Michigan doctor charged with carrying out female genital mutilation

A doctor in Michigan has been charged with carrying out female genital mutilation on young girls, in what is thought to be the first prosecution of its kind in the US.

Jumana Nagarwala, an emergency room physician in Detroit, is accused of performing the procedure on girls aged between six and eight and then lying to investigators when confronted.

Nagarwala, 44, faces a sentence of up to life in prison if convicted of all the charges against her. She was scheduled to appear in federal court in Detroit on Thursday afternoon.

Prosecutors alleged in a complaint filed to court that Nagarwala had been carrying out female genital mutilation procedures for the past 12 years from a medical office in the Detroit suburb of Livonia.

Justice department officials said on Thursday that the charges were believed to be the first ever brought under a US law against female genital mutilation that was passed in 1996 and amended in 2013.


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/13/michigan-doctor-charged-female-genital-mutilation-fgm

About time some one was prosecuted for doing this.

What kind of genital mutilation? These articles never say. It's like saying someone died of a cold...some are a bit more serious than others.

As far as I know it involves cutting out the Clitoris.

Original Quill wrote:What kind of genital mutilation?  These articles never say.  It's like saying someone died of a cold...some are a bit more serious than others.

I thought you were up to date on US acts?

Federal Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act. As of 2015,

(a)
Except as provided in subsection (b), whoever knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.


https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/116

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:What kind of genital mutilation?  These articles never say.  It's like saying someone died of a cold...some are a bit more serious than others.

I thought you were up to date on US acts?

Federal Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act. As of 2015,

(a)
Except as provided in subsection (b), whoever knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.


https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/116

You are assuming I want to know for legal reasons.  I don't.

Now, for the second time, what kind of female genital mutilation was he trying to perform?

You didn't ask for legal reasons did you?

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:


I thought you were up to date on US acts?

Federal Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act. As of 2015,

(a)
Except as provided in subsection (b), whoever knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.


https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/116

You are assuming I want to know for legal reasons.  I don't.

Well it would help if you did.

The above covers all aspects

So its clear enough to me

nicko wrote:You didn't ask for legal reasons did you?

No. I'm interested in the facts.

Thorin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

You are assuming I want to know for legal reasons.  I don't.

Well it would help if you did.

The above covers all aspects

So its clear enough to me

I know what the law is.  I'm an attorney, fcs.  I just want the facts about what he was doing.  What kind of genital mutilation?

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Well it would help if you did.

The above covers all aspects

So its clear enough to me

I know what the law is.  I'm an attorney, fcs.  I just want the fact about what he was doing.  What kind of genital mutilation?

You mean she.

Again the act covers all acts of Mutilation..

But you want to split hairs over how much the victims have been mutilated, based on your need to know what kind of genital mutilation.


whoever knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.




The main point is victims have been mutilated

For some reason in the US--probably fundamentalist religion--the media won't talk about details.  Here's what the article says:

“Female genital mutilation constitutes a particularly brutal form of violence against women and girls. It is also a serious federal felony in the United States,” acting US attorney Daniel Lemisch said in a statement. “The practice has no place in modern society and those who perform FGM on minors will be held accountable under federal law.”

It could be a simple labia recission, or a hoodectomy, or a full-blown clitorectomy, or some other procedure.  It is important because as the law is currently written, one size fits all.  There are important medical procedures where the lawyers are making decisions rather than doctors. It's just like abortion...legislators making the decisions for political reasons.

Stop being so hateful, didge.  Assumption is the mother of ignorance.

Original Quill wrote:For some reason in the US--probably fundamentalist relition--the media won't talk about details.  Here's what the article says:

“Female genital mutilation constitutes a particularly brutal form of violence against women and girls. It is also a serious federal felony in the United States,” acting US attorney Daniel Lemisch said in a statement. “The practice has no place in modern society and those who perform FGM on minors will be held accountable under federal law.”

It could be a simple labia recission, or a hoodectomy, or a full-blown clitorectomy, or some other procedure.  It is important because as the law is currently written, one size fits all.  There are important medical procedures where the lawyers are making decisions rather than doctors.

Simple labia rescission?  Sorry, important medical procedures?

Where is the Doctors documents on each of the children patients. That state they required the mutilation for medical reasons? So lawyers are not making said decisions and clearly the medical Profession were part of the process to create this act. There would be clear medical history showing health concerns for the girls, that required them to have operations based on health grounds

Considering the fact the doctor has denied carrying out the Mutilation. Then there clearly is no medical history showing the victims required being mutilated.

Hence the act covers all forms of genital mutilation to females.

