~~ This is an 'accepted practice' in some African countries ~~

Trial In Circumcision Of Girl, 2, Brings U.S. Attention To Ancient Practice


By DOUG GROSS
Associated Press Writer
LAWRENCEVILLE, Ga. (AP) -- The trial of an Atlanta-area father accused of circumcising his 2-year-old daughter with scissors is focusing attention on an ancient African practice that experts say is slowly becoming more common in the U.S. as immigrant communities grow.

Khalid Adem, a 30-year-old immigrant from Ethiopia, is charged with aggravated battery and cruelty to children. Human rights observers said they believe this is the first criminal case in the U.S. involving the 5,000-year-old practice.

Prosecutors say Adem used scissors to remove his daughter's clitoris in their apartment in 2001. The child's mother said she did not discover it until more than a year later.

"He said he wanted to preserve her virginity," Fortunate Adem, the girl's mother, testified this week. "He said it was the will of God. I became angry in my mind. I thought he was crazy."

The girl, now 7, also testified, clutching a teddy bear and saying that her father "cut me on my private part." Adem cried loudly as his daughter left the courtroom.

Testifying on his own behalf Friday, Adem said he never circumcised his daughter or asked anyone else to do so. He said he grew up in Addis Ababa, the capital of Ethiopia, and considers the practice more prevalent in rural areas.

Adem, who removed a handkerchief from his
pocket and cried at one point during his testimony, was asked what he thought of someone who believes in the practice. He replied: "The word I can say is `mind in the gutter.' He is a moron."

His lawyer, Mark Hill, acknowledged that Adem's daughter had been cut. But he implied that the family of Fortunate Adem, who immigrated from South Africa when she was 6, may have had the procedure done.

The Adems divorced in 2003, and Hill suggested that the couple's daughter was encouraged to testify against her father by her mother, who has full custody.

If convicted, Adem, a clerk at a suburban Atlanta gas station, could get up to 40 years in prison.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, using figures from the 1990 Census, estimated that 168,000 girls and women in the U.S. had undergone the procedure or were at risk of being subjected to it.

The State Department estimates that up to 130 million women worldwide had undergone circumcision as of 2001. Knives, razors or even sharp stones are usually used, according to a 2001 department report. The tools often are not sterilized, and often, many girls are circumcised at the same ceremony, leading to infection.

It is unknown how many girls have died from the procedure, either during the cutting or from infections, or years later in childbirth.

Nightmares, depression, shock and feelings of betrayal are common psychological side effects, according to the federal report.

The report estimated that 73 percent of women in Ethiopia had undergone the procedure, based on a 1997 survey.

Taina Bien-Aime, executive director of Equality Now, an international human rights group, said female circumcision is most widely practiced in a 28-country swath of Africa. She said more than 90 percent of women in Ethiopia are believed to have been subjected to the practice, and more in places like Egypt and Somalia.

"It is a preparation for marriage," Bien-Aime said. "If the girl is not circumcised, her chances of being married are very slim."

The practice crosses ethnic and cultural lines and is not tied to a particular religion. Activists say the practice is intended to deny women sexual pleasure. In its most extreme form, the clitoris and parts of the labia are removed and the labia that remain are stitched together.

"I had maybe read about it in Reader's Digest or some other journal, but not really considered it a possibility here," said Dr. Rose Badaruddin, the pediatrician for the Adems' daughter.

Many refugees from Ethiopia and Somalia come to Georgia through a federal refugee resettlement program.

"With immigration, the immigrants travel with their traditions," Bien-Aime said. "Female genital mutilation is not an exception."

Federal law specifically bans the practice, but many states do not have a law addressing it. Georgia lawmakers, with the support of Fortunate Adem, passed an anti-mutilation law last year. Khalid Adem is not being tried under that law, since it did not exist when his daughter's cutting allegedly happened.

aside from horrifying me, this breaks my heart. those poor girls and women...i can't even imagine what they must feel and think. they must feel incomplete, not like women. i want to do something to help.

I don't even know what to say....:(

circumcison, no matter what gender is barbaric

This is just wrong, I feel so bad for those women and girls :(
I however disagree with the comment "Circumcision, no matter what gender is barbaric"...we had our son circumsized and wouldn't think twice to have it done when and if we have another son,..I guess it's all base on beliefs about it though.

Just because you don't agree with a custom does not mean it is barbaric(and yes I agree female circumcision is wrong). However, we do not live their life.

Just because you don't agree with a custom does not mean it is barbaric(and yes I agree female circumcision is wrong). However, we do not live their life.

:yes

Just because you don't agree with a custom does not mean it is barbaric(and yes I agree female circumcision is wrong). However, we do not live their life.

:agree

that's really sad for these poor women!

