Official Report 258KB pdf
Good morning and welcome to the Equal Opportunities Committee's 19th, and last, meeting in 2004. I have received apologies from Frances Curran.
I am a public health specialist with FORWARD, but I was also a founder of the organisation about 20 years ago. The organisation is one of the leading groups in the world that promotes action against female genital mutilation. Between 1995 and 2001, I was the World Health Organisation's expert on female genital mutilation and helped the organisation to put female genital mutilation on the agenda of the ministries of health of countries where it is practised.
I am the co-ordinator of Amina – The Muslim Women's Resource Centre, which is a project that is based in Glasgow but which has a Scotland-wide helpline for Muslim women that is funded by the Scottish Executive—I thought that I had better say that. We sent a response to the committee and were asked to come along. As I told the clerk, I am not an expert on female genital mutilation, but I bring information, primarily from the west of Scotland, but also from Scotland as a whole, on what women are saying or not saying about the practice.
Can you describe briefly for the committee how FGM can affect girls and women on whom the procedure is carried out?
The term FGM covers a range of procedures. As defined by the World Health Organisation, it includes partial or total removal of external female genitalia and injury to external female genitalia for non-therapeutic reasons. The WHO has carried out a systematic review of the health complications of genital mutilation that have been found to date. Those include immediate complications such as acute pain, infections, bleeding and, occasionally, death. However, few studies have been done on those issues.
Primarily because of where they have been located, the majority of asylum seekers in Glasgow tend to go to the new Princess Royal maternity hospital, which is attached to the royal infirmary. Women who have been subjected to FGM have experienced obstetric problems when giving birth at the hospital. I refer especially to women from the Somali community, which is increasing in size in Glasgow.
When we discuss the complications of FGM, we should not focus solely on the health consequences. We should also consider the human rights dimension. Female genital mutilation is carried out mainly to suppress the sexuality of girl children. In itself, it is a gross violation of the rights of girl children.
It sounds as if I am defending the practice in Malaysia, but I am not; I am just reflecting what people have said to me. Such suppression is not necessarily the intention in Malaysia—it may or may not be the intention in certain circumstances. Like male circumcision, FGM is viewed more from the point of view of cleanliness. That is how the Malaysian situation has been explained to me by a couple of Malaysian sisters to whom I spoke. FGM is done for different reasons. Even though it is not an Islamic practice, it is often done in the name of Islam. I will discuss that further.
We will try to cover as much of that as possible. Our gender reporter Elaine Smith will pick up some of the issues that we do not deal with. That takes us to my next question.
Primarily, education is what is needed. The existing legislation and the bill send out a message but, on their own, they will not get us very far. Some people might consider legislation on FGM to be an imposition on their cultural views. It is an issue that relates to local cultures; it is not about a religion.
FGM predates most of the major religions, including Islam and Christianity. In the countries where it takes place, it is practised by non-believers and believers alike and its practice by believers is not specific to Muslims—it is practised by Christians such as Copts, Protestants and Catholics, as well as animists.
Although some Hadith are cited, they are recognised as being weak—that means that the chain of narration and the validity that can be given to them are considered weak. That does not stop some people from choosing to use them for their own reasons, but most Muslims would not recognise those Hadith as supporting the use to which they are sometimes put.
In your experience, where does the pressure to undertake FGM come from? Does it come from the communities in which it takes place or from any group in or section of a community? If so, how should we deal that? How do we contact communities? You said that what is required is not only education of women, but encouragement to wider communities to consider the issue. If the pressure is not religious, is it from communities?
I agree that legislation is one tool to deal with the issue. From my experience in England, a legislative framework—particularly when that is applied to child protection services—is crucial. A multipronged approach is needed. The legislation is implemented by child protection services, which means that all the professionals who work on the front line with families—such as health visitors and other professionals in health, social work and education—incorporate the legislation into their normal work.
On the issue of pressure, one of the reasons why people will submit their daughters, granddaughters, nieces or whoever to genital mutilation is because of the fear that, if they do not, the girl will not be marriageable. Marriage is extremely important in those communities and the fear is that, without genital mutilation, the daughter will have no honour and will not be marriageable and her life will be blighted. There is a feeling that, with genital mutilation she has a limited life but that, without it, she has no life and that, therefore, it is the best option for her.
I must add that most of the young men growing up in this country who are likely to marry these young girls are not interested in genital mutilation. There is a kind of lag between parents thinking that this is what the young men want and the facts. I should also add that, in England, there is a lot of discussion and work on forced marriages. One of the reasons why FGM persists is that girl children are put through forced marriages. That is also important in Asian communities.
I would like to explore further some of the issues that have been raised because it is important that we get to the roots of what we are up against and what we are trying to tackle. Clearly, there are two approaches. One relates to what legislation can be put in place to try to stop the practice happening. The other, which is as important, is about quite radical change in deeply rooted cultures and traditions. Women in the Somali women's action group told me that there was intense pressure on women to have the procedure carried out on their daughters, for some of the reasons that you have outlined.
Different groups give different reasons for it. However, the core of it relates to control of women's sexuality. Some people say that there is a lot of concern around psychosexual aspects such as the wish to attenuate the sexual desire of the female. That thread runs through all the groups that have the practice. Some of the groups say that it is a religious thing but, if you work with groups and go further into the issue that way, you find that it comes back to the attenuation of the sexuality of the girl child. In some countries, the ritual is also inserted into puberty rites and is made the core of rituals relating to puberty. You need to go further to discover the extent to which genital mutilation is to do with promoting what society says about womanhood and ensuring that girls conform to specific roles. Again, that comes back to control of sexuality.
It is sometimes put to me that it is women who carry out the procedure on girls, but I see it as part of the continuum of men's violence against women and children and as having to do with the patriarchal control of women's bodies. What do you say to the argument that it is women who do this to other women?
The issue is mainly to do with women's powerlessness. In a traditional, standard family system, control of a woman's sexuality occurs during the period of reproduction—from roughly the age of 15 until the menopause. During that time, females' reproductivity and sexuality are very controlled. After the menopause, women of my age group gain a lot of power. They are given many privileges within the patriarchal family and it becomes their responsibility to ensure that younger women fall into the mould.
From what you say, it seems that FGM is being done not out of a desire to harm the child but as the lesser of two evils within a cultural situation. You talked about young men in this country being less interested in FGM as a prerequisite for marriage, which perhaps answers my question. Given the fact that the issue is a cultural one and is a deeply rooted traditional practice, do you think that it is more difficult to deal with FGM in communities in the UK, which might be under pressure to hold on to their cultural traditions and practices, or is the culture in this country, where FGM is not a common practice, having some influence?
In this country, as in all western countries to which people have moved from the traditional communities, FGM takes a much different form. It becomes a strong weapon with which to control girls in communities. Most of the African communities in this country that practise FGM come from a traditional society and might see a more liberal society, in which there is freedom for young girls, as polluting and sexually promiscuous. Therefore, female genital mutilation is often done to keep girls within the community—it is an added weapon or control mechanism.
Because of religious and cultural change, female genital mutilation is new for us in Scotland. There must have been a few people around for a time who experienced it, but until quite recently, the majority of new Scots came from the Indian sub-continent and China, which are not areas where female genital mutilation regularly takes place. As I said, Pakistani Muslims are horrified at the concept. The majority of those to whom I spoke had never heard of it before. The more educated ones, who read things, were aware of it, but they were all horrified by it.
My question is about the consultation that the Scottish Executive carried out, so it is probably more for Fariha Thomas than it is for Efua Dorkenoo, but if Efua wants to comment, that is fair enough.
If we had had more time, we would have been able to talk to more people and consult more widely. I do not know whether our final response would have been different, but it would have been better if the response time had been longer.
I was going to ask about translations. What you said about that is worrying.
I was not aware that the material had been translated, although translations might have been available.
How can we ensure that the relevant people realise that the documents are available in their own languages?
First, it is important to identify all the communities that you want to reach. We tend to focus on Somali communities because they are very visible, but there might also be Sudanese or Egyptian communities here or women who have come here from west African communities in which FGM might not be strongly linked to the Islamic religion. Secondly, there is a need to ascertain whether the people who should read the material are literate. There is a tendency to translate material quickly into local languages, but members of the community, particularly women, might not be able to read the documents; it might be better to put the information on tape.
Our basic information leaflet is not translated into Somali, but our next priority is to get it translated, because many sisters have asked us for a Somali translation. Although not everybody is literate in Somali—I understand that the written language is quite new—quite a lot of people are asking for the leaflet. People also request Arabic and Swahili translations. Most of the people from Malaysia who are here are overseas students or the wives of overseas students and English is their second language, so they can read the documents in English.
Good morning and thank you for coming to the meeting.
At FORWARD we consider that matter on two levels. At policy level, we use the WHO and UN terminology "genital mutilation" to describe what is really happening. On the ground, there is a lot of confusion between female genital mutilation and male circumcision. We realise that at programme level—at grass-roots level—many women feel uncomfortable with the terminology "female genital mutilation", because it has become a normative practice in some communities, so confronting it as "mutilation" is difficult for women, especially initially, because they must question what their parents did to them. They have been told that it was a good thing and that it made them a good woman, clean and so on.
I agree. That is really helpful. Many people feel uncomfortable with "female genital mutilation" as a concept. If it has been done, they think, "I'm mutilated," which does not make them feel positive about themselves. Many people even find it difficult to use the word "genital", and it is important to remember that when we are dealing with people.
