118
GENDER PERSPECTIVES ON TORTURE: Law and Practice
as the Special Rapporteur affirmed46, States’ failures to properly screen migrants and refugees,
identify victims of torture, including victims of FGM, and provide appropriate care and support
can re-traumatize victims and inflict additional mistreatment. Given that women with FGM are
considered vulnerable, and that States have a heightened obligation to protect vulnerable and mar
ginalized individuals from torture47, subjecting women and girls to humiliating, discriminating,
or judgmental attitudes in the health setting prohibits them from enjoying the right to the highest
attainable standard of health, and can amount to torture or ill-treatment. The Istanbul Convention
requires States Parties to ensure that public welfare services have the professional expertise and
capacity to identify and address women’s and girls’ uniquely difficult situations and traumas (arti
cle 20), and to provide such services to all women and girls, irrespective of their legal status in the
country (article 4, §3). With regard to FGM, the Special Rapporteur’s report on Gender Perspectives
could include a recommendation that urges States to undertake appropriate training and introduce
community-level gender and diversity sensitisation campaigns that address underlying discrimi
natory attitudes in the provision of health care services to women and girls with FGM.
A growing concern regarding FGM is the expanding trend of medicalising the practice48. This is
particularly relevant in countries such as Egypt, Nigeria, Malaysia, Mali, Kenya, Yemen49, Northern
Sudan50, and Indonesia51. In Indonesia, where over 50% of women are excised, health professionals
perform one-third of the excisions. In Egypt, where over 90% are subjected to FGM, this amounts to
77%. Various organisations and scholars have argued that medicalising FGM negates the long-term
gynecological and obstetric effects of cutting the genitalia, as well as the impact on the emotional,
psychological, and sexual wellbeing of the woman, and that it remains a violation of the right to
bodily integrity, even if performed by medical professionals52.
However, a number of other effects of medicalization can be noted, including the perception
that medicalising FGM is a safer procedure, which raises concerns about the institutionalizing
and legitimizing effects of medicalization. Moreover, the medicalising trend might equally have a
negative impact on women and girls seeking asylum. Given the current issues related to obtaining
asylum on the grounds of fear of persecution related to FGM (see discussion above), the fact that
FGM is performed in a medical setting could allow it to be considered a minor procedure, and
hence undermine the request for asylum–not only because of a lack of explicit grounds but also
because of a lack of well-founded fear of persecution53.
In his 2013 report on torture in health care settings, the Special Rapporteur expressed concern
about the failure to detect abusive and mistreating practices in health care settings that amount
to torture or ill-treatment due to the fact that the practices exceed the scope of violating the right
to health but are justified because they are described as medical necessities, or “healthcare treat
A/HRC/31/57 §31.
Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Ximenes-Lopez v. Brazil, judgment of 4 July 2006, in A/HRC/31/57.
48
The medicalisation of FGM refers to situations in which the procedure (including re-infibulation) is practiced
by any category of health care provider, whether in a public or a private clinic, at home or elsewhere, at any
point in time in a woman’s life (WHO, 2016, op cit).
49
Robertson L, Szaraz M. 2016. The medicalization of FGM. 28 Too Many.
50
UNICEF, 2013. Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting : A statistical overview and exploration of the dynamics
of change.
51
G.I. Serour. Medicalisation of female genital mutilation/cutting. African Journal of Urology, Vol. 19,
September 2013.
52
See for example: Global Strategy to stop health care providers from performing female genital mutilation,
2010, available at: http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/fgm/rhr_10_9/en/.
53
Foldès P, Martz F. The medicalisation of female genital mutilation FGM and asylum in Europe, Forced
Migration Review, May 2015.
46
47
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents