Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

On Female Genital Cutting: Factors to be Considered When Confronted With a Request to Re-infibulate

  • Symposium: Sex, Gender, and the Body
  • Published:
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

According to the World Health Organization, female genital cutting affects millions of girls and women worldwide, particularly on the African continent and in the Middle East. This paper presents a plausible, albeit hypothetical, clinical vignette and then explores the legal landscape as well as the ethical landscape physicians should use to evaluate the adult patient who requests re-infibulation. The principles of non-maleficence, beneficence, justice, and autonomy are considered for guidance, and physician conscientious objection to this procedure is discussed as well. Analyses of law and predominant principles of bioethics fail to yield a clear answer regarding performing female genital cutting or re-infibulation on an adult in the United States. Physicians should consider the patient’s physical, mental, and social health when thinking about female genital cutting and should understand the deep-rooted cultural significance of the practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, 8 USC §116 (1996).

References

  • Abdulcadir, J., L. Catania, M.J. Hindin, L. Say, P. Petignat, O. Abdulcadir. 2016. Female genital mutilation: A visual reference and learning tool for healthcare professionals. Obstetrics & Gynecology 128(5): 958–963.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • al-Sabbagh, M.L. 1996. Islamic ruling on male and female circumcision. Alexandria: World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blasimme, A., and E. Vayena. 2016. Becoming partners, retaining autonomy: Ethical considerations on the development of precision medicine. BMC Medical Ethics 17(67).

  • Beauchamp, T.L., and J.F. Childress. 2001. Principles of biomedical ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantor, J. 2006. When an adult female patient seeks ritual genital alteration: Ethics, law, and the parameters of participation. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 117(4): 1158–1164.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, R.J., and B.M. Dickens. 2010. Special commentary on the issue of reinfibulation. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 109(2): 97–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, H., P. Stupp, E. Okoroh, G. Besera, D. Goodman, and I. Daniel. 2016. Female genital mutilation/cutting in the United States: Updated estimates of women and girls at risk, 2012. Public Health Reports 131(2): 340–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kopelman, L.M. 2005. The incompatibility of the United Nations’ goals and conventionalist ethical relativism. Developing World Bioethics 5(3): 234–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. 1978. The Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Bethesda, Maryland: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nobile, M. 2014. The WHO definition of health: A critical reading. Medicine and Law 33(2): 33–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scheper-Hughes, N. 1991. Virgin territory: The male discovery of the clitoris. Medical Anthropology Quarterly 5(1): 25–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). 2005. Female genital mutilation/cutting: A statistical exploration. New York: UNICEF.

    Google Scholar 

  • ––––. 2013. Female genital mutilation/cutting: A statistical overview and exploration of the dynamics of change. New York: UNICEF.

  • U.N. Committee Against Torture (CAT). 2008. General Comment No. 2: Implementation of Article 2 by States Parties.

  • World Health Organization (WHO). 2006. Constitution of the World Health Organization. Basic Documents, 45th edition, supplement.

  • ––––. 2008. Eliminating female genital mutilation: An interagency statement UNAIDS, UNDP, UNECA, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCHR, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNIFEM, WHO. Geneva: World Health Organization.

  • ––––. 2016. WHO guidelines on the management of health complications from female genital mutilation. Geneva: World Health Organization.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Rudin Fellowship in Medical Ethics and Humanities of NYU School of Medicine for its funding support. The Rudin Fellowship required submission of this manuscript for publication although the fellowship committee was not involved in the writing of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. New York University School of Medicine, 550 First Avenue, NBV 9E2, New York, NY, 10016, USA

    Mona Saleh

  2. New York University Medical Center, 227 East 30th Street, New York, NY, 10016, USA

    Phoebe Friesen

  3. New York University Medical Center, 423 East 23rd Street, 11066-AS, New York, NY, 10010, USA

    Veronica Ades

Authors
  1. Mona Saleh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Phoebe Friesen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Veronica Ades
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mona Saleh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saleh, M., Friesen, P. & Ades, V. On Female Genital Cutting: Factors to be Considered When Confronted With a Request to Re-infibulate . Bioethical Inquiry 15, 549–555 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-018-9875-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-018-9875-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation