Shifting perceptions of female genital cutting in a Swedish migration context

English version

Autoři: Anna Wahlberg ^aff001; Sara Johnsdotter ^aff002; Katarina Ekholm Selling ^aff001; Birgitta Essén ^aff001
Působiště autorů: Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, International Maternal and Child Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden ^aff001; Faculty of Health and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden ^aff002
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(12)
Kategorie: Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225629

Souhrn

Background

The aim of this paper was to investigate correlations between Somali Swedish own attitudes towards female genital cutting (FGC) and their perceptions about other Swedish Somalis attitudes.

Methods

In 2015, a cross-sectional study was conducted in four Swedish municipalities with 648 Somali men and women. To assess the level of agreement between the participants’ approval of FGC and their perceptions about approval among other Swedish Somalis, Bangdiwala’s B-statistic and Welch’s t-test were used.

Results

We found a substantial agreement between an individual’s own approval of FGC and their perceived approval of FGC among most other Swedish Somali men (B-statistic = 0.85) and women (B-statistic = 0.76). However, we also found a tendency for participants to report that other Swedish Somalis–and especially other Swedish Somali women–approved of FGC, while they themselves did not. Perceived percentage of Somali girls being circumcised in Sweden was significantly higher among Swedish Somalis who said they wanted tissue to be removed on their own daughter (mean 23%, 95% CI: 18.3–27.9) compared to those who said they opposed removal of tissue on their own daughter (mean 8%, 95% CI: 6.4–9.1). The majority of Swedish Somali men (92%) stated a preference to marry someone without FGC or with pricking, which was also the view of most of the Swedish Somali women (90%).

Conclusions

Swedish Somalis motivation to continue or discontinue with the practice of FGC may be influenced by perceptions of what other Swedish Somalis prefer. How FGC is being portrayed, in for example media reports, could therefore have an impact on attitudes towards FGC.

Klíčová slova:

Schools – Cross-sectional studies – Sweden – Social theory – Psychological attitudes – Swedish people – Somalian people – Female genital mutilation

Zdroje

1. EIGE. Estimation of girls at risk of female genital mutilation in the European Union Report. Vilnius; 2015.

2. Socialstyrelsen [Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare]. Flickor och kvinnor i Sverige som kan ha varit utsatta för könsstympning. En uppskattning av antalet [Girls and women in Sweden who may have been exposed to genital mutilation. An estimate of the number]. Stockholm; 2015.

3. SFS 1982:316. Lag med förbud mot könsstympning av kvinnor [Act prohibiting Female Genital Mutilation of Women]. Stockholm; 1982.

4. Johnsdotter S. Created by God. How Somalis in Swedish Exile Reassess the Practice of Female Circumcision. Lund University; 2002.

5. Wahlberg A, Johnsdotter S, Ekholm Selling K, Källestål C, Essén B. Baseline data from a planned RCT on attitudes to female genital cutting after migration: when are interventions justified? BMJ Open. 2017;7(8):e017506. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017506 28801440

6. Wahlberg A, Johnsdotter S, Ekholm Selling K, Källestål C, Essén B. Factors associated with the support of pricking (female genital cutting type IV) among Somali immigrants–a cross-sectional study in Sweden. Reproductive Health; 2017;14(92).

7. UNICEF Somalia and Somaliland Ministry of Planning and National Development. Somaliland Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2011, Final Report. Nairobi, Kenya; 2014.

8. UNICEF Somalia and the Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation. Northeast Zone Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey 2011, Final Report. Nairobi, Kenya; 2014.

9. Vestbostad E, Blystad A. Reflections on Female Circumcision Discourse in Hargeysa, Somaliland: Purified or Mutilated? Afr J Reprod Heal. 2014;18(2):22–35.

10. Mackie G. Ending Fotbinding and Infibulation: A Convention Account. American Sociological Review. 1996;61(6):999–1017.

11. United Nations Children’s Fund. Changing a harmful social convention: Female genital mutilaiton/cutting. Florence; 2005.

12. United Nations Children’s Fund. The Dynamics of Social Change: Towards the abandonment of female genital mutilation/cutting in five African countries. Florence: UNICEF; 2010.

13. UNFPA-UNICEF. Voices of Change. 2014 Annual report of the UNFPA-UNICEF joint programme on female genital mutilation/cutting: Accelerating change. New York; 2014.

