Current policies to protect girls at risk of genital mutilation are invasive and traumatising, study finds

July 24, 2024:

Current policies to protect girls at risk of genital mutilation are invasive and traumatising, study finds

Press release by Taylor & Francis Press & Media Relations team.

Current policies aimed at protecting European African girls at risk of genital mutilation – including compulsory genital examinations and persistent questioning by police – can be invasive and traumatic for the girls involved and their families, new research in Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters finds.

Guidelines to detect female genital mutilation (FGM) and awareness-raising campaigns are built on the assumption that far more girls are being subjected to FGM than is arguably the case, says study author, Professor Sara Johnsdotter of Malmö University. European African families, especially the girls who can be subject to genital exams carried out without the consent or knowledge of their legal guardians, are paying the price for this hyper-vigilance.

Professor Johnsdotter examined records of almost all criminal investigations of FGM in Sweden since the practice was banned in 1982 (that is, 122 police files, obtained under a strict obligation to observe confidentiality). Reports of suspected FGM reach the police from citizens and from professional groups such as teachers, healthcare providers and social workers.

Formal criminal investigations were opened in 98 cases. Of these, one resulted in the conviction of a man for having stated his intention to have FGM carried out on his daughters in Nigeria. Thirty-six were closed without a genital examination of the girl because suspicions were vague or there was not enough evidence of a committed or pending crime.

In 43 of the 61 cases involving genital examinations, experts could not find any signs of FGM and the investigations were closed. In 16 of the 18 cases where examination showed FGM, the investigations were closed and the cases were not taken to court either for reasons that were unclear or because the investigators concluded that FGM had been performed prior to migration. Two cases were taken to court, resulting in a conviction and prison sentence for the girl’s mother in one case and the girl’s father in the other. Both these cases originated from reports by the girls themselves.

Professor Johnsdotter said: “Without claiming that these figures are statistically significant, there may be a point to be made from the fact that no illegal FGM case has been identified and led to prosecution as a result of compulsory genital examinations. The only two cases of illegal FGM that have reached court originated with the girls themselves turning to authorities and telling their stories. Thus, building trust – not prioritising punitive powers – seems to be the better way to handle girls’ and young women’s legal rights when it comes to FGM.”

Many studies show growing opposition to FGM among people who have migrated to Europe, and there is little evidence to support the assertion that it is prevalent. However, there is widespread belief that FGM is secretively practised on a large scale among some immigrant groups in Europe.

“It’s not a crime to be part of a family from Somalia or any other country where girls are subjected to FGM, and it’s not illegal to travel to any of these countries. Yet our systems consistently react as if this were the case. In practice, some of today’s strategies in Europe to tackle FGM lead to ethnic and racial profiling,” Professor Johnsdotter said. “We need to find ways to respond to FGM that are less harmful to the girls and young women the interventions intend to protect.”

Source link

tags

Abkhazia Afghanistan Africa Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Curacao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic East Timor Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France French Polynesia Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guam Guatemala Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria North Korea North Macedonia Northern Cyprus Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Republic of the Congo Romania Russia Rwanda Saint Lucia Samoa San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Togo Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda UK Ukraine United Arab Emirates Uruguay USA Uzbekistan Vatican City Venezuela Vietnam Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe