performed in a nonmedical setting.

This wasn’t the first time he’s sat on a committee that agreed to condone the practice. A pediatrician at the Seattle Children’s Hospital, Diekema looked at the issue back in 1996 when a number of Somali women across town at Harborview Medical Center were requesting that doctors circumcise their female babies. Diekema’s committee was tasked with deciding whether Harborview would allow its physicians to perform a nick.

The committee approved the procedure in the summer of 1996, but following a period of angry letters and Congress’ passage of a federal law banning all forms of female circumcision, the hospital overruled the committee in December of that year.

Now, 14 years later, Diekema’s had his second statement denied.
The AAP’s Board of Directors rescinded the Bioethics Committee’s statement in July, although "the committee stood behind it," Diekema said. In the statement, Diekema’s committee referred to nicking the hood of the clitoris, but it didn’t provide a clear description of the procedure, Diekema said, adding, "that probably would have been helpful for some people."

There are major differences between nicking the clitoral hood and the actual clitoris. The clitoris, like the head of the penis, is filled with nerve endings that, if damaged, would impact a woman’s ability to feel sexual pleasure, Jamie Feldman, a physician at the University Center for Sexual Health, said.

The hood, on the other hand, is a layer of skin comparable to the foreskin of a penis. It’s unlikely that there would be any side effects to nicking the hood, Diekema said. He admitted that clarifying that in the statement would likely have saved the committee from a lot of flack.

Shortly following its release, the statement drew furious feedback from doctors, advocacy groups and others who argued it promoted a useless practice that impeded on the child’s right to autonomy.

"To offer up some baby’s clitoral hood because you want a hospital to strengthen a relationship with a community is child abuse; for what, market-share?" wrote Benjamin Aubey, a Columbia University professor and pediatrician at the Harlem Hospital Center.

The purpose behind the policy, Diekema said, was to prevent the harm that could come from families sending their children overseas to have a circumcision performed in a nonmedical setting. It recommended that federal and state laws be changed to allow pediatricians to perform the nick.

"I think allowing pediatricians to perform the nick under the right circumstances would be better for some girls," Diekema, also a bioethics professor at the University of Washington in Seattle, said. "There’s no question, based on conversations I’ve had with people who take care of women from these communities, that in the absence of offering something that would not be psychologically or physically harmful, some will have a procedure done that will result in great harm."

A loophole in the current federal law doesn’t punish those who take their girls out of the country to have the procedure performed. A bill floating in committee seeks to fix that. Authored by Reps. Joseph Crowely, D-N.Y., and Mary Bono Mack, R-Calif., the Girls Protection Act would mimic those of European countries that have already made it a crime.

Neither could offer solid numbers on how many children might be affected, although a statement from Crowley used "very rough data based on census estimates" to guess that "it could be in the hundreds of thousands."

A number of local Somali women and medical professionals who work closely with Somali patients said that if children are being sent out of the country, it’s extremely rare.

Rights vs. protection

In a country that supposedly allows religious freedom, it makes Ahmed angry that she can’t pass on to her children what she says is a harmless practice.
"Why someone who does not know anything about my religion tell me I can’t do it?" Ahmed, who works as a respiratory nurse at Owatonna Hospital, said. "You don’t have the right to say that."

While some draw a definite distinction between female circumcision and Islam — defining the practice as a cultural one — several people said that the Quran offers the nick as an option.

Although female circumcision has been practiced among other religions, it’s most commonly associated with Islam.

Many point to a line in the Quran in which Prophet Muhammad says to a circumciser on the way to perform the procedure "do not overdo it, because it [the clitoris] is a good fortune for the spouse and a delight to her." In this statement, some claim that the prophet is advocating the mild form of circumcision. Still others believe the prophet is condemning the tradition altogether.

The practice is unknown in 80 percent of the Islamic world, and it originated in regions of Arabia and Africa before Christianity and Islam held a stake in those societies, according to a 2003 article in the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs.

It could certainly be seen as a violation of religious freedom, said Lora Harding Dundek, manager of the Birth and Family Education and Support Services department at the University of Minnesota Medical Center, Fairview Riverside.