(a) Except as provided in subsection (b), whoever knowingly circumcises, excises, or infibulates the whole or any part of the labia majora or labia minora or clitoris of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

(b) A surgical operation is not a violation of this section if the operation is—

(1) necessary to the health of the person on whom it is performed, and is performed by a person licensed in the place of its performance as a medical practitioner; or

(2) performed on a person in labor or who has just given birth and is performed for medical purposes connected with that labor or birth by a person licensed in the place it is performed as a medical practitioner, midwife, or person in training to become such a practitioner or midwife.

(c) In applying subsection (b)(1), no account shall be taken of the effect on the person on whom the operation is to be performed of any belief on the part of that person, or any other person, that the operation is required as a matter of custom or ritual.

(d) Whoever knowingly transports from the United States and its territories a person in foreign commerce for the purpose of conduct with regard to that person that would be a violation of subsection (a) if the conduct occurred within the United States, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

Yes.  I could easily rewrite that law so the bias of presumption is not against sound medical practice, as it is now.  Realize...if you write a law and accompany it with a thousand exceptions, each one is a litigation breeder.  What happens when a new procedure comes along?  Write a new exception? How stupid.

Legislation, as with instruction, is best done directly.  The law in this area is all backasswards because it is politically motivated.  Just like abortion laws.  Also like abortion laws, Americans have a tendency not to want to talk about.  Hence, the reporting is so vague.  It is the basic religious fundamentalism of American society, and we need to drop it.  But then, we need to let go of guns too.

Didge, this is a straight-forward observation, not something for you to bring out your hateful frame of mind.  You always end up in arguments with people because your approach is one of hate.  It's not necessary.

Original Quill wrote:Yes.  I could easily rewrite that law so the bias of presumption is not against sound medical practice, as it is now.  Realize...if you write a law and accompany it with a thousand exceptions, each one is a litigation breeder.  What happens when a new procedure comes along?  Write a new exception?  How stupid.

Legislation, as with instruction, is best done directly.  The law in this area is all backasswards because it is politically motivated.  Just like abortion laws.  Also like abortion laws, Americans have a tendency not to want to talk about.  Hence, the reporting is so vague.  It is the basic religious fundamentalism of American society, and we need to drop it.  But then, we need to let go of guns too.

Didge, this is a straight-forward observation, not something for you to bring out your hateful frame of mind.  You always end up in arguments with people because your approach is one of hate.  It's not necessary.

So based off my last post, you now accuse me of having a hateful mind?

How exactly?

So lets start with what has to be the biggest misdirection going to avoid talking about the fact 500,000 American Females have been mutilated.

So this has nothing to do with any political motivation but along the same lines of all laws already that protect children from abuse.

So wanting to see children protected from abuse and Mutilation. Is the bases for your claim to misdirect and accuse me of having a hateful mind.

In other words as seen, its a piss poor attempt to get out of you not wanting to deal with this issue, by turning this onto me.

That is not going to happen

The act is clear cut on all forms of genital mutilation forced onto females under 18.

You though want to argue over whether the levels of mutilation should warrant different sentences.
Failing to understand that the children have been abused against their will and even worse. Through the actions of their own family.

So you throw in guns to the argument, to further distract.

You want to champion an act on gun policy, then start a thread and lets see the merit to your case.

This act covers and allows for medical procedures to be performed, if medically required on the female genitals.

She has denied carrying out such acts. So she clearly has no case for any medical evidence to back her up. That the victims required a medical procedure.

So nobody requires you to rewrite the law.

Its straight forward and covers all avenues.

Thorin wrote:So based off my last post, you now accuse me of having a hateful mind?

How exactly?

Didge, you always have a hateful attitude. Why do you think you get into so many arguments? You approach dialogue as war. You treat everyone as an enemy.

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:So based off my last post, you now accuse me of having a hateful mind?

How exactly?

Didge, you always have a hateful attitude.  Why do you think you get into so many arguments?  You approach dialogue as war.  You treat everyone as an enemy.

More misdirection yet again.

In fact I don't see anyone as an enemy.

There are just people on a forum, that I really do not know in real life.

There has been next to no effect on my life from anyone here. The only times, is when I have allowed my passions to run away with me.

That is not hating people.

I have my faults and except them.


Anything on the article and posts I have made?

Thorin wrote:So lets start with what has to be the biggest misdirection going to avoid talking about the fact 500,000 American Females have been mutilated.

So this has nothing to do with any political motivation but along the same lines of all laws already that protect children from abuse.

So wanting to see children protected from abuse and Mutilation. Is the bases for your claim to misdirect and accuse me of having a hateful mind.

In other words as seen, its a piss poor attempt to get out of you not wanting to deal with this issue, by turning this onto me.