I agree with everything that you have said. There is concern that "mutilation" rather than "circumcision" is a western word. Would it be helpful if, when we produce leaflets or tapes, or speak to women, we used their own language? That way we would be taking a twin-track approach: the wording in the bill would make the west aware that we are talking about mutilation and that the issue is nothing to do with cleanliness, because it concerns violence against women; but when we are talking to communities and handing out leaflets to men and families, rather than just to women who have been circumcised for example, we would emphasise the word "circumcision" rather than "mutilation".
That would depend. The idea is to change the mindset that FGM is good. As long as communities feel that there is nothing wrong with it and that it is only a little bit of circumcision, it will continue. We are going through a process—we have to get people to see how serious female genital mutilation is and then they might change. If information comes from an authority such as the Scottish Parliament, the practice must be spelled out, although in brackets we could say that it is commonly called circumcision, cutting or something else. If a leaflet is prepared in the Somali language, it might use the word "gudniin" or another term. However, in some places, it is called tahara, which is not helpful because that word is linked to purification. When the World Health Organisation discussed the issue in 1995, most of the experts who came from the countries that are directly concerned said that we should move away from terminologies that give a false impression of the practice. Another such term is "sunna"—many of the Muslim populations that practise FGM use that term, which has a religious meaning.
"Sunna" is related to the Prophet, so it is seen as a good thing. Therefore, the term is not appropriate in this context.
In Africa in 1990, the women's movement that is called the Inter-African Committee on Harmful Traditional Practices, which has chapters in more than 28 countries, came to a resolution in Addis Ababa to use the term "female genital mutilation", because it is the clinical terminology to describe removing a normal, functioning organ. That was important because people who work in the field have a lot of difficulty trying to clarify for communities what the difference is between female genital mutilation and male circumcision. We need to give the direction of the campaign but perhaps accommodate in brackets other commonly used terminology, otherwise we will never get communities to realise the seriousness of the issue.
It is logical for Scotland to follow the English legislation, the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003, which uses the term "female genital mutilation". If we used a different term, that would be confusing and might give out a message that Scotland thinks that FGM is not as bad as England thinks it is. We can be different on other issues—we lead the way on many issues—but, on this one, it is important to have consistency.
The Scottish Parliament could consider the definition in the bill. The English law talks about excising or mutilating, but that creates a tendency for people to think that other forms of genital mutilation are okay, as long as they are not the radical form. The WHO classifies FGM into types I, II, III and IV. It is important to ensure that people understand that all forms of female genital mutilation are illegal. People who do the most radical forms, such as type III—which involves closing up—often stop doing so and instead carry out partial clitoridectomy, which they say is okay, although it is not. The committee might want to consider including the WHO classifications in the bill.
Should a reference to types I, II, III and IV be on the face of the bill rather than in guidance? Is that your suggestion?
Yes. All the different types should be noted. Perhaps a footnote could state that female genital mutilation means any of the WHO classifications—types I, II, III and IV.
So the types should be noted in the definition of female genital mutilation, which should be on the face of the bill.
Yes.
The representatives from the Somali women's action group thought that the word "circumcision" should not be used because it does not properly define the practice. However, they also said that a core of people support the continued use of that term because the term "mutilation" does not sit well with their beliefs. In educating people and providing leaflets about the issue, is it important that we employ people from within those communities, who will presumably be more sensitive about the terms that should be used?
So far, the whole world is moving towards an holistic approach that brings the issue into the main stream. That means that local authorities need to develop local policies and protocols on how to integrate the issue into the health agenda. Health visitors and midwives can be more useful than general practitioners, but GPs need to be aware of the issue.
Efua Dorkenoo mentioned restitching. Do we know whether it is illegal for a woman to request restitching?
I am not sure.
Can you clarify what you are asking?
Obviously, female genital mutilation is illegal in this country at the moment. However, you talked about a woman requesting restitching, presumably after having given birth. Is that illegal?
That is illegal under British law. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, the Royal College of Midwives and the Royal College of Nursing have given guidelines to health workers in that regard.
At a later date, we will have a chance to speak to people such as medical practitioners, who will be able to tell us about that sort of issue from a Scottish perspective.
I agree with what Efua Dorkenoo said about the need for two levels. There is a danger, if professionals are not educated appropriately, that stereotypes can be created. Yesterday, I was talking to someone who works in a women's project in the east end of Glasgow, who told me that she had the previous day been talking to a number of professionals who had come out with appalling statements such as, "All Muslim women are oppressed," and so on.
That is why FGM can be addressed through training. Twenty years ago, people said that nobody should even touch the subject. The experience in England was that communities were told that they should get on with it, but we found that that did not work. As we worked more in communities, we found that girls who were growing up in the UK were being taken back to their mother's or parents' home country for FGM. Those young people were not the offspring of ethnic minority or illegal immigrant families, but of second-generation families.
I will bring in Nanette Milne in a moment. The issue is not only about awareness in communities but awareness among professionals that they should not make generalised statements. It is important that health professionals, teachers and other professionals who work with children know the right protocols and practice. The bill can do that because the protocols are written into the bill, and it can raise awareness on the issue.