"It’s that balance between the law as protecting people and law as violating people’s rights," she said. "It’s certainly not inconsistent with other debates we’ve had around religious freedom and private practice."

The U.S. would never consider a law that would ban male circumcision, a practice of Judeo-Christian origin, although there’s evidence that, as an invasive procedure, it carries certain risks, Harding Dundek said.

Compared to male circumcision, the ritual nick is "far less invasive," Diekema said. To make the two procedures equal, you’d have to remove the clitoral hood, he said.

"This would be more like taking a needle and poking the male foreskin so that you saw a drop of blood," he said.

It’d be difficult to say whether condoning the nick would reduce harm until the medical community knows how often circumcision still happens in the U.S., said Elizabeth Boyle, a sociology professor at the University. Boyle, who spent years studying female circumcision and wrote a book on the subject, said the laws against the practice discourage people to be forthcoming about their behaviors, she said.

"A really fundamental point is that we just don’t know whether it’s being perpetuated."

An ancient tradition

Although there’s some disagreement over the location, historians believe female circumcision originated as many as 2,000 years ago in Egypt.
For cultures obsessed with preserving a woman’s virginity, female circumcision has been viewed as the only way to truly achieve that goal.

While still practiced heavily in more than 28 countries in Africa, the Middle East and Asia, female circumcision has more or less ceased in the U.S. and other countries outside of Africa that have implemented laws against it.
While the World Health Organization defines four types, two forms of the practice are the most well-known.

The mild form, which some refer to as a "clitoral nick," or "sunnah," can consist of cutting, poking or removing part or all of either the clitoris or the clitoral hood.

The most severe form, which advocacy groups refer to as "female genital mutilation" or "infibulation," consists of removing the clitoris, labia minora and inner layers of the labia majora. Both sides of the vaginal opening are then sewn together almost completely, often leaving an opening the size of a pencil head or q-tip for the passage of urine or menstrual blood.

This procedure has taken on a number of forms depending on where it’s performed and by whom. In Somalia, a country with a high prevalence of the extreme procedure, it’s often performed by an elder woman in the clan — usually someone with no formal medical training — using a razorblade and no anesthesia.

The procedure has been the subject of intense, sweeping educational efforts by groups like UNICEF, the U.N. Human Rights Council and the WHO over the past two decades.

In the short term, it’s caused everything from hemorrhage, shock, severe pain, infection and death. Over the years, women who’ve undergone the procedure experience a high number of urinary tract infections. Intercourse tends to be excruciating, and most of the women are unable to achieve orgasm.
Furthermore, 25 to 30 percent of women who undergo the procedure are infertile, sometimes because of their inability to have sex, according to a 2003 article in the Journal of Cultural Diversity.

Perceptions are being changed

There are several waves of change working their way through the Somali community as they adjust to life in the U.S., but perhaps none have been as abrupt as the shift away from circumcision.
Back in Somalia, women were circumcised to conform to society, but in the Western world, the practice is a deviation from the norm.

Iman Warsame, a University senior studying psychology and English, estimates that "almost all" of the women in her mother’s generation have had the extreme form of circumcision performed on them. But among her generation, she thinks, almost no one has had the extreme form, and less than half have had the mild form.

A number of medical professionals said they see the severe form of the procedure much less frequently than a decade ago. It’s much more commonly seen in older women than in teenagers and is almost nonexistent in children.

Even in Somalia and other African countries, educational campaigns have begun to chip away at the number of families who carry on the more damaging procedure. Nowadays, it happens predominately in rural areas and less and less in urban areas like Mogadishu.

Ahmed’s five older sisters each had an infibulation done. By the time Ahmed’s turn came, her mother had become more educated about the side effects of the practice and decided on the clitoral nick instead.

"She asked forgiveness for her other daughters," Ahmed said. "She knew it was the wrong thing to do."

Whether most Somali women in the U.S. today have undergone the mild form of circumcision generally depends on when they moved.

The average age at which girls are circumcised in Somalia is between 7 and 9 years old, so those whose families fled the country when they were younger than that weren’t likely to have been subjected to it.

It’s an example of a shift toward Westernization, Ahmed argues — one that shouldn’t be forced.  "It’s frustrating," Ahmed said. "It’s like you have to take American culture. You have to leave your religion behind."