That is not going to happen

The act is clear cut on all forms of genital mutilation forced onto females under 18.

You though want to argue over whether the levels of mutilation should warrant different sentences.
Failing to understand that the children have been abused against their will and even worse. Through the actions of their own family.

So you throw in guns to the argument, to further distract.

You want to champion an act on gun policy, then start a thread and lets see the merit to your case.

This act covers and allows for medical procedures to be performed, if medically required on the female genitals.

She has denied carrying out such acts. So she clearly has no case for any medical evidence to back her up. That the victims required a medical procedure.

So nobody requires you to rewrite the law.

Its straight forward and covers all avenues.

I don't think anyone is in favor of genital mutilation for religious or cultural reasons.  We recognize that it is done--Muslims do it, Jews do it, even some Asian societies do it--so it doesn't matter in what culture it is done.  It's unnecessary, unless it is clinically called for in the individual case.

The problem is, laws are promulgated not because they address practices that are bad, or because the are contrary to the hippocratic oath, but because we have developed a hatred for the underlying culture that does this.  Who are we talking about?  Muslims, right?  The US passed this law, not for humane reasons, but because there is a bias against Muslims.  You don't see Jews prosecuted for genital mutilation.  Just like the Muslim ban on travel...it wasn't done for reasons of protection, but for discrimination.

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:So lets start with what has to be the biggest misdirection going to avoid talking about the fact 500,000 American Females have been mutilated.

So this has nothing to do with any political motivation but along the same lines of all laws already that protect children from abuse.

So wanting to see children protected from abuse and Mutilation. Is the bases for your claim to misdirect and accuse me of having a hateful mind.

In other words as seen, its a piss poor attempt to get out of you not wanting to deal with this issue, by turning this onto me.

That is not going to happen

The act is clear cut on all forms of genital mutilation forced onto females under 18.

You though want to argue over whether the levels of mutilation should warrant different sentences.
Failing to understand that the children have been abused against their will and even worse. Through the actions of their own family.

So you throw in guns to the argument, to further distract.

You want to champion an act on gun policy, then start a thread and lets see the merit to your case.

This act covers and allows for medical procedures to be performed, if medically required on the female genitals.

She has denied carrying out such acts. So she clearly has no case for any medical evidence to back her up. That the victims required a medical procedure.

So nobody requires you to rewrite the law.

Its straight forward and covers all avenues.

I don't think anyone is in favor of genital mutilation for religious or cultural reasons.  We recognize that it is done--Muslims do it, Jews do it, even some Asian societies do it--so it doesn't matter in what culture it is done.  It's unnecessary, unless it is clinically called for in the individual case.

The problem is, laws are promulgated not because they address practices that are bad, or because the are contrary to the hippocratic oath, but because we have developed a hatred for the underlying culture that does this.  Who are we talking about.  Muslims, right?  The US passed this law, not for humane reasons, but because there is a bias against Muslims.  You don't see Jews prosecuted for genital mutilation.  Just like the Muslim ban on travel...it wasn't done for reasons of protection, but for discrimination.

Nope that is sheer unadulterated gibberish and I see you failed to even back up your claim.

Seems to me you want to continue to discriminate against children and protect the parents who allow for their children to be cut up and mutilated. No matter what religious affiliation they are.

We are talking about the protection of children from harm through laws.

Its not even a bias against Muslims, as Non-Muslims also practice this.

So again, your paranoia is what is wrong here and its not based off facts.

In fact the world has joined together to encourage other nations, for example in Africa. To outlaw the practice.

You then state, that where both Muslims and Jews also force mutilation on boys. That it should also be outlawed. Of which it should be only carried out for medical reasons as well. So even on that point and my view is that the act does not go far enough. I mean why do we have laws governing the legal age people can mutilate their bodies with Tattoo's for example? So to me, it should be a choice made by the individual, once they have reached adulthood. Not the parents forcing this upon them.

Though the issue is about tackling FGM, of which there has been next to nobody, bar one or two ever convicted for these crimes.

So your are in error to claim this is a bias against Muslims, as this was introduced by Obama.
Are you stating he has a bias against Muslims

The current prevalence of FGM in the US is uncertain. In early 2014, Equality Now campaigned with survivor activist Jaha Dukureh – who started a change.org petition that received more than 220,000 signatures, – Representatives Joseph Crowley (D-NY) and Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), and The Guardian to get the Obama Administration to conduct a new prevalence study into the current scope of FGM in the U.S. as the first step towards its elimination.^[5] Released in early 2016, the report showed that 513,000 girls and women were either affected - or at risk of undergoing FGM in the U.S.

