StopIGM.org | Page 4 | STOP Intersex Genital Mutilation in Children's Clinics!

Genital mutilation: How Malta’s law fails intersex children

March 21, 2021May 15, 2019 by StopIGM.org

UPDATE: Article in the Times of Malta (15.05.2019)

Photo: The participants of the 3rd International Intersex Forum, Malta 29.11.–01.12.2013

IGM = CRIME, Not 'Health Care' or 'Therapy'! Malta is world-famous for being the first state to formally outlaw intersex genital mutilation in 2015, despite that the law failed to include any sanctions and IGM continues both domestically and overseas. After tacitly amending the law last year, the Maltese government now claims to have “equalis[ed] the penalties applicable to intersex genital mutilation to the penalties applicable to female genital mutilation”. But is this really true? Intersex NGO StopIGM.org investigates:

How the Maltese GIGESC Act Fails Intersex Children

In 2015, Malta passed the Gender Identity, Gender Expression and Sex Characteristics Act (GIGESC Act), [25] which under art. 14 explicitly makes it “unlawful” to perform IGM practices, but initially included no sanctions at all. A 2018 amendment [26] eventually introduced sanctions, namely “punishment of imprisonment not exceeding five years, or […] a fine (multa) of not less than five thousand euro (€5,000) and not more than twenty thousand euro (€20,000)” (GIGESC art. 14.(2)).

The Maltese Government claims these newly introduced sanctions would “equalise the penalties applicable to intersex genital mutilation to the penalties applicable to female genital mutilation”. [27] However, this is not true, as the sanctions for FGM are actually double (“imprisonment for a term of five to ten years” with no possibility to get off with a fine) and included in the Criminal Code (art. 251E.). [28]

Similarly, regarding IGM there are no extraterritorial protections, while regarding FGM “extraterritoriality [is] in force, we aim to ensure that if female genital mutilation is done to girls when they go abroad, the crime will be prosecuted in Malta”. [29]

Regarding IGM, the GIGESC Act further fails to meet the stipulation of the CRC-CEDAW Joint General Comment No. 18/31 “on harmful practices” that “children subjected to harmful practices have equal access to justice, including by addressing legal and practical barriers to initiating legal proceedings, such as the limitation period” (JGC 18/31, para 55 (o)).

Further, in the case of FGM, not only those who perform the actual deed are guilty under the law, but also “[w]hosoever aids, abets, counsels, incites, procures or coerces a female to excise, infibulate or otherwise mutilate the whole or any part of her own genitalia, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable, on conviction, to the punishment laid down under this article.” (Criminal Code, art. 251E.(6)) On the other hand, in the case of IGM the only ones punishable under the law are the “medical practitioners or other professionals” who perform the actual mutilation domestically (GIGESC art. 14.(1)+(2)), whereas doctors who refer children to be submitted to IGM in foreign hospitals (as it is often the case in Malta, see also p. 9-10) are a priori exempt from prosecution, same as whosoever aiding, abetting, counselling, inciting, procuring or coercing intersex children to be submitted to IGM.

What’s more, according to statements of the Maltese Government, the law as it is exempts IGM 1 “hypospadias repair”, [30] the most frequent IGM practice (and apparently the only one that is performed in Malta itself, see also p. 8-9), as “whether cases of hypospadias are covered by the above prohibition may fall to be determined later by the courts.” [31] For other IGM practices, Malta is sending children overseas for surgery, reportedly to the UK, [32] Belgium, [33] and arguably also to Italy [34] – which the law does not prohibit and punish either.

Conclusion, GIGESC art. 14 aimed at protecting intersex children from IGM practices on the one hand fails to meet the minimal requirements set out by CRC art. 24(3) and the Joint General Comment No. 18, and on the other hand so far the law is simply not enforced.

