Female genital mutilation (FGM)
comprises all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external
female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical
reasons.
The practice is mostly carried
out by
traditional circumcisers, who often play other central roles in communities,
such as attending childbirths. In many settings, health care providers perform
FGM due to the erroneous belief that the procedure is safer when medicalized.
WHO strongly urges health professionals not to perform such procedures.
FGM is recognized internationally as a
violation of the human rights of girls and women. It reflects deep-rooted
inequality between the sexes, and constitutes an extreme form of discrimination
against women. It is nearly always carried out on minors and is a violation of
the rights of children. The practice also violates a person's rights to health,
security and physical integrity, the right to be free from torture and cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment, and the right to life when the procedure
results in death.
Procedures
Female genital mutilation is
classified into 4 major types.
Type 1: Often referred to as
clitoridectomy, this is the partial or total removal of the clitoris (a small,
sensitive and erectile part of the female genitals), and in very rare cases,
only the prepuce (the fold of skin surrounding the clitoris).
Type 2: Often referred to as excision,
this is the partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora (the
inner folds of the vulva), with or without excision of the labia majora (the
outer folds of skin of the vulva ).
Type 3: Often referred to as
infibulation, this is the narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation
of a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and repositioning the labia
minora, or labia majora, sometimes through stitching, with or without removal
of the clitoris (clitoridectomy).
Type 4: This includes all other
harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, e.g.
pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterizing the genital area.
Deinfibulation refers to the practice
of cutting open the sealed vaginal opening in a woman who has been infibulated,
which is often necessary for improving health and well-being as well as to
allow intercourse or to facilitate childbirth.
No health benefits, only harm
FGM has no health benefits, and it
harms girls and women in many ways. It involves removing and damaging healthy
and normal female genital tissue, and interferes with the natural functions of
girls' and women's bodies. Generally speaking, risks increase with increasing
severity of the procedure.
Immediate complications can include:
severe pain
excessive bleeding (haemorrhage)
genital tissue swelling
fever
infections e.g., tetanus
urinary problems
wound healing problems
injury to surrounding genital tissue
shock
death.
Long-term consequences can include:
urinary problems (painful urination,
urinary tract infections);
vaginal problems (discharge, itching,
bacterial vaginosis and other infections);
menstrual problems (painful
menstruations, difficulty in passing menstrual blood, etc.);
scar tissue and keloid;
sexual problems (pain during
intercourse, decreased satisfaction, etc.);
increased risk of childbirth
complications (difficult delivery, excessive bleeding, caesarean section, need
to resuscitate the baby, etc.) and newborn deaths;
need for later surgeries: for example,
the FGM procedure that seals or narrows a vaginal opening (type 3) needs to be
cut open later to allow for sexual intercourse and childbirth (deinfibulation).
Sometimes genital tissue is stitched again several times, including after
childbirth, hence the woman goes through repeated opening and closing procedures,
further increasing both immediate and long-term risks;
psychological problems (depression,
anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, low self-esteem, etc.).
Health complications of female genital
mutilation
Who is at risk?
Procedures are mostly carried out on
young girls sometime between infancy and adolescence, and occasionally on adult
women. More than 3 million girls are estimated to be at risk for FGM annually.
More than 200 million girls and women
alive today have been cut in 30 countries in Africa, the Middle East and Asia
where FGM is concentrated 1.
The practice is most common in the
western, eastern, and north-eastern regions of Africa, in some countries the
Middle East and Asia, as well as among migrants from these areas. FGM is therefore
a global concern.
Cultural and social factors for
performing FGM
The reasons why female genital
mutilations are performed vary from one region to another as well as over time,
and include a mix of sociocultural factors within families and communities. The
most commonly cited reasons are:
Where FGM is a social convention
(social norm), the social pressure to conform to what others do and have been
doing, as well as the need to be accepted socially and the fear of being
rejected by the community, are strong motivations to perpetuate the practice.
In some communities, FGM is almost universally performed and unquestioned.
FGM is often considered a necessary
part of raising a girl, and a way to prepare her for adulthood and marriage.
