IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v52y2001i7p1013-1028.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The medicalization of female "circumcision": harm reduction or promotion of a dangerous practice?

Author

Listed:
  • Shell-Duncan, Bettina

Abstract

In recent decades the practice of female "circumcision" has come under intense international scrutiny, often conceptualized as a violation of women's basic right to health. Although the adverse health consequences of female "circumcision" form the basis of opposition to the practice, anti-circumcision activists, as well as many international medical associations, largely oppose measures to improve its safety. The debate over medicalization of female "circumcision" has, up until now, been cast as a moral dilemma: to protect women's health at the expense of legitimating a destructive practice? Or to hasten the elimination of a dangerous practice while allowing women to die from preventable conditions? This paper seeks to re-examine this debate by conceptualizing medicalization of female "circumcision" as a harm-reduction strategy. Harm reduction is a new paradigm in the field of public health that aims to minimize the health hazards associated with risky behaviors, such as intravenous drug use and high-risk sexual behavior, by encouraging safer alternatives, including, but not limited to abstinence. Harm reduction considers a wide range of alternatives, and promotes the alternative that is culturally acceptable and bears the least amount of harm. This paper evaluates the applicability of harm reduction principles to medical interventions for female "circumcision," and draws parallels to other harm reduction programs. In this light, arguments for opposing medicalization of female "circumcision", including the assertion that it counteracts efforts to eliminate the practice, are critically evaluated, revealing that there is not sufficient evidence to support staunch opposition to medicalization. Rather, it appears that medicalization, if implemented as a harm-reduction strategy, may be a sound and compassionate approach to improving women's health in settings where abandonment of the practice of "circumcision" is not immediately attainable.

Suggested Citation

  • Shell-Duncan, Bettina, 2001. "The medicalization of female "circumcision": harm reduction or promotion of a dangerous practice?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 52(7), pages 1013-1028, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:52:y:2001:i:7:p:1013-1028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(00)00208-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nina, Van Eekert & Naomi, Biegel & Sylvie, Gadeyne & De Velde Sarah, Van, 2020. "An examination of the medicalization trend in female genital cutting in Egypt: How does it relate to a girl's risk of being cut?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    2. Engelsma, Brian & Mackie, Gerry & Merrell, Brandon, 2020. "Unprogrammed abandonment of female genital mutilation/cutting," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    3. Michela Villani & Judith Louise Griffin & Patrick Bodenmann, 2016. "In Their Own Words: The Health and Sexuality of Immigrant Women with Infibulation Living in Switzerland," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-12, November.
    4. Colfer, Carol J. Pierce & Achdiawan, Ramadhani & Roshetko, James M. & Mulyoutami, Elok & Yuliani, E. Linda & Mulyana, Agus & Moeliono, Moira & Adnan, Hasantoha & Erni,, 2015. "The Balance of Power in Household Decision-Making: Encouraging News on Gender in Southern Sulawesi," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 147-164.
    5. Chesnokova Tatyana & Vaithianathan Rhema, 2010. "The Economics of Female Genital Cutting," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-28, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:52:y:2001:i:7:p:1013-1028. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.