Warsame, the events coordinator of the Somali Student Association, strongly disagreed. She said only "ultra conservative" mothers would want to circumcise their daughters today, and most don’t mind that it’s illegal.
In interviews, several local Somali women estimated that about half of their community believes it should be legalized, and the other half is glad it’s not.

The original goal of the tradition, mostly supported by mothers, was to make their daughters more attractive marriage prospects, and now that not being circumcised is becoming acceptable to Somali males in the U.S., circumcision is unnecessary, Warsame said.

"Your daughter’s not going to marry a guy from your generation, she’s going to marry a guy from her generation," Warsame said, "and it’s not very popular now."

Fatuma Farah, a junior at the University majoring in child psychology, agreed.
"Guys today are saying, ‘Hey, if you’re not circumcised, that’s OK,’ " she said. "Perceptions are being changed."

But even the way it’s fading away irritates Warsame.

"The only thing that’s stopping parents is that they know it’s not as fashionable as it used to be," she said. "Can you imagine that? My body would be under the whims of a guy my age, what he might think."

Just one more kind of trauma

Although it was rare in the U.S. to begin with, the practice of circumcision seems to have ceased by and large among those who’ve immigrated to the U.S. But Somali women of all ages still bear the effects of the practice.
Jill Sandeen, a midwife at the University of Minnesota Medical Center, Fairview Riverside Campus, said while it used to be very common at the height of Somali immigration, she doesn’t see many extreme circumcisions anymore.
In conversations with her many Somali patients, she’s learned about their terrible experiences with circumcision.

"One woman said she was 7 and was told there was going to be a party for her," Sandeen said. "And then they strapped her down and she couldn’t pee for four days."

And while such an event would be traumatizing for the average American, these women’s lives have been marked by tragedy, so their circumcision doesn’t stick out, she said.

"They come from a horrible, war-torn place where people were murdered before their eyes," she said. "I think on some level this is just one more kind of trauma they’ve incorporated into their existence."

Confusion over anatomy

As a midwife, the topic of circumcision is almost inevitable when Sandeen meets a new Somali patient. But among many of them, there isn’t a strong understanding of their own anatomy, she said.

In the case of one woman, "she didn’t know that she still had a clitoris," she said. "It kind of takes us back to the 1950s. They don’t even know what’s down there or what was down there."  Others in the medical community share similar stories.

Janis Keil Day, another midwife at the Fairview, Riverside clinic, said she’ll always ask new Somali patients whether they’ve been circumcised. Many will answer no, but when she goes under their hospital gown, she’ll discover otherwise.  "I’m not sure if it’s because they don’t necessarily understand the question you’re asking or if there’s a language barrier," she said.

In any case, many women within the Somali community have dramatically different views on the side effects and implications of the various forms of the procedure. While almost everyone agrees that infibulation is extremely damaging, there’s more division on milder forms.

Ahmed said she doesn’t believe she’s experienced side effects like infection or decreased sensitivity from her circumcision.

A valuable organ

Malyun Duale observes the effects of Westernization on her five daughters with frustration.

"Talking back to their mom," she said.

She talks openly about her concern that they’ll abandon their Somali roots, become consumed with American "sass" and disrespect their mother.

But if there’s one thing the 55-year-old Somalia native is not afraid of, it’s of losing the circumcision tradition. Duale, who moved to the U.S. in 2001, is vocal about not having subjected any of her daughters to the procedure.
"If God creates you and you say ‘you missed something’ or ‘you didn’t do this’ and fix it," she said. "No, the religion says to avoid that."

Adjusting her bright headscarf, Duale’s face falls into a smile naturally as she speaks. She’s passionate about ridding the Somali community of all forms of circumcision and believes education is the way to do it.

Before she left Somalia, she saw the dramatic impact of UNICEF and other organization’s campaigns on circumcision’s prevalence.

She recalls her own circumcision, a mild version, when she was 6 years old. It was done in a clinic in Mogadishu with anesthesia, so it didn’t hurt. She compared the procedure to a finger prick to test for hemoglobin in the blood.