It's not really that new of a topic (at least not to me). A few years ago I read a great book about this exact topic. The writer is Waris Dieri and she actually wrote several books about is as she herself was affected by it.

The girl was 2! WOW!

:sadeyes :oogle

circumcison, no matter what gender is barbaric

:rolleyes I wont even go there and say anything.

On another note, That poor baby. How the mother didn't know for a year beats me.

Wow that is really sad. How awful for those poor women.

Just because you don't agree with a custom does not mean it is barbaric(and yes I agree female circumcision is wrong). However, we do not live their life.

I completely agree with that.

That poor baby! :(

Just because you don't agree with a custom does not mean it is barbaric(and yes I agree female circumcision is wrong). However, we do not live their life.

Perfectly stated.

I cannot even imagine the amount of pain the girl goes through at the time, nevermind sex in later years or childbirth.

OMG, that is so very sad! However how in the HELL does a mother NOT notice that her daughters Labia has been cut for over a yr? Assumeing that the child was already potty trained at the time, does she not bathe the child?!?
As for circumsion being barbaric, umm Ok, I'm respect that you feel that way, However both of my son's were circumsised at birth, both were given local anestetic before the procedure and have never know the difference. For me after going thru Nurseing school and seeing the effects of uncircumsied males who were now unable to properly care for themselves and heath providers to lazy to do it right, there was NO thought of not doing it. But that's just my opinion.:dunno

OMG, that is so very sad! However how in the HELL does a mother NOT notice that her daughters Labia has been cut for over a yr? Assumeing that the child was already potty trained at the time, does she not bathe the child?!?


It is not the labia they cut but the clitoris... and it is thought to stop their women from having premarital sex.

:scared All I'll say is OUCH!!! :wow

Just because you don't agree with a custom does not mean it is barbaric(and yes I agree female circumcision is wrong). However, we do not live their life.

I agree

I personally don't think the word barbaric is necessary. I know there are quite a few countries that hold this tradition, and while it may seem horrible to us, it is considered a custom to them. Just like us piercing our ears. We inflict pain on our children, and ourselves. And where as that may seem a usual custom for some of us to do, it may seem "barbaric" to others.

I don't think we are in the right position to pass judgement on this cultural tradition. It's not our place to.

I don't think judgement should be passed to quickly. It seems very unlikely to me that this mother did not see this for a year. Even my children who were two and potty trained, I would have noticed while changing their clothes or giving them a bath. Something about it seems very strange.

It's unfortunate that a custom like is still practice in native Africa, and among African immigrants here in the States.
The men firmly believe that it prevents their daughters from having premarital sex, thereby earning them a higher dowry when their daughters get married.
While I don't think we're in any position to pass judgement on what's 'right' or 'wrong', it's very unfortunate and still very sad.
Women who are 'circumsized' are often very scared, very timid women in society because of what has been taken from them.

I personally don't think the word barbaric is necessary. I know there are quite a few countries that hold this tradition, and while it may seem horrible to us, it is considered a custom to them. Just like us piercing our ears. We inflict pain on our children, and ourselves. And where as that may seem a usual custom for some of us to do, it may seem "barbaric" to others.

I don't think we are in the right position to pass judgement on this cultural tradition. It's not our place to.

I don't agree with this at all. I don't know of any children that have died from having their ears pierced. Female circumcision IS barbaric, and it's estimated that 100M women have experienced it.

There are 3 variations on female circumcision - One involves the removal of the clitoris. One involves the removal of the clitoris and labia. The most drastic, however, involves the removal of the clitoris and labia, and the vagina is sewed up, leaving a small hole for menstruation. This is done to show that the girl will be faithful to her future husband - she's cut open on her wedding night and then swen up again after intercourse has taken place.

The procedure is carried out on pre-pubescant girls, sometimes as young as 2. Knives and razor blades are used and they're generally not sterilised, and no asnaesthetic is used.

You call it custom if you want to. If this is not barbaric, I don't know what is.

I don't agree with this at all. I don't know of any children that have died from having their ears pierced. Female circumcision IS barbaric, and it's estimated that 100M women have experienced it.

There are 3 variations on female circumcision - One involves the removal of the clitoris. One involves the removal of the clitoris and labia. The most drastic, however, involves the removal of the clitoris and labia, and the vagina is sewed up, leaving a small hole for menstruation. This is done to show that the girl will be faithful to her future husband - she's cut open on her wedding night and then swen up again after intercourse has taken place.

The procedure is carried out on pre-pubescant girls, sometimes as young as 2. Knives and razor blades are used and they're generally not sterilised, and no asnaesthetic is used.

You call it custom if you want to. If this is not barbaric, I don't know what is.


ITA! the means in which it is done is barbaric.

But should, we as a nation, tell other societies how to live? It is a very fine line to be crossed and look where interfering has gotten us before.