You have dealt fairly comprehensively with a number of matters that I was going to raise. It is clear that a change in the law is required. It is also clear that everything that goes with the bill, including education and culture, will have to be changed. Will the new law provide greater protection to young women than the existing law does?
It will, as long as it does not remain just paperwork. For example, the experience in England is that parents were circumventing the law by taking their girl children outside the country—they would go on holiday and have the practice done elsewhere. Parents would even take their children to other European countries, so we have had to work at European level to get a resolution through the European Parliament. A number of countries have introduced legislation or issued clarification on FGM and have made it clear that they treat the issue as a child protection issue.
Given that families have FGM done privately by taking their children outside the country, will it be easy to police the new law and to uphold the law abroad?
Most of the families want to come back to the UK. The education process has involved members of the younger generation and we have found that older siblings have acted to protect their younger siblings. They know that there are places where they can call for help and where help will be given. As with any other child abuse issue, we cannot guarantee that FGM will not happen. There is a lot of child abuse out there, but if we do not know about it there is nothing we can do. If we get to know about it, we can do something about it. Also, professionals and families are becoming more aware of levels of risk and they can be guided on what to do.
It is unlikely that there will be many prosecutions. The point is that the bill will prevent people from practising FGM because of the risk of their being found out, but we are concerned that if there is a prosecution the daughter or whoever has blown the whistle will be blamed and guilt will be put on them by the extended family and perhaps by the community. We need to consider what support mechanisms can be put in place in such cases.
We will put that question to the minister.
I received a partial response on that question, which was that the reason is that such provision is not within the jurisdiction of the UK. However, I would have thought that it would be in the UK's jurisdiction in the case of a UK citizen's giving advice on FGM.
I think that the legislation may cover that, but the committee will put the matter to the minister—it is a wee bit ambiguous.
There will still be people who will not be covered, which is inevitable because of the way the law operates. However, they will still benefit from the educational aspects.
I want to add that we should not see legislation purely from the punitive angle. Legislation has many purposes and, for us, the area in which it has really worked is child protection, which is more about preventive measures.
I think that we agree that there will not be many prosecutions under the legislation. There were not many prosecutions under the Prohibition of Female Circumcision Act 1985 and it is unlikely that there will be many in future. I have a fair idea of the answer to my question, but what do you think prevents people from coming forward in the first place? What would make prosecutions more likely?
Family and societal pressures continue to make it difficult for people to come forward. People risk putting themselves outside their families and their communities, which is why people who have had FGM done to them do not come forward. However, the legislation will give people strength to resist it being done to them or to people they know.
The answer depends on the age at which genital mutilation is done. In the groups that we work with in England, it is being done between the ages of five and eight. In France, for example, there is a large catchment of communities from Senegal and Mali, among whom FGM is being done on babies. Some hospitals have recorded cases of babies dying because of it, and there have been many prosecutions.
I think that my question has been covered. The first question asked about changing the terminology to help to educate communities. It is a cultural matter, so we really have to educate the communities. You have explained exactly how we should go forward. However, do you think that we have enough people in Scotland who could carry out the work of educating communities and professionals? We could gain from the work that you have been doing in England, so are there groups there that we could contact? Would that be the best way forward?
FORWARD would be happy to facilitate getting that training on to your agenda. It is a very specialised area, and local authorities need to develop policy on it. Professionals require training and community groups need their capacity built to enable them to undertake education. So far, we have worked with local authorities and primary care trusts, but we have been called on by other countries, too; for example, we have helped Sweden and the Netherlands to put together their programmes and have been consulted by Australia on matters of health care policy. We would be happy to assist in the whole process and to build the capacity here for groups and professionals to work with communities on FGM.
On some aspects of FGM, it would be useful to bring up the experience in England, where it has been an issue for a lot longer than it has in Scotland. A lot more work has been done there on reaching people, on building capacity in the communities and on supporting local women's groups that want to work on the issue, such as the Somali women's action group and other community groups that are already in the networks. Research has shown that most black and ethnic minority community groups in Scotland are under-resourced and struggling, and it can be difficult for them to take on another big issue. Capacity needs to be built in the communities.
That is the sense that the committee has. Normally we would look within Scotland, but the experience to which you have access is important for us. We need to work on educating the professionals as much as the communities.
I have some specific questions about training, although it has been indicated to me that I have to keep my questions brief. I would like to see examples of the training materials and best practice that have been used, particularly by FORWARD, because they would be helpful to us. It would certainly cut down on some of the questions that I was going to ask. I would like insight into best practice and how things should work.
We have a lot of education materials. FORWARD gets co-funding from the Department of Health and has developed a lot of materials that could be used.
We have talked a lot about collecting information and finding out how many young women are affected by FGM in our communities. What is the best way for the Executive to collect that information?
