:
Most forms of FGC [female genital cutting] are decidedly harmful, and pediatricians should decline to perform them, even in the absence of any legal constraints. However, the ritual nick suggested by some pediatricians is not physically harmful and is much less extensive than routine newborn male genital cutting. There is reason to believe that offering such a compromise may build trust between hospitals and immigrant communities, save some girls from undergoing disfiguring and life threatening procedures in their native countries, and play a role in the eventual eradication of FGC. It might be more effective if federal and state laws enabled pediatricians to reach out to families by offering a ritual nick as a possible compromise to avoid greater harm.
Greater harm, lesser harm...mutilation, cutting, nicking, pricking, piercing, incising, scraping...call it what you like; it doesn't sound like modern science or evidence-based medicine to me.
Georganne Chapin, executive director of an advocacy group called Intact America, said she was “astonished that a group of intelligent people did not see the utter slippery slope that we put physicians on” with the new policy statement. “How much blood will parents be satisfied with?”She added: “There are countries in the world that allow wife beating, slavery and child abuse, but we don’t allow people to practice those customs in this country. We don’t let people have slavery a little bit because they’re going to do it anyway, or beat their wives a little bit because they’re going to do it anyway.”
Why give a backward and brutal cultural phenomenon medical and legal credibility in a developed nation?
In the United States, many state laws, as well as a federal law, criminalize any 'nonmedical' surgery on the genitals of a female minor. The federal law explicitly states that the 'ritual' or 'cultural' beliefs of anyone involved in the procedure are not a defense...Ethically, such bias shows a real lack of respect for the cultural and religious beliefs that ground parental decisions about female genital surgeries. By refusing to engage in any sort of compromise, such attitudes also show a lack of respect for parental motivations, which often include concern about the ability of surgically unaltered girls to marry within the community. This lack of openness to any form of female genital surgery is especially startling when framed by the American laissez-faire attitude toward male circumcision.
[emphasis added]
It could be legitimate to perform either male or female circumcision, as any other surgery, for specific, extremely rare, medical reasons on specific individuals. But to arbitrarily mutilate children, boys or girls, under the pretext that it is for their own good, shows an influence of cynicism and fanaticism...Female circumcision will never stop as long as male circumcision is going on. How do you expect to convince an African father to leave his daughter uncircumcised as long as you let him do it to his son?
Male circumcision remains a controversial issue, but as recently as last year, male circumcision was found to provide real and important benefits for some:
Other cultures permit “honor killings;” would we tolerate these in this country just to be culturally sensitive? I know we do not! When you choose to immigrate, you choose to make changes in your life. Eliminating [female genital cutting/mutilation] is one change that must be made.
Exit Question: If the female anatomy is somehow preserved after subjecting a girl to ritual nicking, how will you have satisfied those who object to "surgically unaltered" girls?
8 comments:
I have yet to hear why this is done to begin with?
Not being a doctor, moslem or for that matter female I see absolutely no possible excuse for this barbaric practice.
As to comparing it to male circumcision, I find that to be ridiculous. Besides the religious history of that particular practice there are very good reasons for it whether or not you agree with it.
Conversely, there are no good reasons, religious or not for FGM.
Greater harm? Lesser harm? What the hell ever happened to do NO harm. More P.C. nonsense run amok.
Male circumcision has always had the element of health advantages to argue in its favor. on the other hand, female circumcision is traditional and cultural practice within Islam. The basis of this practice is the notion that females need to be controlled in their sexual desires by removing their capacity to enjoy sex. That is how this is done. Within Islam, the female is seen as lesser of a human being than a male. Although male passions go unregulated, it is the female who bears the responsibility to protect herself from male lust by donning the burqa and thus discouraging lustful thoughts in the male. Further, the obligation to wear a burqa or niqab is initiated by the male/father/husband figure rather than as a conscious choice by the female.
Genital mutilation - its cultural
Keeping women uneducated - its cultural
Throwing acid on girls' faces - its cultural
Throwing gasoline on an unacceptable wife for your son - its cultural
Hacking off the head of someone who has different beliefs than you do - its cultural
STOP THE BULLSHIT!!!
I did a paper on this sick stuff in College. It is not just muslim, it is much of Northern Afric down to the Sahel belt. It crosses religious lines, but Muslims tend to take everything cultural as religious so what the..
Pretty sick.
It is nothing short of barbaric and why I still believe that Islam is not a religion, but a cult.
Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) should be against the law here in the United States. As a Felony it should carrie a heavy fine and a mandatory prison sentence. Any health care professional, involved in FGM should also loose their license, even if they "nik" the victim.
Post a Comment