Many who have written to the AAP in opposition to its new policy have received the following response:
Re: URGENT: Retract your policy calling for Female Genital Cutting...
Thank you for your letter. To better understand the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) position on female genital cutting (FGC), I encourage you to read the policy statement issued April 26. You can see the full statement here: http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/pediatrics;125/5/1088?rss=1
In this statement, the AAP reaffirms its strong opposition to FGC and counsels its members not to perform such procedures. As typically practiced, FGC can be life-threatening. Little girls who escape death are still vulnerable to sterility, infection, and psychological trauma.
The AAP does not endorse the practice of offering a “clitoral nick." This minimal pinprick is forbidden under federal law and the AAP does not recommend it to its members.
The AAP is steadfast in its goal of protecting all young girls in the U.S. from the harms of FGC.
Errol R. Alden, MD, FAAP
Executive Director
American Academy of Pediatrics
Here is Georganne Chapin's open response to this email, which she also emailed to Dr. Alden on May 25, 2010:
We at Intact America, along with thousands of other intactivists, have been emailing officials at the American Academy of Pediatrics, urging them to retract the AAP’s recent (April 26) policy statement calling for changes to the Federal ban that prohibits all forms of female genital mutilation (FGM).
Many of us have received identical emails from Dr. Errol Alden, Executive Director of the AAP, saying, "The AAP does not endorse the practice of offering a 'clitoral nick’ …The AAP is steadfast in its goal of protecting all young girls in the U.S. from the harms of FGC."
Dr. Alden needs to check his facts. In fact, his disclaimer directly contradicts what the AAP says in the new policy statement. In the AAP’s own words:
"Most forms of FGC are decidedly harmful, and pediatricians should decline to perform them, even in the absence of any legal constraints. However, the ritual nick suggested by some pediatricians is not physically harmful… It might be more effective if federal and state laws enabled pediatricians to reach out to families by offering a ritual nick."
It seems the AAP has a lot of explaining to do. What are they talking about? How can this new policy be practicable? For example, exactly how deep a “nick” will be permitted? Up until what age can the surgery be performed? What if the parents, for cultural reasons, determine that the incision is not large or deep enough, and therefore their cultural needs have not been satisfied? What will doctors do then? Obviously, there are no acceptable answers to these questions and that’s why the AAP needs to repudiate and withdraw its policy immediately.
People have also asked us, “Well isn’t it better to compromise and offer this solution, instead of letting parents take girls out of the country for a worse procedure?”
In a word: NO. FGM is not only illegal in this country, it’s also morally wrong. Just because some people do it anyway doesn’t make it right. If I asked you to shoot someone, and said, “If you don’t, someone else will,” would you do it? Of course not.
Actually, we hear this justification a lot when we talk with doctors about infant male circumcision. Many tell us, “Well, I know it’s not necessary, and I don’t like to do it. But when the parents ask, I oblige because if I didn’t, they’d just take the baby to another doctor.” Is that enough of a justification to perform medically unnecessary surgery without the patient’s consent? Of course not.
Finally, many people say that a ritual “nick” of the clitoris is not nearly as invasive as male circumcision, so therefore it’s okay. Why does that make it more permissible? How invasive is “too invasive”? Any cutting is a painful, medically unnecessary surgical incision into the genitalia of an infant, without that child’s consent – and the AAP’s physicians need to remember that they took an oath to “Do No Harm.”
Intact America firmly stands by its position that ALL babies and children have the right to be protected from medically unnecessary genital cutting inflicted on them without their consent, in the name of culture, religion, profit, or parental preference.
Georganne Chapin
Executive Director
Intact America
You can read Intact America's initial response to the AAP's new policy statement here.
