Muslim mother excluded from school parents' evening for wearing veil

  • Thread starter Thread starter Uthman
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 119
  • Views Views 15K
Status
Not open for further replies.
That's my opinion, I said niqab creates isolation and is bad for community cohesion and the society as a whole and from what I've learned here this is a good enough reason for banning things

gggrrrrrr :'(
you yourself have said youve never spoken to a veiled woman so seriously, what do you know? maybe if you actually accepted niqabis as normal people itll be fine for society...it only creates isolation because its people like you who take it as a barrier
 
Anywhere a muslim woman can wear a niqab, I should be allowed to wear a ski mask. No special rights for the religious please. You're welcome to do everything I'm allowed to do, no less and no more.
 
Good question. My answer to your previous question was actually based on this story:

Imam Abu Hanifah was once praying behind Imam Malik. Imam Malik was of the opinion that one should raise their hands before and after the Ruku' position. Imam Abu Hanifah was not of this opinion.

They both prayed and Imam Malik was raising his hands before and after Ruku' whereas Imam Abu Hanifah didn't do this.

After the prayer, Imam Abu Hanifah joked to Imam Malik that "you were flapping your hands so much, I thought you would fly!"

Imam Malik responded that "I thought you had already flown away the first time you raised your hands!". :D

The above story shows the attitude that we should have towards those who hold a different opinion. However, it is a minor theological difference of opinion (both of which have a firm basis) so I'm not sure whether the same approach can be used for any difference of opinion. So I will have to answer your second question with a response that perhaps more of us should use on this board:

I don't know.


Masha'Allah

that is a really interesting story.. thanks for sharing...

I didn't want to partake on this thread for several reasons:
1- being (I don't want to be crucified for my opinion) which is-- if niqab were a must (obligatory), then why are women forbidden from wearing it during pilgrimage (hajj) when the largest number of men would as well be present...
nonetheless I think anyone should be entitled to dress as they please unquestioned...
2-I believe the Niqab grants a woman complete anonymity thus it makes no sense to wear it and expect to be identified, in other words if there is a situation when anonymity isn't needed then I believe the hijab will take place of the niqab, else a phone conversation with the teacher might accomplish the task just the same...


and Allah swt knows best

:w:
 
Yes, democracy. You know, I think under a democracy, people are allowed to wear what they want?
Unfortunately, living in a democracy doesn't mean you can do whatever you want, whenever you want.

In the UK hard hats are compulsory on building sites and nudity in public is forbidden. There's also the interesting case of Peter Trigger. Employers are allowed to enforce reasonable dress codes and you're not allowed in a bank wearing a balaclava, in fact people have been arrested for wearing one in public.

Not sure I agree with the last point but it's clear that people are allowed to dictate dress codes in certain situations and that muslims are not being discriminated against by enforcing these rules.
 
Anywhere a muslim woman can wear a niqab, I should be allowed to wear a ski mask. No special rights for the religious please. You're welcome to do everything I'm allowed to do, no less and no more.

go right ahead and wear your ski mask. but dont be hypocritical and wear it only when you choose to, to spite muslim women or stir up trouble. wear it ALL THE TIME in public. including if you may have to eat out in public. or if you need a breather. or anything. wear it and keep it on. but dont choose to wear it 'because muslim women can wear a veil and i want to prove a point.' thats stupid.
 
This site says that Islamic texts do not require women to cover their faces.
http://www.islamicnetwork.com/index.php/weblog/comments/al_hijab_the_veil/

This site says that they do
http://muttaqun.com/niqab.html

Again another example of Islamic text is ambiguous and another example of how ‘scholars’ find the interpretation that they want to find.

I note that on the site suggesting that it is NOT obligatory it states that . . . . Muslims must strive to be different!
Difference from the Clothing of Unbelievers ‎
‎Her clothing must not resemble the clothing of the unbelievers. This is a general ruling of the ‘Sharia’h which ‎encompasses not only dress but also such things as manners, customs, religious practices and festivities, transactions, ‎etc. Indeed, dissimilarity with unbelievers is a precedent that was established by the first generation of Islam.
‘Abdullah ‎ibn ‘Amr ibn Al-’Aas said, “The Prophet (saw) saw me wearing two saffron coloured garments, so he said: ‎‎“Indeed, these are the clothes of ‘Kuffar’ (unbelievers), so do not wear them.” [Sahih Muslim]‎


The more I learn the more I despair!!
 