[25] http://justiceservices.gov.mt/DownloadDocument.aspx?app=lom&itemid=12312&l=1
[26] ACT No. XIII of 2018, para 31, http://justiceservices.gov.mt/DownloadDocument.aspx?app=lp&itemid=29057&l=1
[27] Ministry for European Affairs and Equality (2018), “LGBTIQ Strategy & Action Plan 2018-2022”, p. 7, available at http://www.lgbtiq.gov.mt/
[28] http://www.justiceservices.gov.mt/DownloadDocument.aspx?app=lom&itemid=8574
[29] Helena Dalli, Minister for European Affairs and Equality (04.02.2019),
https://eige.europa.eu/news/female-genital-mutilation-illegal-malta-girls-are-not-safe
[30] Piet de Bruyn (2017), Report: Promoting the human rights of and eliminating discrimination against intersex people, COE Doc. 14404, p. 14, para 47, http://semantic-pace.net/tools/pdf.aspx?doc=aHR0cDovL2Fzc2VtYmx5LmNvZS5pbnQvbncveG1sL1hSZWYvWDJILURXLWV4dHIuYXNwP2ZpbGVpZD0yNDAyNyZsYW5nPUVO&xsl=aHR0cDovL3NlbWFudGljcGFjZS5uZXQvWHNsdC9QZGYvWFJlZi1XRC1BVC1YTUwyUERGLnhzbA==&xsltparams=ZmlsZWlkPTI0MDI3
[31] Ibid.
[32] See 2017 CRPD UK NGO Report, p. 9,
http://intersex.shadowreport.org/public/2017-CRPD-UK-NGO-Coalition-Intersex-IGM.pdf
[33] See 2018 CRC Belgium NGO Report, p. 7,
http://intersex.shadowreport.org/public/2018-CRC-Belgium-NGO-Zwischengeschlecht-Intersex-IGM.pdf
[34] Miriam Dalmas (2017), Consultant Public Health Medicine at Ministry for Health, “Structures and processes for cross-border care referral”, slide 5,
https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/ern/docs/20170309_rt3_05_dalmas_pres_en.pdf

Intersex Genital Mutilations in Malta: 2019 CRC Report
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
IGM in Malta + overseas • Legal gaps & loopholes • Harmful Practice
>>> Download as PDF (758 kb)

IGM as a Harmful Practice: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy? • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights • Conclusion: IGM is a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB) >>> Table of Contents

Eliminating IGM practices by holding the perpetrators accountable via well-established applicable human rights frameworks, including Inhuman Treatment and Harmful Practices – Presentation @ UN expert meeting on Intersex Human Rights
>>> Download PDF (831kb)

CAT66 > VIDEO + TRANSCRIPT: UK questioned about Intersex Genital Mutilation by UN – Gov disregards pain, suffering + human rights

March 21, 2021May 12, 2019 by StopIGM.org

Intersex human rights defenders Anick (Intersex UK, centre) and Daniela Truffer and Markus Bauer (StopIGM.org) outside Palais Wilson after testifying before CAT, Geneva 06.05.2019

This week, the UN Committee against Torture (CAT) is examining the human rights record of the UK during its 66th Session in Geneva.

The UK Intersex NGO Coalition (IntersexUK, the UK Intersex Association and StopIGM.org) submitted a comprehensive NGO report (PDF) to the Committee, documenting serious human rights violations perpetrated particularly against intersex children allover the UK, and further briefed the Committee in a private meeting prior to the Session with updates and a powerful personal testimony by Anick.

In addition, also the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) included a section on IGM in its NHRI report (PDF –> p. 86) – many thanks!

Summary: During Session 1 of the UK review, on Tue 07.05.2017 a Committee member asked the UK delegation a question on involuntary surgery on intersex children. CAT has so far issued 7 reprimands to State parties condemning IGM as cruel, degrading or inhuman treatment (CIDT) falling under the non-derogable prohibition of torture. Wednesday 08.05.2019, it was the UK’s turn to answer the Commmitte’s questions. Hardly surprising, during Session 2 the government once more chose to NOT address the pain and suffering of the intersex children at risk, as first they’ll have to look way more into this eternally ’emerging and complex area’ ...

Session 1, Tue 7 May 2019, 10-13h CEST

12:32h (Video @ 2:31:33): YAY!! Committee chairperson Mr. Jens Modvig asks a question about intersex children! Notes there is no evidence for past and current surgical procedures, which may lead to suffering comparable to ill-treatment. Asks about government plans to ensure peer support and a “watchful waiting approach” instead of “early and irreversible surgery […] agreed to by parents […] in a very vulnerable situation” ! :-) Unofficial Transcript:

«On a different note I would like to ask about the role of the Government in regard to surgery of intersex individuals. Such gender determining surgery is increasingly controversial, in particular when it’s applied to infants. And to be frank, the scientific evidence for its long-term impact, particularly for its impact on quality of life, is absent, it simply doesn’t exist.

