Female Genital Mutilation, (AME Medical Journal)

by Aminata Diop

This medical article gives a clinical overview of Female Genital Mutilation, describing what it is, how it’s classified, its health effects, and the medical and ethical challenges around it. It is written by doctors who treat women affected by FGM and aims to raise awareness in the medical community. Reading it gave me both sadness and respect: sadness for the pain women go through, and respect for the doctors who try to repair what should never have been done in the first place.

Three most important points the authors make:

FGM has no medical benefit and causes severe health problems.

The article begins by explaining the four main types of FGM as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO). It states clearly that none of these procedures have any medical or health benefit. Instead, they cause both short-term and long-term harm. These include severe bleeding, infections, chronic pain, urinary problems, sexual difficulties, complications in childbirth, and even death. The authors stress that FGM is not a medical practice but a violation of the body that destroys normal anatomy and function.

Healthcare workers must understand and respond with empathy and skill.

Many women affected by FGM are afraid to seek medical care, or they live in countries where doctors are not trained to manage FGM complications. The article calls on healthcare professionals to be educated, sensitive, and respectful when treating these women. It includes diagrams and clinical explanations to help doctors perform deinfibulation (reopening of the scar) and other reconstructive procedures safely. The authors emphasize that empathy and non-judgment are essential in caring for survivors.

Medicalization of FGM is dangerous and unethical.

The article warns against the growing trend of “medicalized” FGM when health workers perform the procedure thinking it makes it safer. The authors strongly condemn this, saying it gives false legitimacy to a harmful practice. They insist that medical professionals should work to end FGM, not make it “safer.” Doing it under sterile conditions does not make it right.

My personal takeaways:

As a rational humanist, I judge actions by their real effects on people. FGM clearly causes harm, physical, emotional, and social. This article provides the medical evidence for what humanists already know morally: no one has the right to damage another person’s body for cultural or religious reasons. Reading about the medical consequences was disturbing. It reminded me that behind every statistic is a real human being living with pain and loss.

I strongly agree with the authors’ rejection of medicalized FGM. Trying to make something harmful “safe” is like trying to make slavery “comfortable.” The only ethical position is total opposition. I also agree with their call for empathy in treatment. Too often, survivors face judgment or silence. Doctors must be trained to treat them with compassion and understanding, not shame.

However, I also think prevention must go hand in hand with medical care. Repairing damage is good, but stopping new cases is better. That means stronger public education, community dialogue, and laws that truly protect girls.

As an atheist, I see no divine justification that can excuse the harm caused by FGM. All moral worth comes from reducing suffering and increasing happiness. FGM does the opposite.

Final:

This medical article turns emotion into evidence. It shows the hard facts of harm and reminds us that ending FGM is not only a moral duty but also a medical necessity. Human compassion, backed by scientific knowledge, is the path forward.