There is no ambiguity when you think about it, as neither schools of thoughts disagree, both agree you should dress a particular way (modest)
When you take an exam and get an A plus five points for a bonus question, does it detract from your grade? You've gone ahead and given it 110% instead of 100% ..
There are degrees of religiosity and some people desire to spend their life to the service of God--

Now, as not dressing like the kuffar, I don't see why that should make you despair either? Doesn't Ezekiel warn against women who dress to seduce?
It is my feeling that the hadiths that speak against imitating the kuffar, do so of clothes that are seductive or revealing or too obnoxious in color.

and Allah swt knows best!
 
She wasn't doing anything bad by my standards.
She can stand up for her believes in Saudi Arabia and in her own community, but not in public places.


So I guess you'd be the type to stop me from wearing my ninja suit in public?:raging:

It has nothing to do with religion I just wear it to look cool:-[


I've never met a woman like that. In Itally I almost ran over a women dresse like that but that was only because I'm like 6'2'' and she was reallyyyyyy short and I just didn't see her.

Anyway, I can understand not allowing women to drive when they are like this, of other situations where authorities would genuinly need to check ID, but outside of that she should be able to cover her face if she wishes.
 
The more I learn the more I despair!!



despair1-1.jpg



despair_3.jpg


despair.jpg


funnypicturessadcatblackandwhite-1.jpg


sad%20baby.preview.jpg



sad-1.jpg






:cry::cry::cry:


I was only going to do one, but they kept making me laugh so I couldn't stop:-[
 
This site says that Islamic texts do not require women to cover their faces.
http://www.islamicnetwork.com/index.php/weblog/comments/al_hijab_the_veil/

This site says that they do
http://muttaqun.com/niqab.html

Again another example of Islamic text is ambiguous and another example of how ‘scholars’ find the interpretation that they want to find.

I note that on the site suggesting that it is NOT obligatory it states that . . . . Muslims must strive to be different!
Difference from the Clothing of Unbelievers ‎
‎Her clothing must not resemble the clothing of the unbelievers. This is a general ruling of the ‘Sharia’h which ‎encompasses not only dress but also such things as manners, customs, religious practices and festivities, transactions, ‎etc. Indeed, dissimilarity with unbelievers is a precedent that was established by the first generation of Islam.
‘Abdullah ‎ibn ‘Amr ibn Al-’Aas said, “The Prophet (saw) saw me wearing two saffron coloured garments, so he said: ‎‎“Indeed, these are the clothes of ‘Kuffar’ (unbelievers), so do not wear them.” [Sahih Muslim]‎


The more I learn the more I despair!!

"As to those who reject Faith, it is the same to them Whether thou warn them or do not warn them; they will not believe. Allah hath set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes is a veil; great is the penalty they (incur)."

[Qur'an Chapter 2, Verse 6 & 7.]
Need I say more?
 
I note that on the site suggesting that it is NOT obligatory it states that . . . . Muslims must strive to be different!
Difference from the Clothing of Unbelievers ‎
‎Her clothing must not resemble the clothing of the unbelievers. This is a general ruling of the ‘Sharia’h which ‎encompasses not only dress but also such things as manners, customs, religious practices and festivities, transactions, ‎etc. Indeed, dissimilarity with unbelievers is a precedent that was established by the first generation of Islam.
‘Abdullah ‎ibn ‘Amr ibn Al-’Aas said, “The Prophet (saw) saw me wearing two saffron coloured garments, so he said: ‎‎“Indeed, these are the clothes of ‘Kuffar’ (unbelievers), so do not wear them.” [Sahih Muslim]‎


The more I learn the more I despair!!