14. Shell-duncan B, Moreau A, Wander K, Smith S. The role of older women in contesting norms associated with female genital mutilation/cutting in Senegambia: A factorial focus group analysis. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(7):e0199217. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0199217 30044770

15. Efferson C, Vogt S, Elhadi A, El H, Ahmed F. Female genital cutting is not a social coordination norm. Science. 2015;349(6255):1446–7. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa7978 26404811

16. Bellemare MF, Novak L, Steinmetz TL. All in the family: Explaining the persistence of female genital cutting in West Africa. Journal of Development Economics. Elsevier B.V.; 2015;116:252–65.

17. Hayford SR, Ghuman SJ, Kennedy S, Smith L, Smith KP, Watkins SC. Conformity and Change: Community Effects on Female Genital Cutting in Kenya. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 2005;46(June):121–40.

18. Shell-Duncan B, Wander K, Hernlund Y, Moreau A. Dynamics of change in the practice of female genital cutting in Senegambia: Testing predictions of social convention theory. Social science & medicine. 2011;73:1275–83.

19. Burke NJ, Joseph G, Pasick RJ, Barker JC. Theorizing Social Context: Rethinking Behavioral Theory. Health Educ Behav. 2009;36(5 Supplement):55–70.

20. Southwood N, Eriksson L. Norms and conventions. Philosophical Explorations. 2011;14(2):37–41.

21. Vogt S, Efferson C, Fehr E. The risk of female genital cutting in Europe: Comparing immigrant attitudes toward uncut girls with attitudes in a practicing country. SSM—Population Health. 2017;3(July 2016):283–93.

22. Pashaei T, Ponnet K, Moeeni M, Khazaee-Pool M, Majlessi F. Daughters at risk of female genital mutilation: Examining the determinants of mothers’ intentions to allow their daughters to undergo female genital mutilation. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(3):1–12.

23. Thanh LN, Vijay VK. An Analysis of Sample Designs and Sampling Errors of the Demographic and Health Surveys. DHS Analytical Reports no. 3. Calverton, Maryland; 1997.

24. Shankar V, Bangdiwala SI. Observer agreement paradoxes in 2x2 tables: comparison of agreement measures. BMC medical research methodology. 2014;14(100).

25. Viera AJ, Garrett JM. Understanding interobserver agreement: The Kappa Statistic. Family Medicine. 2005;37(5):360–3. 15883903

26. Meyer D, Zeileis A, Hornik K. vcd: Visualizing Categorical Data. R package version 1.4–3. 2016.

27. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Internet]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2015. http://www.r-project.org/

28. Landis JR, Koch GG. The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–74. 843571

29. Bangdiwala SI, Shankar V. The agreement chart. BMC medical research methodology [Internet]. BMC Medical Research Methodology; 2013;13(97).

30. Gele AA, Sagbakken M, Kumar B. Is female circumcision evolving or dissolving in Norway? A qualitative study on attitudes toward the practice among young Somalis in the Oslo area. International Journal of Women’s Health. 2015;7:933–43. doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S93217 26648760

31. Johnsdotter S, Essén B. Cultural change after migration: Circumcision of girls in Western migrant communities. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2016;32:15–25.

32. Cloward K. Elites, exit options, and social barriers to norm change: the complex case of female genital mutiliation. Studies in Comparative International Development. 2015;50(3):378–407.

33. Farina P, Ortensi LE. The mother to daughter transmission of Female Genital Cutting in emigration as evidenced by Italian survey data. Genus. 2014;70(2):111–37.

34. Newell-Jones K. Empowering communities to collectively abandon FGM/C in Somaliland: Baseline Research Report. London; 2016.

35. Abdi R. Carving culture: Creating identity through female genital cutting. Durham Anthropology Journal. 2012;18(1):115–53.

36. Jirovsky E. Contemporary Meanings of Female Circumcision/Female Genital Mutilation (FC/FGM) in Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso—Local Aspects of a Global Assemblage. University of Vienna; 2014.

37. Manski CF. Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem. The Review of Economic Studies. 1993;60(3):531–42.

38. Mackie G, Moneti F, Shakya H, Denny E. What are Social Norms? How are They Measured? 2015.

39. Johnsdotter S, Mestre RM. ‘Female genital mutilation’ in Europe: Public discourse versus empirical evidence. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice. Elsevier Ltd; 2017;1–10.