A baseline of where we are now needs to be set so that in five years we can evaluate whether there has been change. We never did best practice in England because we did not have the resources and the Department of Health had not highlighted the issue. We have found that we are getting to the point where everyone is asking what changes there have been. There have been some small qualitative studies in the community and we have seen the change in attitude and the shift from infibulation to type III FGM.
Section 1 of the bill provides for an exception to the offence of FGM in the case of a surgical operation that it is necessary for a person's physical or mental health. However, the bill does not make specific provision for when such an operation would be necessary or how that would be decided. Do you think that the exception is reasonable?
That is a complex issue and I think that we need a broader discussion of it within the women's movement. Technically, FORWARD would regard FGM—for example, trimming the vulva—as being necessary only for the therapeutic reasons that the WHO defines; we regard sexual reassignment as necessary in that sense. However, we have problems with the idea of cosmetic surgery on the vagina. As my colleague Fariha Thomas said, people in some countries may say that they do FGM for aesthetic reasons, but they have a similar mindset to those who say that they do it for cosmetic reasons. Other people argue that African or ethnic minority FGM is separate and traditional and that it is racist to regard it as cosmetic surgery. However, 90 per cent of traditional FGM is done on children, which is unacceptable. FGM is usually done up to the age of puberty, but it is also done to 18-year-olds and it is forced on older women by their families.
There are problems in respect of, for example, women who have been taught to believe that they are not women if they do not get restitching and whose mental health could be affected if they do not get it. However, there is a big difference between doing FGM for that reason and doing it for cosmetic reasons. As Efua Dorkenoo asked, where do we draw the line between somebody who wants restitching because it is part of something that was done to them when they were younger and a western woman who wants cosmetic surgery?
I realise how complex the matter is. Some countries have laws about FGM that include an age limit of 18 years, to allow consenting adults to undergo the procedure. Should the bill include such an age limit?
That would be difficult for FORWARD. Technically, if there is no age limit, you are treating the African woman as a child—I stress the word "technically". However, the reality is that gross pressure is brought to bear on African women and it is more likely for women to be conditioned—the push factor is strong.
If Fariha Thomas does not want to add to that, Nora Radcliffe may finally ask her questions.
Good morning—it is still the morning. Is it realistic to expect that the bill will prevent people from sending their children abroad? Also, the bill would increase the maximum penalty from five years' imprisonment to 14 years' imprisonment. Will you comment on that?
We can consider the bill as an education tool. If the message about sending their kids abroad gets through to the communities concerned, parents will sit up and think about what they are doing and the bill will offer some protection to the girls who are in that situation. Again from the education angle, the increase in the penalty would spell out the seriousness of the matter.
I agree with that. The bill may stop people sending their kids abroad. I hope that it will. It also shows that the issue is serious.
I would like to return to an earlier discussion about what should be in the bill. I wonder whether having four degrees of mutilation sends a signal that one is less bad than another. I shall read what is in the bill at the moment and you can tell me whether you think that it is better because it is complete. At present, the bill states:
I think that the bill is fine the way it is, because it is comprehensive. If it started going into the different degrees of mutilation, that would get too complicated. You are right to say that people might think that one form is not as bad as the next. However, as I said at the outset, I am not really an expert in that field. It may be that people elsewhere have found that putting in the details of the World Health Organisation categories has been helpful.
We must ensure that we do not get into a situation in which—as some anthropologists might suggest—units could be created in the clinics where pins could be put into the clitoris to release some blood, so that the parents would be happy.
In a symbolic way.
That is right. The WHO included type IV as an unclassified area that includes all kinds of things that people might want to include in one law. For example, some communities do not cut, but they pull to stretch the clitoris; they do that to little girls. Large numbers of women, in order to please their men, put all kinds of things inside the vagina to tighten it, which can lead to complications when they are delivering or for other gynaecological health reasons. However, you may not want the bill to cover everything—I shall leave that to you.
That is helpful.
When I read the bill, I wondered whether body piercing might be covered. I believe that it is quite trendy to put rings and things into all sorts of parts of one's anatomy, including some of those organs. I wonder whether that issue has been considered.
That issue has been thought about. We have also been educated about it, although we might have thought, "Oh no, surely not." We have looked at that and taken it into consideration in the context of the bill.
It was a pleasure.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—
I welcome representatives of the Somali women's action group and their interpreter. If committee members ask questions too quickly and you need more time to interpret what has been said, or if you are not absolutely clear about the question, please tell us. Sometimes we get so involved in an issue that we want 10 questions to be answered at the same time. If that happens, tell us to wait a minute.
She says that a girl may suffer from bleeding and heavy periods.
It is a big operation and is done without anaesthesia or other help, so a girl may have a lot of pain. She may have bleeding and infection. Many girls have died of tetanus, because sometimes thorns from trees are used, without having been washed. A girl may die from haemorrhage or a tetanus infection. The cycle goes on after the procedure, as the girl may have painful periods. When she gives birth to a child, she has to be cut. There is no end to it.
Paragraph 4 of the policy memorandum that accompanies the bill states:
Could you repeat the question?
