Female Genital Mutilation

Student’s name:

Professor’s name:

Course:

Date:

Female Genital Mutilation

Female genital mutilation (FGM) represents an ancient type of abuse against women and girls that has been practiced for over a thousand years. While the roots of the practice are unknown, eliminating it will move the globe nearer to gender equality — and eradicating Female Genital Mutilation represents a crucial component of the United Nations’ Global Goal 5, which aims to achieve gender equality by 2030. So, what exactly is Female Genital Mutilation? It represents the Act of partially or completely removing the external female genitalia and any other trauma or injury to the female genital organs committed for non-medical purposes. As part of a global community that seeks to champion the eradication of female genital mutilation in the world, the United States Congress passed the Female Genital Mutilation Act of 1996 (Ezioni, 2021). The aim of the Act, among other things, criminalized female genital mutilation in the country, advocating for public education and sensitization of the effects of female genital mutilation in the community. At the same time, it also sought to champion the eradication and the criminalization of female genital mutilation in the world by imposing sanctions on other nations and communities outside the United States, thus deterring them from practicing Female Genital Mutilation. On whether the country has authority to impose sanctions on another country for practicing female genital mutilation as a religious act, I reason that yes, the country should continue to champion the eradication of female genital mutilation for the following reasons;

First, female genital mutilation is a serious health hazard and dangerous to the life of any girl. When females are cut, they are in danger of bleeding, severe injury, various illnesses, and even death, depending on how severe the bleeding or infection is. This means that Female Genital Mutilation has to lead to the loss of lives of females, which could otherwise have been protected through prevention.

Secondly, Female Genital Mutilation carried out by medical personnel is never safe or advantageous. Female Genital Mutilation may be done by health care practitioners such as community health workers, midwives, nurses, or doctors in some locations. It may even be included in a typical package of newborn girl care for new mothers. Medicalized Female Genital Medication may or may not involve the use of anesthetics or a sterile setting. However, this does not make things safer or helpful for girls. It is still a heinous crime with a slew of significant short- and long-term health consequences — and no medical rationale. Female Genital Mutilation is performed by trained health professionals who violate girls’ and women’s rights and harm them in violation of medical ethics’ core principles.

Given the position where our country is currently in terms of technological advancements, technical workforce capabilities, health technology advancement, or even resource-wise, the United States must take the first position in championing the eradication of Female Genital Mutilation in the world. Therefore, placing economic sanctions or any other form of sanction on other lesser developed countries is warranted because these countries might lack the technical know-how or the resources to finance holistic and comprehensive research on the effect of female genital mutilation. Lacking comprehensive research means that their current stance on female genital mutilation is based on irrelevant data or no data at all.

To make a better world, all decisions must be based on hard data and empirical evidence; relying on religion or technology solely can lead to distorted decision-making processes and poor decisions altogether. But focusing on empirical evidence will ensure that decisions made are based on merits rather than feelings or fanatism.

Work Cited

Etzioni, Limor. “Contemporary Aspects of Female Genital Mutilation Prohibitions in the United States.” Am. UJ Gender Soc. Poly & L. 28 (2019): 39.

https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/ajgsp28&div=7&id=&page=. Accessed on 2nd September 2021.