Still, she warned, the procedure can have dramatic side effects. Tugging at the healthy skin on the top of her hand as a demonstration, she noted that any time an operation is performed, normally healthy tissue is forever scarred. Since blood collects in the clitoris when a woman is aroused, she said, the scar tissue could hinder the woman’s ability to feel sexual pleasure.

"This is a valuable organ," she said. "We have to respect this organ and know it’s sensitive. It’s not like a leg or a hand. It needs more care."

Duale has worked at the Fairview Riverside clinic as a doula for seven years now, providing emotional and physical support for Somali women as they have children. The Somali Doula Program, a support service for Somali women through the birthing process, was implemented at the Riverside clinic in 2002.

Duale was surprised to learn that college-educated women would still practice the mild form of circumcision if it were legal. She said she thinks those in higher education usually learn to analyze beyond the scope of their own culture.

For years, the idea behind circumcision was to keep a woman celibate, she said. But today, people just need to live according to their morals and don’t need surgery to do that.

"If you’re circumcised or not, you say ‘I’m not going to have sex until I’m married, until I have a good person that I want to share my life with,’ " she said. "The decision depends on how you choose to live."




Friday, September 10, 2010

Female genital mutilation: US pediatricians withdraw outrageous proposal


September 10, 2010
The Freethinker

THE American Academy of Pediatrics has reversed its recent proposal that doctors be given permission to perform a ceremonial pinprick or nick on a girl’s clitoris if it would keep their families from sending them overseas for a full circumcision.

The AAP said last month that it would like American doctors to be given permission to perform the ceremonial procedure on girls born into communities that practice female genital mutilation.

The proposal, made to placate immigrants from mainly Muslim cultures – African, Middle Eastern and Asian – ignited a storm of criticism from opponents of female genital mutilation.

Dr Judith S Palfrey, President of the Academy, said:

We’re saying don’t do it. Do everything that you can to support that family in this tough time, but don’t be pulled into the procedure.

Writing in the Daily Beast, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the former Dutch MP who vigorously campaigns to protect women from militant Islam, pointed out:Female circumcision is a custom in many African and Asian countries whereby the genitals of a girl child are cut. There are roughly four procedures. First there is the ritual pinprick. This is what pediatrics refers to as the “nick” option. To give you an idea of what that means, visualize a preteen girl held down by adults. Her clitoris is tweaked so that the circumciser can hold it between her forefinger and her thumb. Then she takes a needle and pierces it using enough force for it to go into the peak of the clitoris. As soon as it bleeds, the parents and others attending the ceremony cheer, the girl is comforted and the celebrations follow.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Opinion: Cornell and the Clitoris Barbarians: Clitoroplasty is just vaginal mutilation by another name



September 1, 2010
Sara Kassabian / CU Independent
Armed with surgical tools and operating behind the protection of academia’s bureaucracy is Dix Poppas, a pediatric urologist at Cornell University practicing “medical research” that is essentially genital mutilation supported by university research funds and a few degrees.
Under the guise of medical research, Poppas and others have been operating on what they judge to be “oversized clitorises” on women ages five to 25.
There is no research that states that having a slightly large clitoris will hinder the sexual or mental development of young girls. The potential risks that follow Poppas’ clitoroplasty are severe and highly probable as patients have the potential for nerve damage, urinary tract infections, incontinence and an inability to experience orgasm.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) withdrew their initial policy statement in May regarding female genital cutting (FGC), stating that FGC can be life threatening.
“…It is important that the world health community understands the AAP is totally opposed to all forms of female genital cutting, both here in the U.S. and anywhere else in the world.”

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Breaking the silence of genital mutilation

July 6, 2010
By Catherine Reilly - Irish Times

A WINNING SMILE fails to conceal 19-year-old Amina’s* horrific burden, one that can render her bed-bound for days at the asylum seeker hostel in Co Galway where she lives.

Aged six, her family sanctioned a local “circumciser” in her native Somalia to mutilate her genitals, and the consequences reverberate across time and place and within mind, body and soul. When her period comes, it feels as though “the cutting” is happening all over again.

“Oh my God the pain, you are afraid of the pain,” says the teenager, her neat hijab framing a welcoming face. “I am like, ‘Oh my God, let it not come, let it not come’.”

