联合王国对切割女性生殖器官的起诉:良好公共卫生意图与刑法交叉点的不公正

Q2 Social Sciences
M. Berer
{"title":"联合王国对切割女性生殖器官的起诉:良好公共卫生意图与刑法交叉点的不公正","authors":"M. Berer","doi":"10.1177/0968533220914070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Female genital mutilation (FGM) is a harmful traditional practice and a serious public health issue in the countries where it is carried out. It is also a violation of the rights of the girls to whom it is done. The main action taken in the United Kingdom to stop FGM, has been to criminalise it. Public health measures, such as the provision of specialist clinics for those who experience complications of FGM have been implemented as well, and some education in schools is provided. This article is about the injustice that has arisen from the pursuit of prosecutions for FGM in the United Kingdom, in spite of good public health intentions. Since 2012, there have been four criminal cases, several arrests that never came to trial, and for reasons of safeguarding, an unknown number of investigations with the threat of girls being taken into care, and people stopped from travelling with girl children to visit their families in FGM-practising countries. To date, only one criminal case in 2019 – R v. N (FGM) – which is the main subject of this article, has resulted in a guilty verdict. This article outlines this history in relation to the criminal law and uses courtroom observation to analyse what happened in the 2019 case in detail. It argues that the conviction depended on medical opinion and the highly uncertain evidence of two children and was influenced by a spurious link to witchcraft that should never have been permitted in the courtroom. It argues that this conviction is unsafe and should be appealed. It further argues that to use protection orders only because a child’s mother had FGM, in the absence of any evidence of risk, is discriminatory and a form of impermissible racial/ethnic profiling. The article concludes that the United Kingdom should stop recording a history of FGM in women seeking healthcare. It calls for the current law against FGM to be reconsidered and replaced with positive measures for countering FGM which have the support and involvement of the community groups to whom they are addressed.","PeriodicalId":39602,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law International","volume":"19 1","pages":"258 - 281"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0968533220914070","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prosecution of female genital mutilation in the United Kingdom: Injustice at the intersection of good public health intentions and the criminal law\",\"authors\":\"M. Berer\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0968533220914070\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Female genital mutilation (FGM) is a harmful traditional practice and a serious public health issue in the countries where it is carried out. It is also a violation of the rights of the girls to whom it is done. The main action taken in the United Kingdom to stop FGM, has been to criminalise it. Public health measures, such as the provision of specialist clinics for those who experience complications of FGM have been implemented as well, and some education in schools is provided. This article is about the injustice that has arisen from the pursuit of prosecutions for FGM in the United Kingdom, in spite of good public health intentions. Since 2012, there have been four criminal cases, several arrests that never came to trial, and for reasons of safeguarding, an unknown number of investigations with the threat of girls being taken into care, and people stopped from travelling with girl children to visit their families in FGM-practising countries. To date, only one criminal case in 2019 – R v. N (FGM) – which is the main subject of this article, has resulted in a guilty verdict. This article outlines this history in relation to the criminal law and uses courtroom observation to analyse what happened in the 2019 case in detail. It argues that the conviction depended on medical opinion and the highly uncertain evidence of two children and was influenced by a spurious link to witchcraft that should never have been permitted in the courtroom. It argues that this conviction is unsafe and should be appealed. It further argues that to use protection orders only because a child’s mother had FGM, in the absence of any evidence of risk, is discriminatory and a form of impermissible racial/ethnic profiling. The article concludes that the United Kingdom should stop recording a history of FGM in women seeking healthcare. It calls for the current law against FGM to be reconsidered and replaced with positive measures for countering FGM which have the support and involvement of the community groups to whom they are addressed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Law International\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"258 - 281\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0968533220914070\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Law International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0968533220914070\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Law International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0968533220914070","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

切割女性生殖器官是一种有害的传统习俗,在实施这种习俗的国家是一个严重的公共卫生问题。这也侵犯了接受这种治疗的女孩的权利。在英国,制止女性生殖器切割的主要行动是将其定为刑事犯罪。还采取了公共卫生措施,例如为遭受女性外阴残割并发症的人提供专科诊所,并在学校提供一些教育。这篇文章是关于尽管有良好的公共卫生意图,但在联合王国起诉女性生殖器切割所产生的不公正现象。自2012年以来,已经发生了四起刑事案件,几起逮捕从未得到审判,出于保护的原因,有数量不详的调查涉及到被照顾的女孩受到威胁,人们被禁止带着女孩前往实施女性生殖器切割的国家探望家人。到目前为止,2019年只有一起刑事案件——R诉N(女性生殖器切割)——这是本文的主要主题,最终被判有罪。本文从刑法的角度概述了这段历史,并通过法庭观察详细分析了2019年案件中发生的事情。它认为,这一定罪取决于医学意见和两个孩子的高度不确定的证据,并受到与巫术的虚假联系的影响,这种联系本不应在法庭上被允许。它争辩说,这种定罪是不安全的,应该上诉。缔约国还认为,仅因为儿童母亲受过女性生殖器切割而在没有任何危险证据的情况下使用保护令是歧视性的,是一种不允许的种族/族裔定性。这篇文章的结论是,英国应该停止记录寻求医疗保健的妇女的女性生殖器切割历史。它呼吁重新审议现行禁止女性生殖器切割的法律,并代之以打击女性生殖器切割的积极措施,这些措施得到了所针对的社区团体的支持和参与。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prosecution of female genital mutilation in the United Kingdom: Injustice at the intersection of good public health intentions and the criminal law
Female genital mutilation (FGM) is a harmful traditional practice and a serious public health issue in the countries where it is carried out. It is also a violation of the rights of the girls to whom it is done. The main action taken in the United Kingdom to stop FGM, has been to criminalise it. Public health measures, such as the provision of specialist clinics for those who experience complications of FGM have been implemented as well, and some education in schools is provided. This article is about the injustice that has arisen from the pursuit of prosecutions for FGM in the United Kingdom, in spite of good public health intentions. Since 2012, there have been four criminal cases, several arrests that never came to trial, and for reasons of safeguarding, an unknown number of investigations with the threat of girls being taken into care, and people stopped from travelling with girl children to visit their families in FGM-practising countries. To date, only one criminal case in 2019 – R v. N (FGM) – which is the main subject of this article, has resulted in a guilty verdict. This article outlines this history in relation to the criminal law and uses courtroom observation to analyse what happened in the 2019 case in detail. It argues that the conviction depended on medical opinion and the highly uncertain evidence of two children and was influenced by a spurious link to witchcraft that should never have been permitted in the courtroom. It argues that this conviction is unsafe and should be appealed. It further argues that to use protection orders only because a child’s mother had FGM, in the absence of any evidence of risk, is discriminatory and a form of impermissible racial/ethnic profiling. The article concludes that the United Kingdom should stop recording a history of FGM in women seeking healthcare. It calls for the current law against FGM to be reconsidered and replaced with positive measures for countering FGM which have the support and involvement of the community groups to whom they are addressed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Law International
Medical Law International Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: The scope includes: Clinical Negligence. Health Matters Affecting Civil Liberties. Forensic Medicine. Determination of Death. Organ and Tissue Transplantation. End of Life Decisions. Legal and Ethical Issues in Medical Treatment. Confidentiality. Access to Medical Records. Medical Complaints Procedures. Professional Discipline. Employment Law and Legal Issues within NHS. Resource Allocation in Health Care. Mental Health Law. Misuse of Drugs. Legal and Ethical Issues concerning Human Reproduction. Therapeutic Products. Medical Research. Cloning. Gene Therapy. Genetic Testing and Screening. And Related Topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信