In some communities, it is understood that female genital mutilation is a religious instruction. Others say that there is no religious requirement to have it done. There is a misunderstanding about whether it is done because of religion or because of a tradition. How do we deal with that misunderstanding?
She says that it is not a religious practice, but a cultural practice.
Do people understand that?
Yes. They do it because it is part of their culture.
It has been around for a long time.
Yes, but it has nothing to do with religion.
In your experience, from where in communities does the cultural pressure to carry out FGM come? Does it come from particular groups or sections of the community? How can we challenge the tradition?
It comes from older people, because they are trying to keep their culture. They want to stick to their culture and they do not want to change. They think that it is a shame if it is not done. They do not feel good about that. Younger people are more educated and understand the complications and dangers. The older people are mostly not educated and do not read or write. They just stick to the culture.
Do they want to protect the practice because they see it as part of their culture?
Yes. They do not want to lose it.
When I met you before, you talked about the intense pressure in the Somali community to carry out the procedure on girls. You say that it is seen as a good thing for girls. Can you confirm that in the Somali community the main purpose of FGM is to ensure chastity and purity prior to marriage and thereafter?
Yes.
Given that the law is not just about punishment, but about raising awareness and changing deeply rooted cultural attitudes and traditions, do you think that education is the way forward? I will give you an example of programmes that other Governments have funded. In Kenya, there is an initiation ceremony of circumcision through words, which serves as a rite of passage into adulthood for young women. It is about sex education and raising awareness through words, rather than the practice of FGM. Might that be helpful in your community?
It would be, if it were tried.
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
We know that it is illegal, but our group does not understand what is legal or illegal. People do not understand if we say that it is illegal. They say that they do not want to change their culture. Our group needs more education.
Do you think that, because FGM is a cultural issue and is deeply rooted, it is more difficult to deal with it in communities that are living in the UK, which may feel under pressure to hold on to cultural traditions?
It is difficult to tell someone that the practice is illegal and that we can no longer carry it out because it is a very bad practice that is dangerous for our daughters. Our group is only three months old. We hold meetings to talk about the issues and tell our group that, although the practice is part of our culture, it is not good for our children. It is not good for their health or education.
So it is more important to tell people that the practice is not healthy and is not good for the children. The issue is about protecting the children and trying to change the culture, rather than saying, "FGM is illegal. You can't do it."
Yes, we try to do that.
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
They say that that would be much better.
My questions are about the consultation that the Scottish Executive carried out. It was carried out over a very short period. Did you have long enough to respond and would you have responded differently if you had had more time?
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
Yes, we had enough time.
You were happy with the consultation.
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
They agree.
My other question concerns language. Were you aware that information on the bill was available in a language other than English and did you know that you could ask for a translation of the material?
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
Translation is better, because our people understand the Somali language better. We are new in Scotland and most of our people do not understand English, so a Somali translation would be better.
It would be important to have a Somali translation, then.
Yes.
I will take that a stage further. We spoke earlier to a lady from London, who said that it is fine to get materials translated into Somali, for example, but if people do not read the language, it is probably as well to have the materials on tape so that they can hear it rather than have to read it. Do you think that that is important?
Yes, that or images and people who can explain them.
Any way that people can understand more.
So translation, tapes and different kinds of publicity and information are important.
Yes, they are very important.
I welcome the witnesses. Thank you for coming along.
What they do is more than circumcision, so I agree with using "female genital mutilation". They remove so many parts.
It is much more than circumcision. That is a good answer.
I am pleased that the witness said that. We have heard from witnesses previously that, if we used the word "mutilation" in the communities, the women who had gone through it would feel bad, so it might be better to use "mutilation" in the bill but mention that what is considered to be circumcision in the local communities is also covered by the word "mutilation". Do you think that we should go straight for saying that we are dealing with female genital mutilation, without using softening words?
Our group uses the word "circumcision". When we translate our language, we use the word "circumcision". Perhaps it is better to use that word.
That is the point that I am trying to clarify. Perhaps some groups are uncomfortable with the word "mutilation". However, when the chap from the media said that he was uncomfortable with using the word "mutilation", we were shocked, because I believe that we have to get across the message that we are talking about mutilation.
The bill should say "mutilation", because that is what happens. It is not circumcision, because that word refers to one thing, whereas lots of things are being done.
So we should be using the word "mutilation".
Yes.
Do you believe that the new law will protect girls and women from FGM? Do you think that it will provide more protection than does the existing law?
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
The new law will help the people who live in the UK or Scotland. What about those who live abroad?
So far there have been no prosecutions under the existing law. It is unlikely that there will be many prosecutions under the new law. Do you have an opinion about the lack of prosecution? Why will people not come forward to seek prosecutions? Can anything be done to make prosecutions more likely?
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
We do not understand. Can you ask again, please?