She endures chronic stress, frequent infections, back pain and is anaemic, all likely traceable to that watershed day when she was mutilated alongside three other girls.

More than 2,500 migrant women in Ireland are estimated to have suffered some form of female genital mutilation (FGM) in their countries, according to AkiDwA, a national network of African and migrant women.

Social customs, control over female sexuality, marriageability and religion (although no faith obliges FGM) are commonly cited motivators behind a practice usually carried out by local women using basic items like blades and scissors.

FGM is most prevalent in Africa, with vast country-to-country variations: it’s very common in Egypt, Sierra Leone and Guinea, for example, yet quite rare in Cameroon and Uganda.

It involves partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons, says the World Health Organisation (WHO), which defines four main types.

The most common are type one – partial or total removal of the clitoris (an erectile part of the female genitals) and, in very rare cases, only the prepuce (the fold of skin surrounding the clitoris); and type two – partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora (the labia are the lips that surround the vagina).

In Amina’s war-torn homeland of Somalia, it’s almost universal, and the majority suffer its most brutal form, infibulation or type three. This involves narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal formed by cutting and repositioning the inner or outer labia, with or without removal of the clitoris.

When Amina feels intense pain, she takes painkillers prescribed for a back complaint, and suggests a reluctance to reveal her experience of FGM – which she terms “circumcision” – to medical professionals.

Her current GP in Galway is “nice”, she says, but Amina believes disclosure will result in being “told” to have her vaginal orifice “opened”. If she was later sent back to Somalia like that, her virginity would be questioned, she wouldn’t find a husband and would be a social outcast, she says.

“They wouldn’t buy my story if I said I just went to the hospital . No man would believe it, and I’d have to do it again.”

Many FGM-affected women in Ireland are reluctant to talk to healthcare workers, says Ifrah Ahmed (22), from Somalia, a Dublin-based woman who is a representative of the End FGM European Campaign led by Amnesty International Ireland.

In May, Ahmed organised a fashion show in Dublin to raise awareness of the procedure, opened by then Lord Mayor Emer Costello and attended by up to 300 people, many of them African-born teens.

“They want to get help but they’re scared of showing the doctor their private areas,” she says. “FGM is unusual in Ireland, so people will be shocked and you have to explain over and over. That’s what makes people say, ‘No, I don’t want to go’.”

According to Dr Andrea Scharfe Nugent of Dublin’s Coombe Hospital and course director of the MSc in women’s health at the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI), more awareness among healthcare personnel is needed and particularly vital in the obstetrical field.

“There needs to be awareness concerning which countries have a high rate of FGM in order that medical professionals would know to ask questions, and ascertain the type of FGM to assess their specific risk for delivery,” she says.

Nugent adds that a resource launched in January 2009 by the RCSI and AkiDwA, entitled Female Genital Mutilation, Information for Health-Care Professionals Working in Ireland , has proven “very popular in the Irish setting and internationally”.

Funded by the Office of the Minister for Integration, it provides specialist information including expressions in English and native languages that women may use to describe FGM (a term unlikely to be used in itself).

According to the HSE, it will fund updated copies of this and is supporting the cost of a project worker at AkiDwA to “progress implementation of prioritised recommendations” outlined in a national FGM action plan.

So far, more than 500 health professionals such as midwives, GPs and social workers have been reached through training sessions financially backed by the HSE and previously by the Office of the Minister for Integration, while the HSE says it is developing patient information leaflets on FGM. Child protection is “strongly emphasised in all efforts” around informing women of the risks of the practice, says a spokesperson.

Meanwhile, the Department of Health says draft legislation specifically banning FGM is nearing completion. It will make illegal the sending or taking of children resident in Ireland to another country for the practice, a scenario not covered by the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997, which may also be flawed in terms of outlawing possible cases of FGM in Ireland.

No known cases of FGM have taken place here, but alarmingly, there appears to have been incidences of children being brought overseas for the procedure.

“We have heard of cases of girls being brought outside the country to have it performed,” says Sioban O’Brien Green, co-ordinator of the Migrant Women’s Health Project at AkiDwA. “What we have heard anecdotally is referring to Ethiopia and Nigeria,” according to O’Brien Green, who says these accounts involve “a very small number”.