On the contrary, we hear in this Committee individuals often complaining that this type of surgery actually have very poor results, including genital pain, the need for many, many re-operations, poor sexual function and poor self-esteem.

So while of course we acknowledge that medical science progresses and that procedures that were used 30 years ago may be completely different and much more effective today, we are actually concerned that intersex persons have been and are still being subjected to medical procedures which, in spite of the available informed consent from parents, are undocumented as to the impact, longterm impact on quality of life and function, and where the results may create suffering which is comparable to ill-treatment.

For this reason we would like to hear if the State party has any plans to ensure a focused oversight over this area and that could also include for instance ensuring independent counselling of parents, and by independent I mean independent of the surgeons, for instance by adult intersex persons who have a large amount of experience to offer, and the introduction of the possibility of a watchful waiting approach, which is mentioned in one of the most recent scientific articles in this field. A watchful waiting approach rather than moving to early and irreversible surgery which by the way has been agreed to by parents who are in a very vulnerable situation. So why we may be on the edge of this convention’s mandate I would still be keen to have a reply to this question.»

Session 2, Wed 7 May 2019, 15-18h CEST

16:23h (Video @ 01:23:47): Delegation member Ms. Angela Hawley (Policy Lead for Serious Mental Illness, Legislation and Justice, Department of Health and Social Care) gave a telling (non-)answer on intersex children, on the one hand claiming the government would now finally for the 1st time tackle this eternally new ’emerging and complex’ issue while at the same time hardly leaving any doubt that the government is hell-bent to continue with harmful surgeries on the infamous ‘individual case-by-case basis’ for as long as anyhow possible, without ever considering the suffering, let alone human rights of the children concerned … :-( Unofficial Transcript:

«Yesterday the Chair raised the issue of treatments of intersex individuals. These are very often complex cases which can only been considered on an individual case-by-case basis. The Government is working towards ensuring that people with intersex characteristics can access the care they need. In England, National Health Service England are scoping the feasibility of commissioning a clinical pathway for affected children and young adults.

Best practice in the National Health Service is that all infants and adolescents suspected of having intersex characteristics should be seen by an experienced multidisciplinary team. Families should be assigned single points of contact to lead discussions with them and discuss options regarding immediate or delayed treatment with hormone therapy or surgery. Affected new parents, the child or adolescent should have access to specialist psychological support both during and after the diagnostic process. In addition, any affected adolescent who requires medical or surgical attention, should be routinely offered clinical psychological support.

In January 2019, the Government Equalities Office launched a Call for Evidence to better understand the experiences and needs of people in the UK who have variations in sex characteristics. This is an emerging and complex area of social policy and it’s the first time Government has launched a piece of work specifically looking at issues experienced by these particular group. The Call for Evidence is closed and the Government is currently considering the responses received. Thank you.»

(Coincidentally, on the same day also the Government Equalities Office issued a similarly telling (non-)answer to StopIGM.org’s Letter of Concern about Disregard of Human Rights Implications in the ‘Call for Evidence’ – see for yourself which (non-)answer is more openly about ignoring intersex human rights.)

Let’s hope the Committee will not have the wool pulled over its eyes – but will issue yet another strong reprimand for IGM to the UK after the Session!

>>> Intersex: How to Distinguish Medical Crimes from Health Care

Intersex Genital Mutilations in the UK: 2019 CAT Report
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
IGM in the UK • Stats • Complicity of the State • Inhuman Treatment
>>> Download as PDF (679 kb)

UK > ‘Why does the “call for evidence” ignore intersex human rights?’ Letter of Concern to Government Equalities Office, by StopIGM.org

March 21, 2021May 9, 2019 by StopIGM.org

UPDATE 2: We received a telling (non-)answer by GEO (see below) – one day after the UK was asked about intersex children by the UN Committee against Torture …
UPDATE 1: Contributions to the ‘Call for evidence’ sent to the dedicated GEO email account were not read, but ‘archived away’?!

