Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T05:12:20.818Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 55 - Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting

from Section 11 - Public Health Issues in Gynaecology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2021

Tahir Mahmood
Affiliation:
Victoria Hospital, Kirkcaldy
Charles Savona-Ventura
Affiliation:
University of Malta, Malta
Ioannis Messinis
Affiliation:
University of Thessaly, Greece
Sambit Mukhopadhyay
Affiliation:
Norfolk & Norwich University Hospital, UK
Get access

Summary

Female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) is defined by the WHO as the partial or total removal of the external genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons. FGM/C can negatively affect women’s and girls’ psychophysical health with possible infectious, urogynaecological, obstetric, sexual and psychological complications. It is a practice that is illegal in many high-prevalence and -migration countries and is considered to be a violation of human rights. Health professionals have a fundamental role in preventing the practice in future generations, providing health education, avoiding the ‘medicalization’ of FGM/C and in offering appropriate information, counselling, clinical (diagnosis, treatment and psychosexual care) and surgical care (defibulation and clitoral reconstruction) in the case of complications.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

WHO. WHO Guidelines on Management of Health Complications from Female Genital Mutilation. Geneva: WHO, 2016.Google Scholar
WHO. Eliminating female genital mutilation: an interagency statement. OHCHR, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNECA, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNIFEM, WHO. 2008.Google Scholar
Bader, D. Picturing female circumcision and female genital cosmetic surgery: a visual framing analysis of Swiss newspapers, 1983–2015. Feminist Media Stud. 2019. doi:10.1080/14680777.2018.1560348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Brussels Collaboration on Bodily Integrity. Medically unnecessary genital cutting and the child’s right to bodily integrity. AJOB. 2019. doi:10.1080/15265161.2019.1643945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, R, Odgaard-Jensen, J, Fretheim, A, Underland, V, Vist, G. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the obstetric consequences of female genital mutilation/cutting. Obstet Gynecol Int 2014:542859.Google ScholarPubMed
Berg, R, Underland, V, Odgaard-Jensen, J, Fretheim, A, Vist, G. Effects of female genital cutting on physical health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2014;21:e006316.Google Scholar
UNICEF. Female Genita Mutilation/Cutting: a Global Concern. New York: UNICEF, 2016.Google Scholar
European Institute for Gender Equality. Female genital mutilation in the European Union and Croatia report. 2013.Google Scholar
UNICEF, Suisse, Santé Sexuelle Suisse. Excision: La période qui entoure la naissance-une charnière de la prévention. Zurich: UNICEF, 2016.Google Scholar
FIGO. Georgian government bans FGM. 2017. Available at: www.figo.org/news/georgian-government-bans-fgm-0015468.Google Scholar
Ibrahim, ZTE. FGM in Sri Lanka: It’s never ‘just a nick’. 2017. Available at: www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/fgm-sri-lanka-nick-171218122855118.html.Google Scholar
Abdulcadir, J, Botsikas, D, Bolmont, M, et al. Sexual anatomy and function in women with and without genital mutilation: a cross-sectional study. J Sex Med 2016;13:226237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nour, NM, Michels, KB, Bryant, AE. Defibulation to treat female genital cutting: effect on symptoms and sexual function. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108:5560.Google Scholar
Berg, R, Underland, V. The obstetric consequences of female genital mutilation/cutting: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol Int 2013;2013:496564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, RC, Denison, E, Fretheim, A. Psychological, Social and Sexual Consequences of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C): A Systematic Review of Quantitative Studies. Oslo: Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, 2010.Google Scholar
Knipscheer, J, Vloeberghs, E, van der Kwaak, A, van den Muijsenbergh, M. Mental health problems associated with female genital mutilation. BJPsych Bulletin 2015;39:273277.Google Scholar
Tumiati, MC. Psychological Dimensions of FGM: Female Genital Mutilation – from Anthropology to Medicine. Rome: np, 2016.Google Scholar
Antonetti Ndiaye, EFS, Beltran, L. Benefits of multidisciplinary care for excised women. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2015. doi:10.1016/j.jgyn.2015.01.008.Google Scholar
Abdulcadir, J, Bianchi Demicheli, F, Willame, A, Recordon, N, Petignat, P. Post-traumatic stress disorder relapse following clitoral reconstruction after female genital mutilation: a case report. Obstet Gynecol. 2017. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000001835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ouedraogo, CM, Madzou, S, Simpore, A, et al. [Clitoral reconstruction after female genital mutilation at CHU Yalgado of Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. About 68 patients operated]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2016;45:10991106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nappi, R, Salonia, A, Traish, AM, et al. Clinical biologic pathophysiologies of women’s sexual dysfunction. J Sex Med 2005;2:425.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Atallah, S, Johnson-Agbakwu, C, Rosenbaum, T, et al. Ethical and sociocultural aspects of sexual function and dysfunction in both sexes. J Sex Med 2016;13:591606.Google Scholar