If you want to discuss that, there is a thread about it here. :)
 
Now, as not dressing like the kuffar, I don't see why that should make you despair either? Doesn't Ezekiel warn against women who dress to seduce?
It is my feeling that the hadiths that speak against imitating the kuffar, do so of clothes that are seductive or revealing or too obnoxious in color.

and Allah swt knows best!

Greetings Skye

I despair because I love my country and want all the citizens of that country to live in peace and harmony and work together towards common goals aimed at providing us with a secure and prosperous future. How can we work together with a group of people who make no attempt to integrate and who strive to be different for no good reason other than just to be different. It seems to me that it’s got nothing to do with dressing modestly it’s all about dressing differently. I watched a news clip yesterday of the Turkish parliament and all the women there were dressed modestly – non of them were wearing Muslim style garb. I watched the Prime Minister of Pakistan on the same news and he wore a ‘western’ style suit and does not have a beard. I am sure that of the two million Muslims in the UK most of them would be unrecognisable from the indigenous population but there is a sizeable number who seem to want to live in segregated enclaves which look more like Pakistan, where they dress like Pakistanis and where some don’t know how to speak English and who justify their style of dress as a requirement of the religion, that being to copy the life style and dress of a 7C warring tribe. I am sure there was a good reason for Mohammed to decree that Muslims in and around war torn Mecca should dress and wear their facial hair in a different style that the enemy. Does that requirement still stand because we are still the enemy?
 
Thanks - I read that and it confirms my reason for despair!!

if you knew something was specifically muslim would you do it? do you celebrate eid? do you wear a thobe? do you pray in ur own way 5 times a day? do you fast?

or knowing jews wear skull caps, do you wear a skull cap? do you celebrate their festivals?

or christian festivals..as a non christian do you celebrate it?

Sikhs and their turbans and knife thingies- would you do it knowing its a 'sikh' thing?

Hinduas with their bindus- would you get one?

just generally speaking of course. would YOU take other religious practices and things and imitate?
 
if you knew something was specifically muslim would you do it? do you celebrate eid? do you wear a thobe? do you pray in ur own way 5 times a day? do you fast?

or knowing jews wear skull caps, do you wear a skull cap? do you celebrate their festivals?

or christian festivals..as a non christian do you celebrate it?

Sikhs and their turbans and knife thingies- would you do it knowing its a 'sikh' thing?

Hinduas with their bindus- would you get one?

just generally speaking of course. would YOU take other religious practices and things and imitate?

Of course I don’t wear a skull cap or a turban, why would I am not even sure why anyone would wear either item as they appear to have no practical function. The point is, in considering what I might wear I don’t think – I must wear something that is different from what a Muslim wears. I also don’t purposely do anything that is opposite to anything Muslims do just because Muslims do it. I wear the clothes that are for sale in the shops where I live, provide a practical function and look like stuff everybody else is wearing. If I lived in Mecca I might wear the long flowing white shirt they wear because they would be readily available and suitable for that climate and I might want to ‘fit in’ rather than ‘stand out.’

Muhammad was at war with his neighbours, for some reason (possibly because opposing forces didn’t wear identifying uniforms) someone decreed that Muslims should look differently from the enemy. Whatever the reason surely God doesn’t care what style of clothing you wear?
 
Last edited:
Greetings Skye

I despair because I love my country and want all the citizens of that country to live in peace and harmony and work together towards common goals aimed at providing us with a secure and prosperous future. How can we work together with a group of people who make no attempt to integrate and who strive to be different for no good reason other than just to be different. It seems to me that it’s got nothing to do with dressing modestly it’s all about dressing differently. I watched a news clip yesterday of the Turkish parliament and all the women there were dressed modestly – non of them were wearing Muslim style garb. I watched the Prime Minister of Pakistan on the same news and he wore a ‘western’ style suit and does not have a beard. I am sure that of the two million Muslims in the UK most of them would be unrecognisable from the indigenous population but there is a sizeable number who seem to want to live in segregated enclaves which look more like Pakistan, where they dress like Pakistanis and where some don’t know how to speak English and who justify their style of dress as a requirement of the religion, that being to copy the life style and dress of a 7C warring tribe. I am sure there was a good reason for Mohammed to decree that Muslims in and around war torn Mecca should dress and wear their facial hair in a different style that the enemy. Does that requirement still stand because we are still the enemy?