According to 1997 estimates by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, at that time, over 168,000 girls and women in the U.S. had either been, or were at risk of being, subjected to FGM. In 2000, the African Women’s Health Center at Brigham and Women’s Hospital put the number at 227,887.^[5] The Population Reference Bureau estimated that in 2011 there were up to 507,000 females who had undergone FGM or were at risk of it.^[6]

Of these women and girls, 55% were of Egyptian, Ethiopian, or Somalian origin. The practice is concentrated in eight states: California, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Texas, Virginia, and Washington.

Also have read on this global effort to tackle this issue.

http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/fgm/prevalence/en/

https://www.unicef.org/protection/57929_58002.html

---

Thorin wrote:So your are in error to claim this is a bias against Muslims, as this was introduced by Obama.

Oh really? The law was actually drafted in 1996. But there was no enforcement of it until right now. Obama had nothing to do with it, and could not have as the Republicans refused to pass any legislation while a black was in the White House.

So, why now? Why only Muslims? As I pointed out earlier, Muslims, Jews and even some Asian cultures practice genital mutilation. There are plenty of candidates to be targeted. Why only Muslims?

I'll tell you why. It's just like Trump's Muslim Ban. He hasn't banned anyone from Europe, where all of the terrorists actually fly into the US. Plain and simple, he wants to target a religion...Islam. Same thing with genital mutilation. It's just another way of going after Muslims as a religion. Southern racist Rednecks are better at disguising their motive.

Discriminating against a religion is a violation of the US Constitution, First Amendment. It's another erosion of America. I"ll give this country 10 more years, and it's gone.

Original Quill wrote:

Thorin wrote:So your are in error to claim this is a bias against Muslims, as this was introduced by Obama.

Oh really?  The law was actually drafted in 1996.  But there was no enforcement of it until right now.  Obama had nothing to do with it, and could not have as the Republicans refused to pass any legislation while a black was in the White House.

So, why now?  Why only Muslims?  As I pointed out earlier, Muslims, Jews and even some Asian cultures practice genital mutilation.  There are plenty of candidates to be targeted.  Why only Muslims?

I'll tell you why.  It's just like Trump's Muslim Ban.  He hasn't banned anyone from Europe, where all of the terrorists actually fly into the US.  Plain and simple, he wants to target a religion...Islam.  Same thing with genital mutilation.  It's just another way of going after Muslims as a religion.  Southern racist Rednecks are better at disguising their motive.

Discriminating against a religion is a violation of the US Constitution, First Amendment.  It's another erosion of America.  I"ll give this country 10 more years, and it's gone.

Obama had everything to do with making the act into law.
So again more paranoia over Muslims, even though the act never even mentions Islam or Muslims
So if as seen US citizens, effected by FGM, are from 3 majority come from Ethiopia, Egypt and Somalia. Then its based on regions and culture over that of religion. Ethiopia has a large and majority Christian population over that of Muslims. Egypt has a millions of Christians.

So what you should be asking is why so late in acting?
You have such paranoia and think now Obama must be anti-Muslim, even though this act is protecting the rights of children. Its astounding, how you continue to come out with such off the chart and unfounded bonkers views.

So you need to cut the crap and misdirection about Trump and show me how you back placing the beliefs of people, more cultural than religious (Even though that makes no difference) over that of the human rights of children.

Please explain to me how a parent based on a belief. In your eyes, and based off unfounded claim. That its religious discrimination, to have laws that defend children from abuse? That the law should respect religious beliefs and that tomorrow, you would back the right of those. No Matter whether Christian, Jewish or Muslim, to stone to death adulterers.

What is even more comical, is how you have argued off the first amendment claiming religious discrimination, in defense of child abuse. When as seen its cultural. Now nobody is stopping any religious person. Who wants to mutilate themselves once 18. This law protects their rights but also stops any belief religiously from obtaining power.

Now are you claiming that the first amendment gives parents the power to not only physically mutilate them, but also kill them, if their are disobedient. It shows you failed to understand the first amendment. As it does not afford any special privilege to any religious group.

So your claim its discrimination is at best comical and pure unadulterated gibberish yet again

Now you want to continue this farce I know you are making up, because this is more about you, trying to prove me wrong here?

That's a lie...Obama couldn't have written legislation in 1996. It was a year before he entered the Illinois Senate.

You wouldn't know discrimination if it hit you in the face like a wet fish. You are such a suck-up to Israel, it skews every opinion you have about Muslims. Prosecute Muslims, but not Jews or Asians. That's the very pinnacle of discrimination. With talents like yours, you would fit in well in Alabama.