Sonia, what i mean is.

Just because we are westerners- does not mean we are right.

Just because we have our own beliefs- does not make us right.

Who are we to judge on other culture's traditions?!

Yes perhaps they are barbaric to us, but thats because we have different ideals.

The practice is an ancient tradition, nothing we are going to say or do is ever going to stop it.

Sonia, what i mean is.

Just because we are westerners- does not mean we are right.

Just because we have our own beliefs- does not make us right.

Who are we to judge on other culture's traditions?!

Yes perhaps they are barbaric to us, but thats because we have different ideals.

The practice is an ancient tradition, nothing we are going to say or do is ever going to stop it.


I agree, and I'm sure certain things or customs that we have here other nations or countries think are barbaric as well....just because it's something that we don't practice or believe in doesn't make it barbaric..I'm not condoning (sp?) it or anything cause I find that it's very sad that the females go through something like that but I can't say it's barbaric and wrong just because it isn't a custom of ours. KWIM??

Sonia, what i mean is.

Just because we are westerners- does not mean we are right.

Just because we have our own beliefs- does not make us right.

Who are we to judge on other culture's traditions?!

Yes perhaps they are barbaric to us, but thats because we have different ideals.

The practice is an ancient tradition, nothing we are going to say or do is ever going to stop it.

I'm sorry but a culture that results in unbelievable pain, infection and in many cases, death IS barbaric. Call me judgmental :dunno
I think that the west has been very foolish in picking it's battles, and as a result it's in a poor position to interfere with cultural beliefs elsewhere in the world that cause gross harm and distress. In this case, however, the custom was being practised in our domain. Are you saying that we shouldn't interfere because it's someone's culture?! Where do we draw the line?

In the U.S. or eleswhere where it is against the law, yes we should do something. However, going to another country and telling them that their way of life is wrong, is well wrong. it is a thin, fine line b/c Darfur comes to mind. Could it be freedom of religion though

In the U.S. or eleswhere where it is against the law, yes we should do something. However, going to another country and telling them that their way of life is wrong, is well wrong. it is a thin, fine line b/c Darfur comes to mind. Could it be freedom of religion though


That has got be a court thing, as far as freedom of religion. I personally say that it doesn't fall into that category simply because it's putting someone elses life at risk, and it's not being done properly, as far as medical issues are concerned. It's a sticky situation as I see it. Because it could easily come up against the practice of circumcising boys. (They don't get a choice, it's done for religion, and arguements like that) However, I see the male circumcision as usually done by a doctor or a religious figure who has been trained to make sure that medically it's all ok.

Does that make sense?

you could argue most any religious practice puts someone's life at risk.

In the U.S. or eleswhere where it is against the law, yes we should do something. However, going to another country and telling them that their way of life is wrong, is well wrong. it is a thin, fine line b/c Darfur comes to mind. Could it be freedom of religion though

It's not a religious practice, it's purely cultural, so in that it differs from male circumcision. The girl's are circumcised to assure their virginity before marriage. In the case of cutting off their clitoris, it is done to prevent the girl from enjoying intercourse, therefore discouraging her from having sex. In the case of infibulation (where the clitoris and labia are cut off and the vagina is sewn up), the girl is cut open on her wedding night and then sewn up again after the marriage is consumated. If she becomes pregnant, she is cut open during the last stages of labour, and then sewn up after giving birth.

As the practice is grounds for asylum, I think it can be viewed as wrong, regardless of whether the practice is cultural. I mean, if paedophilia was viewed as a cultural phenomenon in Western civilisation, would you accept it as an individual's right?

No and i know what it is. It is thier belief, however wrong. I think it is wrong to have to wear the headscarf and all. Women are oppressed through out the world, this is a more severe form. They may think you are barbaric for enjoying sex.

No and i know what it is. It is thier belief, however wrong. I think it is wrong to have to wear the headscarf and all. Women are oppressed through out the world, this is a more severe form. They may think you are barbaric for enjoying sex.


I don't think female circumcision and women wearing headscarfs (which in most countries is left to the woman to decide on her own wether she wants to or not) is in anyway closely enough related to be comparable.

No and i know what it is. It is thier belief, however wrong. I think it is wrong to have to wear the headscarf and all. Women are oppressed through out the world, this is a more severe form. They may think you are barbaric for enjoying sex.

So you think that beating women that don't comply with their husband's wishes is ok? That mutilation of toddlers is ok? Coercive arranged marriages are ok? It's ok to abort a baby, even if it's against the mother's wishes? And it's alright for women to be gang-raped? You're saying that none of these practices are barbaric? I'm sorry, but it sickens me that anyone would think that any of these activities are ok just because they are happening in another country.

you could argue most any religious practice puts someone's life at risk.