where I personally think that clothing in general is a frivolous topic to discuss, especially by Muslims when there are much more pressing problems like the current state they are in, as well I believe the prophet PBUH was a very wise person and many misconstrue his teachings, I still believe that people should dress as they please, you have spanish monks dressing like the KKK or I should rather say the KKK members dress like them, you also have Latvian nuns covered from head to toe... it is a matter of anonymity (see my previous post on the matter) I don't personally think that one expects to dress in niqab and expect certain interactions to occur, but it is a choice they have made and I have to respect it...

as stated above and this is my own personal belief based on the fact that women are forbidden from wearing niqab or covering their face during pilgrimage that it is a requirement only of the prophet's wives (or women of the house) due to a certain incident that happened to saida Aisha RA .. some sisters wish to be elevated to that status and they are certainly so entitled, they have my utmost respect and admiration as I am sure their lives are very difficult due to their choice... in other words let's try to make their lives easier not more difficult if we can...

peace
 
greetings skye

i despair because i love my country and want all the citizens of that country to live in peace and harmony and work together towards common goals aimed at providing us with a secure and prosperous future.
Is that so? From reading your posts, I think that you want people to conform to your own personal standards of The Way Things Ought To Be, and if they don't, they are not to be tolerated. Or rather, a cause for 'despair'.

How can we work together with a group of people who make no attempt to integrate
Yes, because absolutely no Muslims in Britain integrate whatsoever. None of them speak or read or write (or type) in English. And they all smell, have no sense of humour and have leprosy.

and who strive to be different for no good reason other than just to be different.
So, what, you don't like Goths, either? They like to be different for the sake of it. As do a bunch of people born in this country. As is their right, so long as they are not breaking any laws in so doing.

It seems to me that it’s got nothing to do with dressing modestly it’s all about dressing differently.
And how is 'dressing differently' necessarily a bad thing? You don't have to wear a uniform to be accepted as a British citizen.

'If everybody looked the same,
We'd get bored looking at each other'

I watched a news clip yesterday of the turkish parliament and all the women there were dressed modestly – non of them were wearing muslim style garb. I watched the prime minister of pakistan on the same news and he wore a ‘western’ style suit and does not have a beard. I am sure that of the two million muslims in the uk most of them would be unrecognisable from the indigenous population but there is a sizeable number who seem to want to live in segregated enclaves which look more like pakistan, where they dress like pakistanis and where some don’t know how to speak english and who justify their style of dress as a requirement of the religion, that being to copy the life style and dress of a 7c warring tribe.
1) The people who can't speak English probably first emigrated in the 70's

2) Immigration rules have now changed - immigrants must be able to speak and understand English (correct me if I'm wrong)

3) By your logic, my late grandmother, who was learning English in her final years, but dressed like a Pakistani for all of them, would be some sort of difficult fuddy-duddy brown leech on British society.

Also, I've not heard of traditional Arabian dress being described as that of a '7C Warring Tribe'. That's such an offensive stereotype, it's hilarious.

Still, the only thing cooler than that would be to emulate the garb of a 25C Warring Species:

klingon-1.jpg


K'Plah!

I am sure there was a good reason for mohammed to decree that muslims in and around war torn mecca should dress and wear their facial hair in a different style that the enemy. Does that requirement still stand because we are still the enemy?
Who said you(plural) are the enemy? Aside from certain whackos who claim to be Islamic but promptly drop all pretences in order to perpetrate or celebrate the murder of civilians contrary to Islamic law.

If people want to dress differently or men want to (gasp) grow facial hair, it's their right to, as long as they don't break any laws in the process.

However, I do object to women growing beards because I think freak shows are exploitative.

I would have chosen the Scream. :p
 
Last edited:
go right ahead and wear your ski mask. but dont be hypocritical and wear it only when you choose to, to spite muslim women or stir up trouble. wear it ALL THE TIME in public. including if you may have to eat out in public. or if you need a breather. or anything. wear it and keep it on. but dont choose to wear it 'because muslim women can wear a veil and i want to prove a point.' thats stupid.

