IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1003303.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Medicalization of female genital cutting in Malaysia: A mixed methods study

Author

Listed:
  • Abdul Rashid
  • Yufu Iguchi
  • Siti Nur Afiqah

Abstract

Background: Despite the clear stand taken by the United Nations (UN) and other international bodies in ensuring that female genital cutting (FGC) is not performed by health professionals, the rate of medicalization has not reduced. The current study aimed to determine the extent of medicalization of FGC among doctors in Malaysia, who the doctors were who practiced it, how and what was practiced, and the motivations for the practice. Methods and findings: This mixed method (qualitative and quantitative) study was conducted from 2018 to 2019 using a self-administered questionnaire among Muslim medical doctors from 2 main medical associations with a large number of Muslim members from all over Malaysia who attended their annual conference. For those doctors who did not attend the conference, the questionnaire was posted to them. Association A had 510 members, 64 male Muslim doctors and 333 female Muslim doctors. Association B only had Muslim doctors; 3,088 were female, and 1,323 were male. In total, 894 questionnaires were distributed either by hand or by post, and 366 completed questionnaires were received back. For the qualitative part of the study, a snowball sampling method was used, and 24 in-depth interviews were conducted using a semi-structured questionnaire, until data reached saturation. Quantitative data were analysed using SPSS version 18 (IBM, Armonk, NY). A chi-squared test and binary logistic regression were performed. The qualitative data were transcribed manually, organized, coded, and recoded using NVivo version 12. The clustered codes were elicited as common themes. Most of the respondents were women, had medical degrees from Malaysia, and had a postgraduate degree in Family Medicine. The median age was 42. Most were working with the Ministry of Health (MoH) Malaysia, and in a clinic located in an urban location. The prevalence of Muslim doctors practising FGC was 20.5% (95% CI 16.6–24.9). The main reason cited for practising FGC was religious obligation. Qualitative findings too showed that religion was a strong motivating factor for the practice and its continuation, besides culture and harm reduction. Although most Muslim doctors performed type IV FGC, there were a substantial number performing type I. Respondents who were women (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.4, 95% CI 1.9–10.0. P ≤ 0.001), who owned a clinic (aOR 30.7, 95% CI 12.0–78.4. P ≤ 0.001) or jointly owned a clinic (aOR 7.61, 95% CI 3.2–18.1. P ≤ 0.001), who thought that FGC was legal in Malaysia (aOR 2.09, 95% CI 1.02–4.3. P = 0.04), and who were encouraged in religion (aOR 2.25, 95% CI 3.2–18.1. P = 0.036) and thought that FGC should continue (aOR 3.54, 95% CI 1.25–10.04. P = 0.017) were more likely to practice FGC. The main limitations of the study were the small sample size and low response rate. Conclusions: In this study, we found that many of the Muslim doctors were unaware of the legal and international stand against FGC, and many wanted the practice to continue. It is a concern that type IV FGC carried out by traditional midwives may be supplanted and exacerbated by type I FGC performed by doctors, calling for strong and urgent action by the Malaysian medical authorities. Abdul Rashid and co-workers study Malaysian doctors' positions on and experience of female genital cutting.Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?:

Suggested Citation

  • Abdul Rashid & Yufu Iguchi & Siti Nur Afiqah, 2020. "Medicalization of female genital cutting in Malaysia: A mixed methods study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(10), pages 1-22, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003303
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003303
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003303&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003303?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pmed00:1003303. 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: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    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.