Background: Female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) is a common sociocultural practice in many communities in Africa. Unfortunately, what females are forced to accept because they are helpless, in order to be an individual in social life and in the country they live in, is an important health issue that is not only harmful to the human body but also against human rights. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the wishes, knowledge and attitude of Somali women regarding FMG/C. Methods: From 16 regions of Somalia, 356 women were randomly selected. A structured and interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to collect data. Results: Except for one, all women participating in the survey were circumcised. A significant proportion of women embraced the continuation of FGM/C (52%) and 54.2% of them were satisfied with being FMG/C. Their knowledge, attitude, and practices were shaped by their religion and traditions. However, the proportion of those who wanted to stop FGM/C was 91%. Conclusions: Further efforts and research from different countries, cultures, beliefs, organizations, and individuals focusing on knowledge, awareness, legalization, and the opinions of lay and religious individuals, particularly including women’s rights activists, and women with FGM/C, are needed to stop FGM/C, also known as female circumcision.

1.
Sweileh WM: Bibliometric analysis of literature on female genital mutilation: (1930–2015). Reprod Health 2016; 13: 130.
2.
Odukogbe AA, Afolabi BB, Bello OO, Adeyanju AS: Female genital mutilation/cutting in africa. Transl Androl Urol 2017; 6: 138–148.
3.
WHO Press WHO: Global Strategy to Stop Health-Care Providers from Performing Female Genital Mutilation. Geneva, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF, UNHCR, UNIFEM, WHO, FIGO, ICN, IOM, WCPT, WMA, MWIA, 2017, p 9.
4.
Kaplan A, Forbes M, Bonhoure I, Utzet M, Martin M, Manneh M, Ceesay H: Female genital mutilation/cutting in the gambia: long-term health consequences and complications during delivery and for the newborn. Int J Womens Health 2013; 5: 323–331.
5.
Kaplan Marcusan A, Riba Singla L, Laye M, Secka DM, Utzet M, Le Charles MA: Female genital mutilation/cutting: Changes and trends in knowledge, attitudes, and practices among health care professionals in the gambia. Int J Womens Health 2016; 8: 103–117.
6.
Zurynski Y, Sureshkumar P, Phu A, Elliott E: Female genital mutilation and cutting: a systematic literature review of health professionals’ knowledge, attitudes and clinical practice. BMC Int Health Hum Rights 2015; 15: 32.
7.
Kaplan A, Hechavarria S, Bernal M, Bonhoure I: Knowledge, attitudes and practices of female genital mutilation/cutting among health care professionals in the gambia: a multiethnic study. BMC Public Health 2013; 13: 851.
8.
Varol N, Hall JJ, Black K, Turkmani S, Dawson A: Evidence-based policy responses to strengthen health, community and legislative systems that care for women in australia with female genital mutilation/cutting. Reprod Health 2017; 14: 63.
9.
Iavazzo C, Sardi TA, Gkegkes ID: Female genital mutilation and infections: A systematic review of the clinical evidence. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2013; 287: 1137–1149.
10.
Koukkula M, Keskimaki I, Koponen P, Molsa M, Klemetti R: Female genital mutilation/cutting among women of somali and kurdish origin in finland. Birth 2016; 43: 240–246.
11.
UNICEF: Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: A Global Concern, 2016.
12.
Kaplan A: From Senegambia to Catalonia: Acculturation and Social Integration Process. Fundación la Caixa, Barcelona: X Award Dr. Rogeli Duocastella in Social Sciences, 1998.
13.
Tamaddon L, Johnsdotter S, Liljestrand J, Essen B: Swedish health care providers' experience and knowledge of female genital cutting. Health Care Women Int 2006; 27: 709–722.
14.
Oljira T, Assefa N, Dessie Y: Female genital mutilation among mothers and daughters in harar, eastern ethiopia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2016; 135: 304–309.
15.
Biglu MH, Farnam A, Abotalebi P, Biglu S, Ghavami M: Effect of female genital mutilation/cutting on sexual functions. Sex Reprod Healthc 2016; 10: 3–8.
16.
Wahlberg A, Johnsdotter S, Ekholm Selling K, Kallestal C, Essen B: Factors associated with the support of pricking (female genital cutting type iv) among somali immigrants – a cross-sectional study in sweden. Reprod Health 2017; 14: 92.
17.
Refaat A: Medicalization of female genital cutting in Egypt. East Mediterr Health J 2009; 15: 1379–1388.
18.
Shell-Duncan B, Wander K, Hernlund Y, Moreau A: Dynamics of change in the practice of female genital cutting in senegambia: testing predictions of social convention theory. Soc Sci Med 2011; 73: 1275–1283.
19.
Dalal K, Lawoko S, Jansson B: Women’s attitudes towards discontinuation of female genital mutilation in Egypt. J Inj Violence Res 2010; 2: 41–45.
20.
UNICEF: Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: A Statistical Overview and Exploration of the Dynamics of Change, 2013.
21.
Nour NM: Female genital cutting: a persisting practice. Rev Obstet Gynecol 2008; 1: 135–139.
22.
Hess RF, Weinland J, Saalinger NM: Knowledge of female genital cutting and experience with women who are circumcised: a survey of nurse-midwives in the United States. J Midwifery Womens Health 2010; 55: 46–54.
23.
Thierfelder C, Tanner M, Bodiang CM: Female genital mutilation in the context of migration: experience of African women with the Swiss health care system. Eur J Public Health 2005; 15: 86–90.
24.
Mathews B: Female genital mutilation: Australian law, policy and practical challenges for doctors. Med J Aust 2011; 194: 139–141.
25.
Zaidi N, Khalil A, Roberts C, Browne M: Knowledge of female genital mutilation among healthcare professionals. J Obstet Gynaecol 2007; 27: 161–164.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.