You gloss over the point. There is a reason why I'm not allowed to wear a ski mask in many public places. That same reason holds true for the woman wearing the islamic face covering.

If we start making special exceptions for the religious, that is when we start down the downward spiral. This goes not only for muslims and face coverings but also for sikhs and knife carrying, jehovah's witnesses and the child neglect/abuse of forbidding their kids blood transfusions, jews and muslims and genital mutilation, etc.

If what you propose to do is not allowed in general, it should NOT be allowed just because you claim religious privilege.
 
If we start making special exceptions for the religious, that is when we start down the downward spiral. This goes not only for muslims and face coverings but also for sikhs and knife carrying, jehovah's witnesses and the child neglect/abuse of forbidding their kids blood transfusions, jews and muslims and genital mutilation, etc.
.

I am amused really for as much time as you have spent here, you have come to learn nothing at all, is that an atheist thing or are you too wrapped up in your own beliefs to take the time to learn about others, especially when you are such a staunch religio-phobe?

Let's sum it up for you in a nut shell so when you make analogies they can make better sense learned one!
1- A Jehovah's witness CAN'T withhold blood and/or blood transfusions to a minor unless it is a non-emergent situation. Medical ethics isn't subject to your veto one way or the other, given how poorly informed you appear!

2- Genital 'mutilation/cutting' has nothing to do with Islam, here is an article by a Muslim doctor and a Harvard graduate
Female circumcision and genital cutting
Nawal M Nour, MD, MPH



UpToDate performs a continuous review of over 375 journals and other resources. Updates are added as important new information is published. The literature review for version 15.1 is current through December 2006; this topic was last changed on June 30, 2006. The next version of UpToDate (15.2) will be released in June 2007.

INTRODUCTION — Female genital cutting (FGC), also known as female circumcision or genital mutilation, is a culturally determined practice, predominantly performed in parts of Africa and Asia and affecting more than 130 million women and girls worldwide [1]. Recent immigration patterns have caused obstetricians and gynecologists throughout the world to increasingly encounter women who have experienced this practice. It is imperative that these providers understand the health and social issues related to FGC so that they can manage the immediate and long-term complications of the procedure.

TYPES — FGC refers to the manipulation or removal of external genital organs in girls and women. The World Health Organization classified FGC into four types of procedures. Type I consists of excision of the prepuce, with or without excision of part of all of the clitoris. Type II involves clitoridectomy and partial or total excision of the labia minora. Type III, or infibulation, includes removing part or all of the external genitalia and reapproximation of the remnant labia majora, leaving a small neointroitus. Type IV involves other forms of injuries to the genital region including pricking, piercing, stretching, burning, scraping or any other manipulation of external genitalia [1,2].

ORIGINS AND RATIONALE — The origins of FGC are unknown, but theories as to its origins date back to ancient Egypt, pre-Islamic Arabia, ancient Rome, and Tsarist Russia [3-5]. More recently, this practice has come to represent an important rite of passage for girls into womanhood within some cultures. It is thought by some to be a religious custom, but no religion condones it. It is reinforced by customary beliefs that it maintains a girl's chastity, preserves fertility, ensures marriageability, improves hygiene, and enhances sexual pleasure for men.

In Europe and the United States, removal of the clitoris or prepuce was occasionally performed to treat clitoral enlargement, redundancy, hysteria, lesbianism, and erotomania up until the 1930s [6].

Most of the time, circumcision is done out of love. Parents initiate this procedure for their daughters, not to them. Being a wife and a mother is a woman's livelihood in these societies; thus not circumcising one's daughter is equivalent to condemning her to a life of isolation. Infibulation safeguards her virginity, preserves her chastity, and ensures her eligibility for marriage, thereby protecting her future.