It’s an issue that other western countries continue to grapple with, as underlined by a recent proposal by the American Academy of Paediatrics (AAP) for legal changes to enable paediatricians in the US to “reach out to families by offering a ritual nick as a possible compromise to avoid greater harm”.

The AAP withdrew this statement after critics accused it of supporting the “medicalisation” of FGM.

Amina, who would like to be a midwife or Montessori teacher, believes the key to unlocking mindsets is held by women like herself. She says she’d engage in dialogue on FGM within her disparate community in Ireland if a forum developed, and despite her own fears, says she wouldn’t allow any form of FGM to be perpetrated on her future children.

She believes those who sanctioned her ordeal will be called to answer – though not in this world.

“It is cultural, it is not religion, it is not in the Koran,” she says. “On the Day of Judgment, they will be asked about what they did to us. I can say, ‘Oh Mum, I forgive you’, but in God’s eyes, they are not forgiven.”

*Amina is not her real name

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Not Anyone’s Daughter

June 30, 2010
The New York Times

Advocates have been fighting to end female genital mutilation across Africa and parts of the Middle East and Asia, marking progress one village at a time. The battleground extends to immigrant communities in the developed world, which still value this horrifying ritual.

Female genital mutilation has been banned in the United States since 1996. Representatives Joseph Crowley of New York and Mary Bono Mack of California are now sponsoring legislation that would make it a felony to take a girl out of the country to have the procedure, punishing violators with fines and a five-year prison term. Supporters hope the law will be a deterrent and embolden more young women or their mothers to resist family or community pressure and defend themselves.

The need for strong resistance was underscored after the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a statement that a milder version of mutilation — a nick of a girl’s genitals done in a doctor’s office — should be made legal in the United States as a way to prevent families from taking children abroad for the full brutal procedure. Advocates rightly argued that medicalizing this violence against women would only legitimize it and undermine the force of the ban. The academy has since withdrawn the statement.

Congress should move quickly to pass the Girls Protection Act. More needs to be done. State health authorities should step up education campaigns in immigrant communities. Pediatricians could make it their business to recognize and report the signs of abuse.

Federal officials could ensure that ports of entry like Kennedy International Airport in New York City have informational signs, hot lines and a shelter. An international departure terminal may provide the last chance to save a girl from a lifetime of suffering and early death.

Friday, June 25, 2010

A "ritual nick" too far

June 25, 2010
By Victoria Moore - The Sydney Morning Herald

In October 1992 a program went to air on ABC TV called Where Angels Fear to Tread on female genital mutilation. I was involved through a program the ABC offered to aspiring writers called Writer-in-Observation.


The storyline was of a young schoolgirl of Muslim background who was brought to the surgery by her mother to have a procedure performed that involved female genital mutilation. This placed the doctors in a dilemma. It was a procedure that although not banned at the time was strongly advised against by the Australian Medical Association, leaving individual doctors to make their own ethical decisions.

The arguments made were that if Australian doctors did not perform this procedure, it would, much like the abortion debate, lead to back-alley bungling or the girl being taken overseas to have the procedure.

The young girl, herself, it was revealed, had serious doubts, but the pressure from within her community to have the procedure was extreme. Pressure that was brought to bear by the mothers and grandmothers and, indeed, the euphemism most commonly used was "going to grandma's".

In 1994, two years after the screening of this episode, the AMA banned all forms of female genital mutilation Australia-wide. But, now here in Australia, it has been suggested that a "ritual nick" could be performed to appease cultural sensibilities in some Muslim communities. http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-national/doctors-dont-support-ritual-nicking-20100528-wi3t.html

The idea for a "ritual nick" was raised by the American Academy of Paediatrics, and promptly retracted. The procedure is a prick or nick of a girl's clitoral skin.

It is a less severe form of female genital mutilation, which in its most acute form, called infibulation, involves the removal of the clitoris, the labia minora and the sewing up of the labia majora covering the urethra and leaving only a small vaginal opening. In some countries still, if a girl has not had this procedure performed she is considered unworthy of marriage. It also makes childbirth extremely dangerous — can you imagine giving birth through a vagina that has been sewn up so that only a very small opening remains? Doctors in London 30 years ago were forced to perform hysterectomies to save the lives of Middle Eastern women who had given birth after enduring female genital mutilation.

