Female genital mutilation and migration in Mali: do return migrants transfer social norms?

Mesplé-Somps, Sandrine

doi:10.1007/s00148-019-00733-w

Cited by 21 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…FGM/C is a strong social norm that makes it difficult for individuals to challenge, as the practice often occurs in societies where norms of collectivity are predominant. The impact of these different settings on social norm change and human rights is not in the scope of this paper and has been discussed elsewhere by various authors (see for example Diabate et al [45], UNICEF [46], Leye et al [47]).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Debating medicalization of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C): learning from (policy) experiences across countries

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAlthough Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) is internationally considered a harmful practice, it is increasingly being medicalized allegedly to reduce its negative health effects, and is thus suggested as a harm reduction strategy in response to these perceived health risks. In many countries where FGM/C is traditionally practiced, the prevalence rates of medicalization are increasing, and in countries of migration, such as the United Kingdom, the United States of America or Sweden, court cases or the repeated issuing of statements in favor of presumed minimal forms of FGM/C to replace more invasive forms, has raised the debate between the medical harm reduction arguments and the human rights approach.Main bodyThe purpose of this paper is to discuss the arguments associated with the medicalization of FGM/C, a trend that could undermine the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 5.3. The paper uses four country case studies, Egypt, Indonesia, Kenya and UK, to discuss the reasons for engaging in medicalized forms of FGM/C, or not, and explores the ongoing public discourse in those countries concerning harm reduction versus human rights, and the contradiction between medical ethics, national criminal justice systems and international conventions. The discussion is structured around four key hotly contested ethical dilemmas. Firstly, that the WHO definition of medicalized FGM/C is too narrow allowing medicalized FGM to be justified by many healthcare professionals as a form of harm reduction which contradicts the medical oath of do no harm. Secondly, that medicalized FGM/C is a human rights abuse with lifelong consequences, no matter who performs it. Thirdly, that health care professionals who perform medicalized FGM/C are sustaining cultural norms that they themselves support and are also gaining financially. Fourthly, the contradiction between protecting traditional cultural rights in legal constitutions versus human rights legislation, which criminalizes FGM/C.ConclusionMore research needs to be done in order to understand the complexities that are facilitating the medicalization of FGM/C as well as how policy strategies can be strengthened to have a greater de-medicalization impact. Tackling medicalization of FGM/C will accelerate the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goal of ending FGM by 2030.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Debating medicalization of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C): learning from (policy) experiences across countries

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The challenge is to identify those opinion leaders and target them, which can be seen as trying to dene the network structure that matters for a specic innovation. 19 Thus, in a study concerned with FGC, Diabate and Mesple-Somps (2014) found that Malian migrants to non-FGC countries play an important role in inuencing decisions about FGC when they come back to their village (after controlling for selection into migration and return migration).…”

Section: The Role Of Opinion Leadersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eradicating women-hurting customs: What role for social engineering?

Platteau¹,

Camilotti²,

Auriol

2017

WIDER Working Paper

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social engineering refers to deliberate attempts, often under the form of legislative moves, to promote changes in customs and norms that hurt the interests of marginalized population groups. This paper explores the analytical conditions under which social engineering is more or less likely to succeed than more indirect approaches when it comes to suppress genderbiased customs. This implies discussing the main possible interaction frameworks leading to antiwomen equilibria, and deriving policy implications from the corresponding games. The theoretical arguments are illustrated by examples drawn from available empirical works, thus providing a reasoned survey of the literature.

show abstract

“…Ferrant and Tuccio (2015) argue that South-South migration leads to a convergence of female discrimination in origin countries towards levels of destination countries. Diabate and Mesplé-Somps (2019) provide evidence that Malian return migrants from countries, where female circumcision is not common, have a signicant negative eect on the spread of female genital mutilation. Lodigiani and Salomone (2020) show that emigration induces female political empowerment, but conditional on the female parliamentary participation in destination countries.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%