Many women who have undergone FGC do not consider themselves to be mutilated. They do not believe that they are being selectively tortured because the majority of women in their community have gone through this ritual. Those who immigrate to the United States from refugee camps may be surprised to learn that most women here are not circumcised. Therefore, these women can be offended if they are referred to as having undergone genital mutilation. Instead, it is better to use the term circumcision, genital cutting, or the exact word they use in their language. Women who have undergone FGC have voiced concern that health care providers are not sensitive when broaching this subject and sometimes must be educated about this practice by the patient herself.

PROCEDURE — Circumcision is performed between the ages of 5 and 12, in some places during a celebration in which the girl receives gifts of money, gold, and clothes. Invited families and friends often bring food and music to the festivities. In other regions, however, girls are abducted in the middle of the night to be circumcised.

Nonmedically trained operators usually perform FGC. Anesthesia and antibiotics are rarely administered. The instruments used are old, rusty knives, razors, scissors, or heated pebbles, which are rarely washed between procedures. Hemostasis is assured by catgut sutures, thorns, or homemade adhesive concoctions such as sugar, egg, or animal excrement. The girl's legs are bound around the ankles and thighs for approximately one week after the procedure, and she is kept in bed. However, the circumcision can be done under more sterile conditions and an anesthetic may be administered when performed in major cities.

COMPLICATIONS AND OUTCOME — There are both short and long-term complications related to this procedure. However, health care providers should be aware that circumcised women present with a variety of complaints and their circumcision is not necessarily the problem. It is also important to stress that not all women suffer complications.

Periprocedural complications — Surgical precision can be compromised by lack of anesthesia, the struggles of the child held forcibly in the lithotomy position, and the experience of the operator. Success is often dependent upon chance, rather than accuracy. Early post-procedure complications thus include hemorrhage, infection, oliguria, and sepsis (show table 1) [7].

Long-term gynecological issues — Women who have undergone type II or III FGC tend to suffer more long-term complications than those who have undergone type I or IV. The most common long-term complications are dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and chronic vaginal infections. Other complications are related to voiding (show table 2) [8]. Meatal obstructions and urinary strictures could develop if the urethral meatus was inadvertently injured. Affected women complain of straining, urinary retention, or a slow urinary stream. An infibulated scar can also result in the urine becoming stagnant, thereby facilitating the ascent of bacteria into the urethra. Infibulated women are thus at higher risk for meatitis, urinary stones, and chronic urinary tract infections [9,10]. Other complications from scarring include fibrosis, keloids, sebaceous cysts, vulvar abscesses, and partial or total fusion of the labia minora or majora. The latter complication can lead to hematometra or hematocolpos. In addition, a small neointroitus may cause vaginismus, chronic vaginal infection, and neuromas [11,12]. The infertility rate is higher in circumcised women compared to the general population (25 to 30 versus 8 to 14 percent) [13]. The frequency of infertility appears to correlate with the anatomical extent of FGC [14]. Introital and vaginal stenosis create a physical barrier; thus, couples may attempt coitus for months before completing penetration [15]. Failure to succeed and persistent dyspareunia can lead to apareunia [16]. Infertility may also be related to tubal damage from ascending infection related to the procedure. Sexual satisfaction has been difficult to ascertain because of the sensitive nature of the topic. One survey that interviewed circumcised women reported they were able to achieve orgasm [17]. However, a study of 1836 circumcised Nigerian women found that the procedure (type 1 and II) did not attenuate sexual feelings or frequency of intercourse and was associated with a higher prevalence of abnormal vaginal discharge and pelvic pain [18]. Another study also showed that those who had undergone type III infibulation were significantly affected in terms of sex drive, arousal and orgasm when compared with those who had undergone a type I procedure [19].

Obstetrical issues

Monitoring labor — Progress of labor is typically monitored using serial cervical examinations. Performing a pelvic exam on an infibulated woman can be challenging. The narrow neointroitus can make a bimanual exam difficult, if not impossible. Obstetricians face the dilemma of either defibulating the woman early in labor or monitoring the labor via rectal exam. Neither of these is an optimum solution: early defibulation would require a very early epidural and irritation of the incision with every cervical assessment, while rectal examination of the cervix is uncomfortable and most obstetricians have no experience using this technique in labor. However, inaccurate cervical assessment is also problematic because latent phase of labor may be falsely diagnosed as active labor and lead to an unnecessary cesarean delivery. Other challenges include difficulties placing a fetal scalp electrode, intrauterine pressure catheter, or Foley catheter and performing fetal scalp pH.