People have not been prosecuted for carrying out FGM. Cases are not usually reported to the authorities. Why is that? Can steps be taken to encourage people to come forward and report it so it can be prosecuted?
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
They say that people help each other, because no one wants to go against the Somali community; everyone wants to stay in that community. People cannot go to the police and report it, because they will end up out of the community. People help each other, even if they are against it.
If someone reports something today and it happens tomorrow, they have the same problem.
Do you think that education will gradually change things?
I think so.
People will be less afraid.
Yes. People have to be aware of what is going on, the complications and the danger that their children are in. From childhood women are frightened. They are waiting for the day. They are not comfortable at all. They are always asking questions. They need to understand more.
So it is not just about the law. It is a long process.
Yes, to make it clear what is going to happen.
Do you think that the discussion around FGM and the publicity that comes with it will help to give people information and ammunition to stop their children having FGM in the future, or that they will help to change cultures? At the start, it was clearly said that female genital mutilation can be dangerous and unpleasant. Can we consider ways of trying to change people's attitudes? Obviously, people are not going to talk about their mother or grandmother or tell the police that their grandmother or whoever was involved, but are the law and the information that people have important?
Yes. People must then uphold the law and think about what will happen to them if they do not. They need both.
So information is important.
Will more publicity and education make it less likely that children will be taken abroad?
They will be taken abroad, but GPs should examine girls in the country before they go abroad to find out whether they have had it done. They must also be checked when they come back.
We want to stop people taking their children abroad for FGM.
Would the practice make people reluctant to take children to a GP if they were ill?
Yes, it would.
The midwife from England said in the previous session that a difference had been made in a Somali community in England because the community leaders—the most respected and more senior members of the community—had made it clear that FGM was unacceptable. Is that a way forward? Would influential people in the community spelling out such a message be a good way of changing attitudes, cultures and traditions?
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
Yes. Our group respects old women, so if an old woman says that we have to do a practice, we do it. So, first we need to talk to the old women and tell them that the practice cannot be done.
What about the men? When I met you, we talked about the attitudes of men.
They are also important.
I was thinking about getting into communities to educate people. We have talked about education in communities. Are there any activities apart from those that have already been mentioned that we could undertake with communities, groups and educators in your communities to raise awareness of, and work towards the eradication of, female mutilation? Is there anything that we can do immediately or in the long term in your communities?
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
We need a lot of meetings. There are also a lot of things to be done.
Would it be relatively easy for committee members or individual MSPs to go and speak to the relevant members of your community? Would those people be willing to listen and to take on board educational materials?
Witness A says that you can go there but, to be educated, those people need a Somalian person to be able to talk to them. The FORWARD people can be there and observe.
People think that, if a foreigner is talking to them, that means that they are trying to change their culture or influencing them to do something. It is better if it comes from their own people.
So it would be better if someone from the Somali community were appointed to speak to the elders and to distribute the material that is produced by the Scottish Executive. Would that be the best way to go about it?
Yes.
It is always important for women within a community to be active. Perhaps it is about women in the community being aware of information and being able to spread that information, rather than having people coming into the community to tell women what they have to do. I would object to people coming into my community to tell me how to live. I am sure that it would be the same with you. It is about trying to spread information and get discussion going, with organisations providing the necessary support for that work.
Yes.
I agree entirely with that. I wanted your views on how easy it would be for someone in the community not to feel ostracised by carrying out such work. I am sure that, as you have mentioned, there will be women in the community who can do that work.
That includes people providing medical care, too.
People do not know how to reach them when it comes to—
Medical professionals, even—
Yes, medical professionals.
When a woman is having a baby, or when it comes to treating adolescents, people need to be able to recognise that someone has had FGM done to them. We are pushing for such expertise. We spoke to the people from England—FORWARD—who have had 20 years' experience. Are there enough experienced people in Scotland to handle the type of investigation or education that is required? Should we be bringing up people from FORWARD or other organisations in England, where people have more expertise, to give us a hand?
Yes, I think that you should get the people from London to help. They have more experience than people in Scotland.
They have experience and practice.
Yes.
I want to talk about the care that is required when a woman is pregnant. If a woman has undergone FGM and goes into hospital to have a baby, is it common for her to want to be stitched up again afterwards? Would that be a common request?
Yes. That would be very common. I remember that, two months ago, one of my friends was pregnant. She had had female genital mutilation. When the doctor saw that, he was surprised. He did two operations.
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
Could you repeat the question, please?
Yes. I will phrase it differently. I am concerned that women would elect or ask to have—
After a baby is born?
No—before the baby is born. I am concerned that women might ask to have a caesarean section because it would be illegal for them to be stitched up again after the baby is born. I am concerned that, because of that, a lot of women will undergo an intense surgical procedure. Another aspect is that caesareans might be performed routinely because the health staff do not know how to deal with the issue of FGM. Have you had any experience of those issues?
As an interpreter, I have been to a lot of births, but I have never seen a Somali lady who asked to be stitched after her baby was born.