Original Quill wrote:That's a lie...Obama couldn't have written legislation in 1996.  It was a year before he entered the Illinois Senate.

You wouldn't know discrimination if it hit you in the face like a wet fish.  You are such a suck-up to Israel, it skews every opinion you have about Muslims.  Prosecute Muslims, but not Jews or Asians.  That's the very pinnacle of discrimination.  With talents like yours, you would fit in well in Alabama.

So more lies, more unfounded nonsense. Suddenly Israel is to blame for FGM globally as well according to the "I have lost the plot in this debate Quill"

So considering I never claimed Obama wrote the legislation but rightly saw the act created under his term. Which makes no reference to any specific religion. That you think the protection of human rights of children, should be superseded by the beliefs of parents. That you wrongly think the first amendment which is based on Freedom of Belief, does not give licence to force their religious beliefs onto others. Even though, this is a cultural belief adopted within some religions. FGM has no Quranic text to support FGM. Next you will be telling me that we should allow sharia courts and have the stoning of ex-Muslims for Apostasy. As to you, it would be discriminating and prosecuting Muslims by denying them practicing their beliefs. So all those who break the law on FGM should be prosecuted, no matter what religions or beliefs they follow.

So based on the above, and instead of all the constant gibberish. Just say you support the practice of FGM and that children should have no protection under law according to you

Frankly, I think the majority of the forum is going to read your views here, including many of the left and cringe at your defense of FGM, by screaming discrimination.

You clear would fit right in within Saudia Arabia

This is your last chance to formulate a reasoned counter. If its full of bull again, you are out of the debate.
I get tired of pandering to infants like yourself

You're talking out of your ass, didge. Do you just sit in your tiny cell and make this stuff up?

You are such a fookin' liar...you said:

Thorin wrote:Obama had everything to do with making the act into law.

You have no integrity, do you? No intelligence...no integrity...wtf do you have going for you?

Wow, so more misdirection and immaturity from Quill then.

Original Quill wrote:For some reason in the US--probably fundamentalist religion--the media won't talk about details.  Here's what the article says:

“Female genital mutilation constitutes a particularly brutal form of violence against women and girls. It is also a serious federal felony in the United States,” acting US attorney Daniel Lemisch said in a statement. “The practice has no place in modern society and those who perform FGM on minors will be held accountable under federal law.”

It could be a simple labia recission, or a hoodectomy, or a full-blown clitorectomy, or some other procedure.  It is important because as the law is currently written, one size fits all.  There are important medical procedures where the lawyers are making decisions rather than doctors.  It's just like abortion...legislators making the decisions for political reasons.

Stop being so hateful, didge.  Assumption is the mother of ignorance.

Whichever way you present it...MUTILATION is the key word.

I cant understand why more people in so called civilised societies are not charges and punished for doing this to young vulnerable kids....its barbaric.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:For some reason in the US--probably fundamentalist religion--the media won't talk about details.  Here's what the article says:



It could be a simple labia recission, or a hoodectomy, or a full-blown clitorectomy, or some other procedure.  It is important because as the law is currently written, one size fits all.  There are important medical procedures where the lawyers are making decisions rather than doctors.  It's just like abortion...legislators making the decisions for political reasons.

Stop being so hateful, didge.  Assumption is the mother of ignorance.

Whichever way you present it...MUTILATION is the key word.

I cant understand why more people in so called civilised societies are not charges and punished for doing this to young vulnerable kids....its barbaric.

I agree with you, mutilation is the principle at issue. It is crossed with other issues...some religions have adopted mutilation as a ritual, tradition is another factor, and then there's just cosmetics...body art. Where the line is drawn in the US, is at the age of majority. Genital mutilation is illegal until an individual is of age.

Some groups try to get around this by arguing they are advocating prophylactic (preventive) procedures. But if they can't take the time to do a clinical study of the individual, to see if he or she is at risk, then they shouldn't be allowed to take a knife at a human being. Who would do anything surgically without knowledge?

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:For some reason in the US--probably fundamentalist religion--the media won't talk about details.  Here's what the article says:



It could be a simple labia recission, or a hoodectomy, or a full-blown clitorectomy, or some other procedure.  It is important because as the law is currently written, one size fits all.  There are important medical procedures where the lawyers are making decisions rather than doctors.  It's just like abortion...legislators making the decisions for political reasons.

Stop being so hateful, didge.  Assumption is the mother of ignorance.

Whichever way you present it...MUTILATION is the key word.

I cant understand why more people in so called civilised societies are not charges and punished for doing this to young vulnerable kids....its barbaric.

Thanks for getting back on topic Syl and this is about protecting the Human rights of children.