‘Until there is a change in the law, we’ll continue cutting’ – Dr I. Mushtaq (GOSH, UCL) Photo: Peaceful protest outside the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, host of the infamous ‘ISHID 2011 Live Surgeries’, with Open Letter to GOSH, ISHID and RCS. (Arguably one example of the ‘[h]istorical [!] experience of live teaching surgeries and medical photography’ mentioned in GEO’s ‘Technical Paper, p. 11 –> p. 13 of PDF.)

IGM = CRIME, Not 'Health Care' or 'Therapy'! The ‘Call for evidence on the experiences of people who have variations in sex characteristics’ of the UK Government Equalities Office (GEO) is now closed.

Unfortunately, so far GEO’s ‘evidence-gathering exercise’ is completely ignoring human rights.

Which is the more shameful, as recently the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) both reprimanded the UK for Intersex Genital Mutilations (IGM), explicitly obliging the Government to ‘[p]rovide redress to the victims of such treatment’ (CRC) and to ‘[e]stablish measures to ensure equal access to justice’ for IGM survivors (CRPD).

Intersex NGO StopIGM.org therefore sent the Government Equalities Office a >>> Letter of Concern about Disregard of Human Rights Implications in the ‘Call for Evidence’ (PDF), noting the total absence of any reference to applicable human rights, as well as the total absence of any human rights-related questions in the survey, namely to access to justice and rehabilitation, despite that these are crucial issues for many IGM survivors.

Daniela Truffer, IGM survivor and co-founder StopIGM.org:

‘I’ve seen the pattern before: Once the government can no longer simply deny the harmful and unnecessary genital surgeries perpetrated on intersex children, because they have been called out by human rights bodies, they’ll start a lengthy investigation. During its course, human rights concerns are conveniently brushed aside, same as IGM survivors and their legitimate grievances. Instead, the proceedings focus unduly on doctors, parents, and LGBT politics. In the end, the government will propose some 3rd gender legislation mostly benefiting trans people, while continuing to turn a blind eye to the daily mutilations of intersex children, paid for by the NHS. So far, unfortunately the UK Government Equalities Office ticks every box along the way.’

The Letter of Concern further acknowledges it’s a good thing that the UK Government, according to GEO’s ‘Technical Paper’ (PDF), is now officially ‘aware of calls from some UK stakeholders to end the practice of what they describe as “medically unnecessary interventions”‘, and aims to fill ‘evidence gaps’ to better ‘understand the nature and scale of the issue’. The Letter also references the most important intersex human rights obligations arising from the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (p. 4-6).

Last but not least, the Letter of Concern – delivered to GEO via email last Thursday – kindly asks for an ‘explanation why the Government Equalities Office so far seems to fail to adequately consider intersex human rights, namely the non-derogable rights to protection from harmful practices, and to justice, redress and rehabilitation.’

So far, GEO has not yet acknowledged the receipt of the the Letter …

UPDATE 1: When after weeks we still didn’t receive at least a confirmation of the receipt of our Letter of Concern from GEO, for safety we re-sent the letter on 23.04.2019 asking if it arrived safely.

While thereafter we finally received an acknowledgement, unfortunately we also had to learn that contributions to the ‘Call for evidence’ sent to the dedicated GEO email account for the ‘Call’ were not read by GEO, but instead ‘archived away’ … The full explanation given stated, ‘Apologies, I don’t believe your previous email was seen, as we moved Departments not long after and a few emails were archived away.’

At least we were further promised that our Letter will now be ‘forwarded […] on to the relevant colleague’, however, so far we still have to hear back from this person. Which leaves us to wonder, how many other contributions to the ‘Call’ via email were also tacitly ‘archived away’?

