Laws and policies intended to combat FGM - which could be efficient?

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!


We have a new govt. in Sweden, and the new minister for integration and equality - Nyamko Sabuni - made a name for herself among us that are politically interested already as a backbench parliamentarian. She is a member of the liberal party, but put forth a motion to combat FGM by legal coercion. Sweden has had a law against FGM - distinct from the anti-assault laws - or 15 years, but the first conviction only came a few months ago. There is a sizeable Somali (where FGM is reportedly near-universal) minority in Sweden, but until recently noone had been caught. Her suggestion was that girls from families which came from countries where FGM should be forced to undergo mandatory gynecological tests to find out if FGM had been done to them.

This caused a lot of anger - among other things, she was branded anti-islamic. Furthermore, there are several problems with the tactic.
1. It is only reactive, once FGM has been carried out on a girl nothing (AFAIK) can be done to set it right again.
2. It was intended to be mandatory, but only for people of specific ethnic groups.
3. What do you do with those who do not comply? Do you get the cops to physically restrain them to the examination chair? Would that not cause more emotional scarring than it prevents?
4. If the answer to #3 is yes, will one find enough cops to do it? Or wll the cops balk at that awful order?
5. Even if it is done and the minor girl is found not to have undergone FGM, then that does not ensure that she is safe. Her parents may well take her home to the old county, and have it done there. Should one have a retest policy for everytime a girl comes back from such a country?

There are a lot of cons to this approach at combating FGM, but I can not see any other approach that seems more effective. Mere education - without sanctions - about the laws in this country would not suffice, since history provides us with ample evidence that people will break against laws that they do not like, if there is no percieved risk in doing so.

Do you have any suggestion for a better approach?

When she was appointed the whole suggestion - which had not been voted into law - came up again. That pulled up other, but related, motions in the parliament that had failed. Two other parliamentarians, from different parties opposing each other, had motioned that male circumcision on minors should be outlawed, since it was done against informed consent (babies being legally unable to give informed consent), had no medical value (in the general case, it would still be legal in the unusual case where there was a medical reason), and that religious/cultural wishes should always defer to individual rights. That one failed, probably due to inertia and that the parlimentarians did not want to upset too many people if they do not percieve an electoral bonus for it.

Personally, I think that both practices are barbaric, and that cultural or religious practices mandating cutting away perfectly healthy bits of minors should be combated with the full force of law. Such practices cause unecessary pain and serve no good whatsoever. To Hell with that kind of sadism!

Thoughts, comments, suggestions for better policies?


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[Philistine]

I think it would have been better to have spelled out that FGM is Female Genital Mutilation. It took me almost a third of your post to figure it out.

I find the thought of mandatory gynecological examinations of islamic girls almost as disturbing as the fact of FGM itself.

I assume the main problem is people taking the girl back to their home country for the procedure, rather than doing it in Sweden? (At least I hope so).

I'm not sure how you could effectively fight this--given that detection is difficult.

Also, conflating male circumcision with FGM seems off-base, due to the vast difference in effect.

--Philistine