Abstract
Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) affects millions of girls and women globally each year despite widespread criminalization of the practice. Eradication efforts have focused on the health risks associated with FGM/C however, it is important to understand the sociocultural context in which this practice exists. We conducted a cross-sectional study using retrospective chart review and structured interviews with women recruited through the Bellevue/New York University Program for Survivors of Torture. Of the 43 participants enrolled in the study, 88.4% initially indicated there is no benefit of undergoing FGM/C but when prompted, agreed that social acceptance (16.3%), religious approval (11.6%), and better marriage prospects (9.3%) are possible benefits. More sexual pleasure for the women (46.5%), avoiding pain (30.2%), and fewer medical problems (16.3%) were stated as benefits of not undergoing FGM/C. Overall, 40 (93%) participants believed the practice should be discontinued. This study highlights that there may be a perception of social benefit of undergoing FGM/C. Although most participants believed the practice should be discontinued, the complex social milieu within which this practice exists must be addressed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
UNICEF. Female genital mutilation/cutting: a global concern. 2016. https://data.unicef.org/resources/female-genital-mutilationcutting-global-concern/.
UNICEF. Female genital mutilation/cutting: a statistical overview and exploration of the dynamics of change. 2013. https://www.unicef.org/publications/index_69875.html.
World Health Organization. Family and Community Health Cluster. A systematic review of the health complications of female genital mutilation including sequelae in childbirth. 2000. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/66355.
World Health Organization. Care of women and girls living with female genital mutilation: a clinical handbook. 2018. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/272429/9789241513913-eng.pdf.
Shell-Duncan B, et al. Legislating change? Responses to criminalizing female genital cutting in Senegal. Law Soc Rev. 2013;47(4):803–35.
Too Many. The law and FGM: an overview of 28 African countries. 2018. https://www.28toomany.org/thematic/law-and-fgm/.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Division of reproductive health. Reproductive health in crisis situations. 2015. https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/global/tools/crisissituations.htm.
The CITI Program. Biomedical research: basic course. https://about.citiprogram.org/en/course/biomedical-biomed-basic/.
Shahawy S, et al. Perspectives on female genital cutting among immigrant women and men in Boston. Soc Sci Med. 2019;220:331–9.
Khaja K, et al. Female genital cutting: African women speak out. Int Social Work. 2009;52(6):727–41.
Jirovsky E. Views of women and men in Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso, on three forms of female genital modification. Reprod Health Matters. 2010;18(35):84–93.
Alo OA, Gbadebo B. Intergenerational attitude changes regarding female genital cutting in Nigeria. J Women’s Health. 2011;20(11):1655–61.
Fried S, et al. Outpatients’ perspectives on problems and needs related to female genital mutilation/cutting: a qualitative study from Somaliland. Obstet Gynecol Intl. 2013;2013:1.
Reig-Alcaraz M, et al. Attitudes towards female genital mutilation: an integrative review. Int Nurs Rev. 2013;61(1):25–34.
Afifi M. Women's empowerment and the intention to continue the practice of female genital cutting in Egypt. Arch Iran Med. 2009;12(2):154–60.
Karmaker B, et al. Factors associated with female genital mutilation in Burkina Faso and its policy implications. Int J Equity Health. 2011;10:20.
Patra S, Singh RK. Attitudes of circumcised women towards discontinuation of genital cutting of their daughters in Kenya. J Biosoc Sci. 2015;47(1):45–60.
Berg RC, Denison E. A tradition in transition: factors perpetuating and hindering the continuance of female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) summarized in a systematic review. Health Care Women Int. 2013;34(10):837–59.
United States Department of State. 2016 Country reports on human rights practices—India. 2017. https://www.refworld.org/docid/58ec8a2613.html
Ahmady K. A comprehensive research study of female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) in Iran—2015. 2015. http://kameelahmady.com/prevalence-of-female-genital-mutilationcutting-in-iran/. Accessed Nov 2019
UNICEF. Female genital mutilation/cutting: what might the future hold? 2014. https://data.unicef.org/resources/female-genital-mutilationcutting-might-future-hold/.
UK Border Agency. Country of origin information service. Female genital mutilation (FGM). 2008. https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local/1171171/1504_1224004793_africa-fgm-080708.pdf.
UNICEF. Female genital mutilation prevalence (%)—Maldives. 2017. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.STA.FGMS.ZS?end=2018&locations=MV&start=1960&view=chart.
Hinai HA. Female genital mutilation in the Sultanate of Oman. 2014. https://www.stopfgmmideast.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/habiba-al-hinai-female-genital-mutilation-in-the-sultanate-of-oman1.pdf.
United States Department of State. 2016 Country reports on human rights practices—Pakistan. 2017. https://www.refworld.org/docid/58ec89e9f.html
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank EMPOWER Lab members Julia Leschi and Gabriel Herrera for their work on data collection for this project.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Martell, S., Schoenholz, R., Chen, V.H. et al. Perceptions of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) among Asylum Seekers in New York City. J Immigrant Minority Health 23, 1241–1248 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-020-01103-5
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-020-01103-5