The article's focus wasn't really on the ethics of the mutilation itself, but rather the follow up
BlackAdder Send a noteboard - 18/06/2010 05:29:21 PM
The professor's actions aside, I don't even see how this is relevant research, even besides the ethical concerns! What, is it all a way to make a more "humane" form of clitoral mutilation? Who the hell approved this and why aren't they being called into question as well? And what the hell is with these parents?
Seriously, how do people achieve these levels of stupid?
Seriously, how do people achieve these levels of stupid?
I don't really support the practice, but I don't think that the follow up exam is inconsistent with the whole practice, either.
I mean, the guys knocked out the girls, cut up their clitorises, and the article complains about the follow up sensory exam? WTF.
Still, a sensory follow up exam makes sense considering the claims they are making about their technique, and I'm not really sure what the alternative tests would be... I mean, they are testing the function of sex organs of 6-year old girls, so of course it will be awkward.
Also this:
Although we have tried, we have been unable to locate any other pediatric urologist who uses these techniques. Indeed, we doubt many would, because we think most would—as we do—find this technique to be impossible to justify as being in these girls’ best interests. We understand that these tests might produce generalized knowledge that shows whether Poppas’s techniques are better than some other surgeons’, but it isn’t clear to us how this kind of genital touching post-operatively is in individual patients’ best interests. If the testing shows a girl has lost sensation through the surgery, her lost clitoral tissue cannot be put back. However, the tests would seem to expose the girls to significant risk of psychological harm.
Burden of proof... Plus, there are ways to restore sensation without replacing the whole tissue, but I'm not sure how well they work, uh, in this region.
The article should focus on enlightening us about the practice of genital mutilation itself and not on the follow-up medical exams, about which the authors don't seem to have much understanding.
So, a Cornell Uni researcher has performed female genital mutilation and then diddled his patients.
- 18/06/2010 11:37:57 AM
634 Views
>< Ugh. So many people to beat...so little time...
- 18/06/2010 11:47:20 AM
338 Views
The article's focus wasn't really on the ethics of the mutilation itself, but rather the follow up
- 18/06/2010 05:29:21 PM
325 Views
Setting aside the "vagina monologues" tone, that IS a special kind of wrong.
- 18/06/2010 12:33:25 PM
382 Views
Re: Actually, I'm not sure, but I think there is a corelation - or at least, reported corelation -
- 18/06/2010 12:42:15 PM
357 Views
Talk about your mixed blessings. 
- 29/06/2010 12:49:17 PM
483 Views
- 29/06/2010 12:49:17 PM
483 Views
I understand that homosexuality in men is also linked genetically to higher fertility in women
- 29/06/2010 01:06:09 PM
288 Views
I'm'a try REALLY hard not to read anything into that. 
- 29/06/2010 01:33:02 PM
413 Views
- 29/06/2010 01:33:02 PM
413 Views
Why would anybody want to have that done to their daughters anyway? I have never heard of such
- 18/06/2010 11:36:15 PM
311 Views
And just what IS a normal clitoris or vagina? Or even a normal penis for that matter?
- 19/06/2010 12:16:54 AM
316 Views