The infibulated scar can prolong only the second stage of labor, probably because the scar may obstruct crowning and delivery [20]. A defibulation procedure during the second trimester is strongly recommended to prevent this problem [21].

Pregnancy outcome — A WHO study group compared obstetrical outcomes of women with and without FGC (n=7171 no FGC, 6856 FGC 1, 7771 FGC II, 6595 FGC III) [22]. Women with FGC II and III, but not FGC I, were at significantly higher risk of cesarean delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, and extended maternal hospital stay, and their infants were at significantly higher risk of requiring resuscitation and of dying in the hospital than women without FGC. The risks were higher in women with FGC III than FGC II. Nulliparous and parous women with FGC I, II, and III had higher rates of episiotomy and perineal tears than women without FGC.

DEFIBULATION COUNSELING AND PROCEDURE — Women seek defibulation because they are pregnant or planning pregnancy, or because of apareunia/dyspareunia, dysmenorrhea, or difficulty urinating [23].

The optimum time to defibulate a woman is prior to coitus to prevent dyspareunia or prior to pregnancy to prevent obstetric complications. What is medically beneficial to the woman, however, may not necessarily be the best time for her. As discussed above, one of the reasons for female circumcision is to ensure virginity. Therefore, these women may prefer to marry and prove their virginal status prior to defibulation.

Defibulation can be performed during pregnancy. A woman may require multiple prenatal visits before she finally consents to the procedure [21]. Counseling her about the risks of delivery with an infibulated scar is critical; the risks (eg, bleeding, infection, scar formation, preterm labor) and benefits of defibulation must also be reviewed and she should be aware that her urinary stream will feel different (increased).

Surgery during the second trimester under regional anesthesia decreases both obstetrical and fetal risks. General anesthesia is an alternative, but local anesthesia is not a good choice because women sometimes develop flashbacks from their circumcision.

One series of 32 patients who underwent defibulation reported that all of the women and their husbands were satisfied with the results [23].

Technique — The infibulated scar is a flap obstructing the introitus and urethra that must be excised. The steps in the procedure are as follows [23]: Place regional or general analgesics and long-acting local anesthesia. Insert a Kelly clamp under the scar to delineate its length (show picture 1). Palpate anteriorly to assess whether the clitoris is buried under the scar). Place two Allis clamps along the infibulated scar Make an anterior incision between the two Allis clamps with Mayo scissors, being certain not to cut into a buried clitoris (show picture 2A-2B). The goal is to view the introitus and urethra easily (show picture 3). There is no need to incise too anteriorly towards the clitoral region. Place (4.0) subcuticular sutures on each side (show picture 4 and show picture 5).

Postoperatively, instruct the patient to take sitz baths twice each day. Lidocaine cream (2 percent) can be applied after the sitz bath. Opioid analgesics taken as needed for one or two days is usually adequate for postoperative pain control [24].

A treatment technique using carbon dioxide laser surgery has also been described [25].

REINFIBULATION — Some women who have just given birth will request immediate reinfibulation. The procedure may create the long-term complications previously mentioned and should be strongly discouraged. The woman may only feel comfortable being infibulated; her request should be respected. The United States passed a law in March 1997 that made performing any medically unnecessary surgery on the genitalia of a girl younger than 18 years of age a federal crime. However, reinfibulation was not included as a federal crime, so it may be performed with absorbable sutures in a running fashion if a woman strongly insists upon the procedure [26].