And yet as this idea of a "ritual nick" gains media coverage here, attitudes against female genital mutilation continue to advance throughout the Middle East. Egypt, for example, now performs these "ritual nicks" as opposed to the more severe form of mutilation, but infibulation is still prevalent in East African countries and small communities in Asia. It is estimated that between 4 and 5 million of these procedures are performed annually world-wide.

In Muslim countries where these customs are still being observed, there are woman taking great risks, sometimes life threatening, to protect their young girls from these practices. They themselves want it to cease once and for all. If we in Australia legitimise these practices, however ritualistically, it will totally negate their work, their beliefs and their futures. Now is not the time to succumb to this tradition.

Indeed in Switzerland it is not only illegal to peform these types of procedures, but children can also be removed from their parents if it is found that they have subjected them to female genital mutilation. This has resulted in all but ceasing the practice in the East African immigrant population in that country.

The federal government should pass into law all the recommendations of the Australian Medical Association that have been in place since 1994 so that female genital mutilation, in whatever form, is not performed here.

Victoria Moore is a freelance writer now living in regional Victoria.

Monday, June 14, 2010

Female Genital Cutting: Affecting Young Girls in America

Many U.S. doctors faced with decision when asked to cut young girls


June 14, 2010
By Brinda Adhikari and Lara Salahi

Female genital cutting (FGC) is a tradition that many assume to be affecting girls living only in Africa and Asia. But this rite of passage procedure is an all too familiar for many women living in the U.S.

The practice of cutting encompasses all procedures involving partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons, according to the World Health Organization. In some countries, many of these girls will have their clitoris completely removed to deny them sexual pleasure. And at its most severe, some of them will have their vaginas sewn shut to preserve their virginity.

For resources on female genital cutting, go to ABCNews.com's additional resources page.

"It's worse than anything in this world," said one young woman living in America, known as Mary, who asked to conceal her real name for fear ofretribution from her community.

Mary had the most radical form of cutting performed on her in her home country. Her clitoris was removed and her vagina was stitched together.

Another young woman, anonymously identified as Amy, told ABC News that if her parents found out she was speaking out about female genital cutting they would "literally" kill her.

Although the procedure has been officially banned in the U.S. since 1996, some parents who want to stay true to their traditions ask American doctors to cut their daughters, leaving many doctors with a complicated choice.

Female genital cutting, a ritual thousands of years old, is a tradition many mothers and fathers feel obligated to have their daughters undergo because, without it, they are deemed unworthy of marriage. It is a cultural practice, without religious basis or any medical benefits. In fact, studies show that women who have been through it may suffer a lifetime of devastating complications, from severe infections, to pain and bleeding, and even a higher risk of death during childbirth. Some women die from the procedure itself.

Each day in Africa and Asia, more than 8,000 girls between infancy and age 15 undergo female genital cutting, an estimated total of three million girls annually.

"Obviously [parents] don't use the word 'female genital mutilation,' said Terry Dunn, an obstretrician gynecologist in Denver, Colo. "What the mom of the patient says is, 'I want to have the procedure that makes my daughter like me.'" Many physicians who consider FGC a horrifying treatment of a girl suffer a dreadful dilemma. If they say no, the young patient may become one of tens of thousands of young girls taken back to their home countries, in a process known as 'vacation-cutting.' Once there, the girls are often cut using a broken glass or unsterilized razor blades, and, more often than not, without anesthesia. While FGC may be banned in the U.S., there is no law protecting girls from being taken overseas to have the procedure in another country.

The CDC estimates that between 150,000 to 200,000 girls in the United States are in danger of being taken overseas during their time off from school to undergo vacation cutting. In fact, Amy said her parents were pressuring her to return to their home country. Instead, Amy said, she ran away from home.

"If I went back, I would have been cut," said Amy.


Dilemma Doctors Face

According to Dr. Doug Diekema, a pediatrician at Seattle's Children's Hospital and former chairman of the American Academy of Pediatrics' bioethics committee, by refusing to cut girls in the U.S., many doctors may be putting these girls' lives in jeopardy.

