Hege Storhaug, HRS
Hva er det med oss i vesten som gjør at vi hiver individualismen på båten når vi møter kollektivistiske kulturer i vårt eget ”nabolag”? For hvorfor i all verden skal talspersoner for eksempelvis somaliere i Australia ha noen som helst innflytelse over australsk politikk, dertil knyttet til en medbrakt praksis som er groteske rituelle overgrep mot barn? Hvorfor skal de spørres i det hele tatt om hva de mener? Jo da, uttalerett har man, ytringsfrihet likeså. Akkurat som bryggerinæringen her på berget gjerne må mene både dett og hint om alkoholpolitikken og åpningstider her på berget. Men det er som vi vet ikke bryggerinæringen som bestemmer hvor langt på natt vi kan få servert det ene eller andre.
Så kunne man jo tro at det var somaliere og andre i Australia som ville ha muligheter til profesjonell hjelp til å lemleste jentene sine. Det er det ikke. Det er leger som ser flere og flere ødelagte underliv hos unge kvinner med innvandrebakgrunn som fremmer forslaget. Det samme som i USA, og der løsningen som foreslås også er den samme: at et kontrollert mindre inn-/overgrep på babyer (!) legaliseres når det gjøres av profesjonelle leger.
AUSTRALIAN doctors are considering a controversial form of genital mutilation on baby girls.The practice involving cutting a girl’s genitals, sometimes with razors or pieces of glass, could be allowed in a clinical setting to stem illegal backyard procedures which are leaving young girls scarred for life.
The Royal Australian New Zealand College of Obstetricians will next month discuss backing «ritual nicks», a modified form of genital mutilation.
But experts are divided on whether to allow the practice, given that in some cultures it is used to remove the sexual feelings of women.
Female genital mutilation has been outlawed in Australia since the 1990s but is common among African, Asian and Middle Eastern communities.
With the rise in Somali and Sudanese numbers in Australia, doctors are seeing more cases of young girls, and women, needing surgery after illegal operations. Backers of «ritual nick» said it was a superficial procedure leaving no long-term damage.
RANZCOG secretary Gino Pecoraro said the policy would be discussed at next month’s Women’s Health Committee meeting.
«We will need to start to think about [its introduction] but we would have to speak to community leaders from Australia,» Dr Pecoraro said.
«If a nick could meet the cultural needs of a particular woman, then it might save her from going through what can really be drastic surgery.
«But we need to make sure we do not legitimise the ritualistic maiming of children.»
But many are outraged, some saying a «ritual nick» is still child abuse and legitimises female mutilation.
University of Newcastle’s professor of perinatal and infant psychiatry Dr Louise Newman said some doctors were being approached to perform the procedure.
«We know it is happening here . . . but [the] majority are done in the home in a traditional way,» she said.
Reasons given by practising populations include religion, despite the Koran not requiring it, and that it can help maintain cleanliness and health.
«The problem is some people see it similar to male circumcision but the reasons for both are very different as well as the impact,» Dr Newman said.
«The actual procedure can be pretty devastating.»