At a time when the World Health Organization (WHO) is campaigning against excisionsstill too practiced in certain countries of Africa and the Middle East, two American gynecologists defend without blushing these practices however dangerous for the health of those concerned.
Dr Kavita Shah Arora and Dr Allan J. Jacobs strongly endorse minimalist excisions in the name of respect for the cultural traditions of the countries that practice them. Their point of view, which immediately sparked an uproar, was published the Journal of Medical Ethics. “We are not saying that interventions on the genitals of women are desirable, but rather that certain interventions should be tolerated by liberal societies”, they explain in the article, taken up by AFP.
According to the two Americans, the West should show more leniency. Excisions which have no lasting effect on the appearance or function of the genitals or those which “slightly” modify their appearance, without lasting effect on the reproductive capacity or on the sexual development of women, should therefore be tolerated. The two gynecologists go even further by comparing these procedures to the male circumcision.
This opinion has aroused the ire of certain American scientific colleagues who have pointed out the danger of such assertions. Brian D. Earp, an American researcher in bioethics, worries for example that the authorization of “minimalist” excisions leads to “fiascos”, by raising a number of legal, regulatory, medical and sexual problems.
The position of the two gynecologists is against that of the WHO, which considers genital mutilation as violations of the rights of young girls and women. More than 125 million young girls and women are victims of genital mutilation practiced in 29 African countries and the Middle East, estimates the WHO.
Health risks
Female genital mutilation or excision includes a number of surgical procedures intended to completely or partially remove the female external genitalia (clitoris, labia minora and labia majora). Whether carried out to control female sexuality or underpinned by an alleged religious or social imperative, these excisional practices are not without risk for the women, girls and infants who are victims of them.
In addition to the immediate health consequences (pain, bleeding, infections, lesions of genital tissues and risk of hemorrhagic shock or even death), the long-term impact has a lasting effect on the lives of women who often develop urinary, vaginal and sexual problems. and often present a risk of complications during pregnancy. They are also more likely to suffer from psychological disorders (stress, depression, post-traumatic stress, anxiety, etc.).
To read also: Excision: informing women to better fight it
Mutilated flags to denounce excision
