» Articles » PMID: 32703226

Female Genital Mutilation/cutting in Sierra Leone: Are Educated Women Intending to Circumcise Their Daughters?

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2020 Jul 25
PMID 32703226
Citations 19
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) has been recognized as a gross violation of human rights of girls and women. This is well established in numerous international legal instruments. It forms part of the initiation ceremony that confers womanhood in Sierra Leone. Girls and women who are subjected to this practice are considered to be ready for marriage by their parents and communities and are rewarded with celebrations, gifts, and public recognition. Following this, we examined the relationship between education and women's FGM/C intention for their daughters in Sierra Leone.

Methods: We used cross-sectional data from the women's file of the 2013 Sierra Leone Demographic and Health Survey (SLDHS) to explore the influence of education on FGM/C intention among women in the reproductive age (15-49). A sample of 6543 women were included in the study. Our analysis involved descriptive computation of education and FGM/C intention. This was followed by a two-level multilevel analysis. Fixed effect results were reported as Odds Ratios and Adjusted Odds Ratios with their respective credible intervals (CrIs) whilst results of the random effects were presented as variance partition coefficients and median odds ratios.

Results: Our findings showed that women who had no formal education were more likely to intend to circumcise their daughters [aOR = 4.3, CrI = 2.4-8.0]. Among the covariates, women aged 20-24 [aOR = 2.3, CrI = 1.5-3.4] were more likely to intend to circumcise their daughters compared to women between 45 and 49 years old. Poorest women were more likely to report intention of circumcising their daughters in the future compared with the richest [aOR = 2.1, CrI = 1.3-3.2]. We noted that, 63.3% of FGM/C intention in Sierra Leone is attributable to contextual factors.

Conclusion: FGM/C intention is more common among women with no education, younger women as well as women in the lowest wealth category. We recommend segmented female-child educational and pro-poor policies that target uneducated women in Sierra Leone. The study further suggests that interventions to end FGM/C need to focus on broader contextual and social norms in Sierra Leone.

Citing Articles

Prevalence of female genital mutilation and associated factors among women and girls in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ayenew A, Mol B, Bradford B, Abeje G Syst Rev. 2024; 13(1):26.

PMID: 38217004 PMC: 10785359. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02428-6.


A multilevel analysis of social determinants of skilled birth attendant utilisation among married and cohabiting women of Madagascar.

Armah-Ansah E, Bawa B, Dindas J, Budu E, Ahinkorah B, Ameyaw E Int Health. 2023; 16(6):642-652.

PMID: 38011796 PMC: 11532666. DOI: 10.1093/inthealth/ihad108.


Do Attitude, Awareness and Intention to Perform Female Genital Mutilation or Cutting for Their Daughters of Women Healthcare Providers Differ from Mothers in Somalia?.

Suluhan D, Keles E, Haji Mohamud R, Eker H, Cimen S, Yaksi N Int J Womens Health. 2023; 15:1333-1343.

PMID: 37588045 PMC: 10426448. DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S411217.


Estimating excess mortality due to female genital mutilation.

Ghosh A, Flowe H, Rockey J Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):13328.

PMID: 37587182 PMC: 10432559. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-38276-6.


What interventions are effective to prevent or respond to female genital mutilation? A review of existing evidence from 2008-2020.

Matanda D, Van Eekert N, Croce-Galis M, Gay J, Middelburg M, Hardee K PLOS Glob Public Health. 2023; 3(5):e0001855.

PMID: 37192150 PMC: 10187928. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001855.


References
1.
Larsen K, Merlo J . Appropriate assessment of neighborhood effects on individual health: integrating random and fixed effects in multilevel logistic regression. Am J Epidemiol. 2004; 161(1):81-8. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwi017. View

2.
Yount K, Cheong Y, Grose R, Hayford S . Community gender systems and a daughter's risk of female genital mutilation/cutting: Multilevel findings from Egypt. PLoS One. 2020; 15(3):e0229917. PMC: 7059929. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229917. View

3.
Abathun A, Sundby J, Gele A . Attitude toward female genital mutilation among Somali and Harari people, Eastern Ethiopia. Int J Womens Health. 2016; 8:557-569. PMC: 5065096. DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S112226. View

4.
Rymer J, OFlynn N . Female genital mutilation: everyone's problem. Br J Gen Pract. 2013; 63(615):515-6. PMC: 3782770. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp13X673586. View

5.
Allam M, de Irala-Estevez J, Fernandez-Crehuet Navajas R, Serrano del Castillo A, Hoashi J, Pankovich M . Factors associated with the condoning of female genital mutilation among university students. Public Health. 2001; 115(5):350-5. DOI: 10.1038/sj/ph/1900791. View