FGM is often motivated by beliefs
about what is considered acceptable sexual behaviour. It aims to ensure
premarital virginity and marital fidelity. FGM is in many communities believed
to reduce a woman's libido and therefore believed to help her resist
extramarital sexual acts. When a vaginal opening is covered or narrowed (type
3), the fear of the pain of opening it, and the fear that this will be found
out, is expected to further discourage extramarital sexual intercourse among
women with this type of FGM.
Where it is believed that being cut
increases marriageability, FGM is more likely to be carried out.
FGM is associated with cultural ideals
of femininity and modesty, which include the notion that girls are clean and
beautiful after removal of body parts that are considered unclean, unfeminine
or male.
Though no religious scripts prescribe
the practice, practitioners often believe the practice has religious support.
Religious leaders take varying
positions with regard to FGM: some promote it, some consider it irrelevant to
religion, and others contribute to its elimination.
Local structures of power and
authority, such as community leaders, religious leaders, circumcisers, and even
some medical personnel can contribute to upholding the practice.
In most societies, where FGM is practised,
it is considered a cultural tradition, which is often used as an argument for
its continuation.
In some societies, recent adoption of
the practice is linked to copying the traditions of neighbouring groups.
Sometimes it has started as part of a wider religious or traditional revival
movement.
International response
Building on work from previous
decades, in 1997, WHO issued a joint statement against the practice of FGM
together with the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the United
Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).
Since 1997, great efforts have been
made to counteract FGM, through research, work within communities, and changes
in public policy. Progress at international, national and sub-national levels
includes:
wider international involvement to
stop FGM;
international monitoring bodies and
resolutions that condemn the practice;
revised legal frameworks and growing
political support to end FGM (this includes a law against FGM in 26 countries
in Africa and the Middle East, as well as in 33 other countries with migrant
populations from FGM practicing countries);
the prevalence of FGM has decreased in
most countries and an increasing number of women and men in practising
communities support ending its practice.
Research shows that, if practicing
communities themselves decide to abandon FGM, the practice can be eliminated
very rapidly.
In 2007, UNFPA and UNICEF initiated
the Joint Programme on Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting to accelerate the
abandonment of the practice.
In 2008, WHO together with 9 other
United Nations partners, issued a statement on the elimination of FGM to
support increased advocacy for its abandonment, called: “Eliminating female
genital mutilation: an interagency statement”. This statement provided evidence
collected over the previous decade about the practice of FGM.
In 2010, WHO published a "Global
strategy to stop health care providers from performing female genital
mutilation" in collaboration with other key UN agencies and international
organizations.
In December 2012, the UN General
Assembly adopted a resolution on the elimination of female genital mutilation.
Building on a previous report from
2013, in 2016 UNICEF launched an updated report documenting the prevalence of
FGM in 30 countries, as well as beliefs, attitudes, trends, and programmatic
and policy responses to the practice globally.
In May 2016, WHO in collaboration with
the UNFPA-UNICEF joint programme on FGM launched the first evidence-based
guidelines on the management of health complications from FGM. The guidelines
were developed based on a systematic review of the best available evidence on
health interventions for women living with FGM.
To ensure the effective implementation
of the guidelines, WHO is developing tools for front-line health-care workers
to improve knowledge, attitudes, and skills of health care providers in
preventing and managing the complications of FGM.
WHO response
In 2008, the World Health Assembly
passed resolution WHA61.16 on the elimination of FGM, emphasizing the need for
concerted action in all sectors - health, education, finance, justice and
women's affairs.
WHO efforts to eliminate female
genital mutilation focus on:
strengthening the health sector
response: guidelines, tools, training and policy to ensure that health
professionals can provide medical care and counselling to girls and women
living with FGM;
building evidence: generating
knowledge about the causes and consequences of the practice, including why
health care professionals carry out procedures, how to eliminate it, and how to
care for those who have experienced FGM;
increasing
advocacy: developing publications and advocacy tools for international,
regional and local efforts to end FGM within a generation.
0 Comments
We would love to get a feedback from you