Thanks very much for coming to the meeting. Are you aware of any other communities in Scotland where FGM is practised? If so, do you have any communication with them?
We have met some people from different countries like Egypt and Sudan. We have met those people to discuss the issues. We know more people, but we do not know exactly about other communities.
The policy memorandum to the bill states that there is no evidence that the practice is widespread in communities in Scotland, but it also recognises the private nature of the practice. It is not easy for the Scottish Executive to collect statistical information on the number of women and young children who have been affected. How would you advise us to try to collect the information and keep it up to date?
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
Go door to door to ask everyone if they have done it. The survey should be anonymous. It should not ask for the person's name, but the age and whether she has had it done.
If we say that we will write down the name, nobody will tell us anything.
Yes. The information that is collected should be confidential, statistical information.
Yes.
We heard from witnesses earlier that a lot of information, in particular health information, is available in different formats. What access do you have to that information? Would it be helpful to have more such information?
They say that they have a meeting every two months on the health problems and that they will do whatever it takes to inform those people.
So, more information is important—
More information, yes.
How aware of FGM issues are the health professionals who work in the communities? We are finding that often the health professionals, as much as communities, need awareness training and education on particular issues. How much information do they have? Do you think that you need lots of information and support?
A lot, she says. The health board does not have that much information.
Some countries that have laws against FGM set an age limit of 18 years, which allows consenting adults to have the procedures carried out. Do you think that the law here should include an age limit?
Yes. When they are 18 years old, a person should be able to decide what is done with their body.
So, once a woman is 18, she should be able to give consent?
That is not in the bill at the moment. Were you aware of that?
Yes. If she is 18, she can decide what will happen to her body.
Do you think that she would be able to make that decision without pressure from anyone else?
If she lived in the UK, no one could pressure her.
So, if she lived in the UK, it would be okay to have an age limit.
Yes. She would be under no pressure.
The new law will increase the possible term of imprisonment—from five years to 14 years—for anyone who carries out FGM or who arranges for it to be carried out either here or abroad. Do you have any views about that change in the length of sentence?
They do not have anything against that, but people should be taught that the law is coming and that they are going to be sent to prison for 14 years. They should be made aware of that.
Do you think that the threat of a much longer sentence will have more influence?
Yes.
If the bill makes it illegal to have girls sent abroad to have FGM, do you think that that will help to stop the practice?
If there is a possibility that the Government knows what someone intends to do, they will not do it. The Government should be able to find out whether it has been done.
You are saying that it is all very well to have the law, but that it must be enforced and the Government must take steps to ensure that people are found out.
Yes. If that is the case, people will think twice before they act.
We hope so.
I want to pick up on a couple of points. When I met you before, you did not think that FGM was being carried out in Scotland. You felt that the fact that it was illegal meant that there was a deterrent. However, I presume that girls might still be being sent abroad. Is that correct?
Yes.
The new law should help to stop that happening, but I am concerned that FGM might be being carried out in other communities in Scotland. Although FGM is illegal in Tanzania, it is still being performed underground. Are you sure that it is not being done in Scotland?
I do not think that it is being done in Scotland.
It is important to pass the bill, because the problem at the moment is children being sent abroad.
If children are forced to have it done abroad, they will report that—they will not keep quiet.
When I spoke to you before, you felt strongly that asylum seekers, too, should be covered by the bill. The reason for their not being included seems to be that if people who seek asylum leave the country, their asylum application falls. However, is it possible that the daughters of asylum seekers could be taken abroad by other members of the community who were not asylum seekers because they had already been granted residency? If the bill does not deal with asylum-seeking families, those girls might not be covered by it. Is that an issue? Could that happen to girls in that position?
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
I do not think that that would happen in the Somali community.
Why does the group think that asylum seekers should be covered by the bill?
Asylum seekers are not all Somali people. There are many asylum seekers from other countries, whose children could be sent abroad to have it done.
So you think that, in other communities, children of asylum seekers might be taken abroad by someone else.
Yes.
If asylum seekers are not given asylum, they will be sent back to Africa, where such oppression will be carried out.
That takes us on to a slightly different issue—the reasons for granting asylum. I think that the immigration authorities should consider the threat of FGM as a good reason for granting asylum. You said that although it might be difficult for women to volunteer that information, if they were asked a specific question, they would answer it. Is that correct?
Yes.
Witnesses spoke in Somali.
Do you think that the upcoming generation of men in your community have a different attitude to FGM? Would they wish their wives or the women that they want to marry to have FGM undertaken? Have attitudes among younger men changed?
It depends.
On what?
Most of them believe that, but some guys do not. It depends on the individual.
Is that the result of their being influenced by the different culture or would they have felt that way anyway?
It is perhaps the result of their having different ideas. People who have lived in the UK for a long time do not have the same mentality as people who have just come from Somalia.
I thank the witnesses very much for their evidence. It is important that we get as much information as possible to feed into our report.