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS There are four types of female genital cutting. (See "Types" above). The number of African immigrants and refugees coming into the United States is increasing, bringing renewed interest in unique cultural traditions [27]. The most important aspect of caring for circumcised women is to develop a trusting relationship. Obstetrician-gynecologists should move beyond the scar and address the woman's health needs, such as pregnancy tests, annual Papanicolaou smears, mammograms, and hormone replacement therapy recommendations. Cultural awareness and sensitivity regarding the procedure are crucial. (See "Origins and rationale" above). Potential problems after female genital cutting include dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, chronic vaginal and bladder infections, voiding difficulties, fibrosis, keloids, sebaceous cysts, vulvar abscesses, infertility, and difficulty with pelvic examinations, coitus, and vaginal delivery. (See "Complications and outcome" above). We suggest defibulation prior to coitus to prevent dyspareunia or prior to pregnancy to prevent problems with vaginal delivery (Grade 2C). (See "Defibulation counseling and procedure" above).


Use of UpToDate is subject to the Subscription and License Agreement. REFERENCES 1. Female Genital Mutilation. A joint WHO/UNICEF UNFPA statement. World Health Organization 1997.
2. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/facts.../en/index.html. (Accessed 3/21/2006).
3. Hedley, R, Dorkenoo, E. Child protection and female genital mutilation advice for health, education and social professionals. London: FORWARD, 1992.
4. Hosken, RP. The Hosken Report Genital and Sexual Mutilation of Females. Lexington: Women International Network News, 1994.
5. Shandall, AA. Circumcision and infibulation of females: a general consideration of the problem and a clinical study of the complications in Sudanese women. Sudan Med J 1967; 5:178.
6. Sheehan, E. Victorian clitoroidectomy. Medical Anthropology Newsletter 1981; 10.
7. Dirie, MA, Lindmark, G. The risk of medical complications after female circumcision. East Afr Med J 1992; 69:479.
8. Ozumba, BC. Acquired gynetresia in eastern Nigeria. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1992; 37:105.
9. Agugua, NE, Egwuatu, VE. Female circumcision: management of urinary complications. J Trop Pediatr 1982; 28:248.
10. Nour, NM. Urinary calculus associated with female genital cutting. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107:521.
11. Toubia, N. Female circumcision as a public health issue. N Engl J Med 1994; 331:712.
12. Fernandez-Aguilar, S, Noel, JC. Neuroma of the clitoris after female genital cutting. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 101:1053.
13. Macleod, T. Female genital mutilation. J SOGC 1995; 4:333.
14. Almroth, L, Elmusharaf, S, El Hadi, N, et al. Primary infertility after genital mutilation in girlhood in Sudan: a case-control study. Lancet 2005; 366:385.
15. El Dareer, A. Women Why Do You Weep? Zed Press, London 1982.
16. Aziz, FA. Gynecologic and obstetric complications of female circumcision. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1980; 17:560.
17. Lightfoot-Klein, H, Shaw, E. Special needs of ritually circumcised women patients. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 1991; 20:102.
18. Okonofu, FE, Larsen, U, Oronsaye, F, et al. The association between female genital cutting and correlates of sexual and gynaecological morbidity in Edo State, Nigeria. BJOG 2002; 109:1089.
19. Thabet, SM, Thabet, AS. Defective sexuality and female circumcision: the cause and the possible management. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2003; 29:12.
20. De Silva, S. Obstetric sequelae of female circumcision. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1989; 32:233.
21. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Female circumcision/Female Genital Mutilation: Clinical management of circumcised women. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Washington, DC 1999.
22. Banks, E, Meirik, O, Farley, T, et al. Female genital mutilation and obstetric outcome: WHO collaborative prospective study in six African countries. Lancet 2006; 367:1835.
23. Nour, NM, et al. Defibulation to treat female genital cutting. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 108:55.
24. Nour, NM. Female genital cutting: clinical and cultural guidelines. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2004; 59:272.
25. Penna, C, Fallani, MG, Fambrini, M, et al. Type III female genital mutilation: Clinical implications and treatment by carbon dioxide laser surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 187:1550.
26. Federal Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act of 1996. Public Law 104 -140, 11O Stat 1327, 1996.
27. www.brighamandwomens.org/africanwomenscenter. (Accessed 3/21/200

I don't know the first thing about sikhs, but do know quite a few things about atheists, as they appear with every post to be a most undereducated and intolerant bunch!

all the best!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top