I'd like to hear that argument.

ok-male circumcision you could die from infection..baptism you could die from lung aphsyication(i cant spell today). etc. I never said i agreed with it. I think its wrong. And yes, wearing of the scarves can be compared b/c some women are so scared of their husbands, that they don't want to rebel. It starts with a scarf and can escalate to other things. Oh and I'm sorry I sicken you.

ok-male circumcision you could die from infection..baptism you could die from lung aphsyication(i cant spell today). etc. I never said i agreed with it. I think its wrong. And yes, wearing of the scarves can be compared b/c some women are so scared of their husbands, that they don't want to rebel. It starts with a scarf and can escalate to other things. Oh and I'm sorry I sicken you.

What do those baptisms involve that puts anyone at risk of asphyxiation?!

The women have at least some semblance of a choice, and can take their scarf off at any time. A 2 yr old little girl does not have that choice and the procedure is irreversible. I can't see where the two practices are comparable.

So, you're saying that you believe that these practices are wrong, but it would also be wrong to tell the people who carry out these procedures that it's wrong? I'm not following your reasoning....

You've got it. In baptism your going under water-its very unlikely to happen but could. Also what about the jehovah's witness not taking blood. I bet children, who dont have a choice, have died from that practice. or the amish not being educated past 8th grade. Yeah you tell a woman to just take off her scarf, she will get killed for shaming her family.

Sonia-nothing against you, im actually enjoying the adult conversation.

You've got it. In baptism your going under water-its very unlikely to happen but could. Also what about the jehovah's witness not taking blood. I bet children, who dont have a choice, have died from that practice. or the amish not being educated past 8th grade. Yeah you tell a woman to just take off her scarf, she will get killed for shaming her family.

Sonia-nothing against you, im actually enjoying the adult conversation.

Thank you for the clarification. I'm not sure that refusing education after 8th grade can result in death. In baptism, the risk of death is negligible, as is the risk of death arising from wearing a scarf. The case of Jehovah's witnesses is, I grant you, a valid case. But the practice that this debate has focused on has nothing to do with religion, it is purely cultural, so it throws the 'all reigious practices put people's lives at risk' arugment out of the window.

None of my comments are meant as a personal attack - I'm merely targeting your posts because you're the only other person posting! A debate is just that - a debate. Nothing more :)

yeah its kind of hard to debate with a 4year old and almost two year old :). Well culture can be even more sticky, in some instances.

Oh and sorry for the multiple typos, still having keyboard difficulties.

I don't agree with this at all. I don't know of any children that have died from having their ears pierced. Female circumcision IS barbaric, and it's estimated that 100M women have experienced it.

There are 3 variations on female circumcision - One involves the removal of the clitoris. One involves the removal of the clitoris and labia. The most drastic, however, involves the removal of the clitoris and labia, and the vagina is sewed up, leaving a small hole for menstruation. This is done to show that the girl will be faithful to her future husband - she's cut open on her wedding night and then swen up again after intercourse has taken place.

The procedure is carried out on pre-pubescant girls, sometimes as young as 2. Knives and razor blades are used and they're generally not sterilised, and no asnaesthetic is used.

You call it custom if you want to. If this is not barbaric, I don't know what is.


I've taken tons of socio-cultural anthropology classes... and sociology classes... and I've definitely learned that the "Western" way isn't always the right way and that I shouldn't judge other cultures... and that what works for us doesn't always work for them. So I try really hard to be open-minded and understanding of unusual practices (by Western standards) such as polygamy... cousin marriage... etc...

But genital mutilation (especially the ones described in the quote above) is something that... no matter how much anthro training I receive... I will NEVER understand or support. I very much understand the value in preserving culture and customs... but I do believe that this crosses the line into the realm of torture.

I realize that "our way" isn't always the right way. But at the same time... just because something has been practiced for hundreds and hundreds of years... doesn't make it right either.

I've taken tons of socio-cultural anthropology classes... and sociology classes... and I've definitely learned that the "Western" way isn't always the right way and that I shouldn't judge other cultures... and that what works for us doesn't always work for them. So I try really hard to be open-minded and understanding of unusual practices (by Western standards) such as polygamy... cousin marriage... etc...

But genital mutilation (especially the ones described in the quote above) is something that... no matter how much anthro training I receive... I will NEVER understand or support. I very much understand the value in preserving culture and customs... but I do believe that this crosses the line into the realm of torture.

I realize that "our way" isn't always the right way. But at the same time... just because something has been practiced for hundreds and hundreds of years... doesn't make it right either.

That's exactly how I feel about it.

I don't think judgement should be passed to quickly. It seems very unlikely to me that this mother did not see this for a year. Even my children who were two and potty trained, I would have noticed while changing their clothes or giving them a bath. Something about it seems very strange.

I agree.