"It's very easy to take the high road in cases like this," said Diekema. "But when you're dealing with religious or cultural beliefs, saying no sometimes is not sufficient for people and it will not necessarily eliminate the practice."

In fact, Diekema and a few of his colleagues put forth the idea that American doctors use a so-called ritual nick as an alternative , to keep parents from seeking more dangerous methods of cutting. And, based on Diekema's recommendation, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) released an official policy statement saying, "the ritual nick would not cause physical harm."

"The cut itself would be tiny, really just like a poke with a needle so that there might be a drop of blood," said Diekema.

But to many opponents of any form of procedure resembling the traditional female cutting, a ritual nick should not be acceptable as a substitute.

"What the AAP is in fact doing is 'wink, wink, nod, nod' in order to protect your patient from a possible worse form of [FGC], let's just spread her legs and nick her," said Taine Bien-Aime, president of the international human rights organization, Equality Now. "The reality is that what [that] statement does is perpetuate female genital mutilation. There is no other way around it."

But Diekema said that the proposed ritual nicking should not be considered a form of mutilation. "If you look up any definition of mutilation in the dictionary, it doesn't apply to this particular procedure," said Diekema.


Running Out of Options

For Mary, who has seen too many friends suffer through this, ritual nicking is not an acceptable compromise by doctors to keep parents from vacation cutting.

When asked by senior health and medical editor, Dr. Richard Besser, what pediatricians should do when faced with a family who wants to take their daughter back to their home country to undergo genital cutting, Mary said, "Call child services on them."

But, Dr. Nawal Nour, director of the African Women's Health Center at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, Mass., said it is important not to vilify the immigrant community.

"Blame is never the solution," said Nour. "Empower them, rather than let's cut them and hurt them."

The center, which exclusively helps immigrant women deal with the complications caused by FGC, educates women about the dangers of FGC to prevent cutting for future generations. Layla Guled, a Somali language interpreter, says parents often feel as though they don't have a choice. Moreover, she says, they have the best intentions.

"Our mothers are trying to do the right thing for us," said Guled. "But our generation is trying to fight it."

The AAP offered clarification to their initial policy statement, saying that while the ritual nick may be considered an option, the practice of cutting is still harmful to girls. But after questions by ABC News regarding ritual nicking recommendations, the AAP withdrew their policy statement completely, saying that it had caused too much confusion and controversy.

"I want to make it very clear that the American Academy of Pediatrics opposes any form of female genital cutting, and that would include the ritual nick," Dr. Judith Palfrey, president of the AAP, told ABC News.

Still, Diekema said he stands behind the idea of ritual nicking as an alternative to vacation cutting.

Yet so many U.S. doctors still face a terrible set of options. And while millions of young girls wait for some answer on their fate, some who speak publically about it say they are not giving up the fight.

"We have to change a whole culture," said Mary. "Maybe we can't change their generation but we can change our own generation. We know it's wrong. There's nothing right about this."






Copyright © 2010 ABC News Internet Ventures

Female Genital Cutting: Where to Get Help

For Women in Communities That Face FGC, There's Help

June 14, 2010
By Brinda Adhikari and Lara Salahi – ABC News

Female genital cutting (FGC) encompasses all procedures involving partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons, according to the World Health Organization. While the procedure seems like a tribal tradition undergone on other countries, many young women in the U.S. have undergone FGC.
For many girls who may have already undergone FGC or who are facing community pressure to undergo the procedure, there's help. Here are a few places to turn:
Equality Now: is an international human rights organization that advocates for the social welfare of girls and women.
 Sanctuary for Families is a non-profit organization based in New York that offers help for women seeking assistance regarding FGC.
 American Academy of Pediatrics is an expert-based organization that offers medical information and policy statements on children's health, including young girls.
 UNICEF , a part of the United Nations, advocates for children's rights and protection worldwide.
 Tostan is a nongovernmental organization dedicated to preserving African women's rights and to empowering African communities to abandon FGC.
Brigham and Women's Hospital: African Women's Health Center is a clinic committed to improving the health of refugee and immigrant women who have undergone FGC.