Foldes, P, Cuzin, B, Andro, A. Reconstructive surgery after female genital mutilation: a prospective cohort study. Lancet 2012;380:134141.Google Scholar
Johnsdotter, S. How pro-orgasm intentions in anti-FGM campaigning backfire. 20th World Congress for Sexual Health; 12–16 June 2011.Google Scholar
Catania, L, Abdulcadir, O, Puppo, V, et al. Pleasure and orgasm in women with female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C). J Sex Med 2007;4:16661678.Google Scholar
Abdulcadir, J, McLaren, S, Boulvain, M, Irion, O. Health education and clinical care of immigrant women with female genital mutilation/cutting who request postpartum reinfibulation. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2016;135:6972.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abdulcadir, J, Marras, S, Catania, L, et al. Defibulation: a visual reference and learning tool. J Sex Med 2018;15:601611.Google Scholar
WHO. Care of Girls and Women Living with Female Genital Mutilation: A Clinical Handbook. Washington, DC: WHO, 2018.Google Scholar
Abdulcadir, J, Rodriguez, M, Say, L. Research gaps in the care of women with female genital mutilation: an analysis. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol 2015;3:294303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merckelbagh, HM, Nicolas, MN, Piketty, MP, Benifla, JL. [Assessment of a multidisciplinary care for 169 excised women with an initial reconstructive surgery project]. Gynecologie, Obstetrique Fertilite 2015;43:633639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jordal, MGG. Body, Migration, Re/constructive Surgeries Making the Gendered Body in a Globalized World. New York: Routledge, 2019.Google Scholar
Abdulcadir, J, Tille, JC, Petignat, P. Management of painful clitoral neuroma after female genital mutilation/cutting. Reprod Health. 2017. doi:10.1186/s12978-017-0288-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, RC, Taraldsen, S, Said, MA, Sorbye, IK, Vangen, S. The effectiveness of surgical interventions for women with FGM/C: a systematic review. BJOG. 2017. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.14839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abdulcadir, J, Dallenbach, P. Overactive bladder after female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) type III. BMJ Case Reports 2013;2013.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Esu, E, Udo, A, Okusanya, BO, Agamse, D, Meremikwu, MM. Antepartum or intrapartum deinfibulation for childbirth in women with type III female genital mutilation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2017;136(Suppl. 1):2129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Female genital mutilation and its management. Green-top Guideline No. 53. 2015.Google Scholar
Hussen, AO, Catania, L. Deinfibulazione terapeutica. Il Ginecologo Rivista di Ostetricia e Ginecologia 2006;1:7278.Google Scholar
Rodriguez, MI, Say, L, Abdulcadir, J, Hindin, MJ. Clinical indications for cesarean delivery among women living with female genital mutilation. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2017. doi:10.1002/ijgo.12234.Google Scholar
Mistry, H, Jha, S. Pregnancy with a pinhole introitus: a report of two cases and a review of the literature. Eur J Contraception Reprod Health care 2015;20:490494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, C, Nour, N. Surgical techniques: defibulation of type III female genital cutting. J Sex Med 2007;4:15441547.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thabet, SM, Thabet, AS. Defective sexuality and female circumcision: the cause and the possible management. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2003;29:1219.Google Scholar
Abdulcadir, JRM, Say, L. Clitoral reconstruction after female genital mutilation/cutting: a systematic review of the evidence. IJOG 2015;129:9397.Google Scholar
Thonnon, C. Évaluation de la qualité de vie sexuelle après réparation d’excision. Lyon: Université de Lyon Est, 2014.Google Scholar
Abramowicz, S, Oden, S, Dietrich, G, Marpeau, L, Resch, B. [Anatomic, functional and identity results after clitoris transposition]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2016;45:963971.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chevrot, A, Lousquy, R, Arfi, A, et al. [Operative technique: the clitoral transposition]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2015;44:787791.Google Scholar
Vital, M, de Visme, S, Hanf, M, et al. Using the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) to evaluate sexual function in women with genital mutilation undergoing surgical reconstruction: a pilot prospective study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2016;202:7174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ouedraogo, CM, Madzou, S, Toure, B, et al. Practice of reconstructive plastic surgery of the clitoris after genital mutilation in Burkina Faso: report of 94 cases. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 2013;58:208215.Google Scholar
Abdulcadir, J, Rodriguez, MI, Petignat, P, Say, L. Clitoral reconstruction after female genital mutilation/cutting: case studies. J Sex Med. 2015. doi:10.1111/jsm.12737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×