UPDATE 2: Coincidentally on the same day the UK gave a telling (non-)answer on IGM to the UN Committee against Torture in Geneva, we finally received a similarly telling (non-)answer from the Government Equalities Office (GEO) to our Letter of Concern:

From: <d[…]y_at_cabinetoffice.gov.uk> on behalf of “GEO.CORRESPONDENCE_at_cabinetoffice.gov.uk” <geo.correspondence@geo.gov.uk>
Date: Wednesday, 8 May 2019 at 18:16
To: <nella_at_zwischengeschlecht.info>
Cc: “GEO.CORRESPONDENCE Mailbox” <geo.correspondence_at_cabinetoffice.gov.uk>
Subject: Fwd: COGEO-000119 – Reply – DID YOU GET OUR MAIL? Fwd: Concern about Disregard of Human Rights Implications in the “Call for Evidence”

Dear Daniela Truffer, Markus Bauer,

Thank you for your letter of 24 April regarding human rights concerns and the Call for Evidence on Variations in Sex Characteristics. I am responding on behalf of the Minister for Women and Equalities.

The Government Equalities Office (GEO) launched a call for evidence to provide everyone in the United Kingdom, especially people with variations in sex characteristics, with an opportunity to engage with Government and to tell us in detail about their experiences and what they think Government could or should be doing to improve their lives.

In your letter, you express concern that the call for evidence made no mention of human rights. The scope and design of the survey was specifically aimed at understanding the experiences of people with variations in sex characteristics; including, but not limited to, their experiences of healthcare, education, support services and documentation.

We have acknowledged that although we have some understanding of the key issues from our engagement with stakeholders, the existing evidence has a number of gaps. As you highlight in your letter, we are aware of calls to end the practice of what they describe as ‘medically unnecessary interventions’. However, before taking any steps, we must understand the nature and scale of the issue. In order for the Government to make informed decisions about potential policy interventions to meet the needs of people who have variations in sex characteristics, we are acutely aware of the need to strengthen the evidence base, hence launching the call for evidence as a first step.

We are currently analysing the results of the survey, and our response will be published in due course.

Yours sincerely,

Government Equalities Office

Now judge for yourself, which of today’s 2 (non-)answers makes the more compelling argument whether the UK government really wants to urgently protect intersex children from harmful surgery – or rather not:

The one issued on behalf of GEO to our Letter of Concern (see above) – or the one issued on behalf of the Department of Health and Social Care to the UN Committee against Torture in Geneva?

To be continued …

>>> Letter of Concern to GEO about Disregard of Human Rights Implications (PDF)

IGM in the UK: UN-CRC NGO Report
Human Rights Violations Of Persons With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
IGM – Most Common Forms • What is Intersex? • A Harmful Practice
>>> Download (PDF 3.60 MB)

>>> Genital mutilation on the NHS: UN-CRC reprimands UK + Nepal

IGM in the UK: UN-CRPD Follow-Up NGO Report
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
Impunity • International IGM Networks in the UK • Testimonies
>>> Download as PDF (369 kb) | DOC (552 kb)

>>> UK, Morocco: UN-CRPD slams intersex genital mutilation on the NHS – again!

Germany > UN Press Release Highlights Intersex Genital Mutilation

March 21, 2021May 3, 2019 by StopIGM.org

During its 66th Session in Geneva, the UN Committee against Torture (CAT) questioned Germany about Intersex Genital Mutilations (IGM), based on damning evidence and personal testimony provided by StopIGM.org in a NGO report and in a private meeting with the Committee.

In her (non-)answer to the question, the Head of the German Delegation basically repeated the ever same empty promises of “action as soon as we analysed the proceedings of the last expert meeting” (after wich, according to the usual pattern of more than 20 years documented in the NGO report on p. 25, inevitably no action follows, but instead yet another mutilator-friendly “expert meeting” or “study” to “further evaluate the situation”). Next, she quickly but unsurprisingly tried to reframe the issue from involuntary non-urgent surgery on healthy children a.k.a. IGM practices to “gender-affirming treatments” (i.e. consensual procedures on adult trans persons) and generally to LGBT and trans topics, repeatedly referring to “queer living” flyers and “rainbow online portals” (see full transcript in german).

This intersex Q&A was also summarised in the UN press release of Germany’s review as follows:

“Committee against Torture examines the situation in Germany”
>>> UN Press Release (30.04.2019)

Questions by the Committee Experts

CLAUDE HELLER ROUASSANT, Committee Co-Rapporteur for Germany […] Mr. Heller Rouassant raised concern about the non-consensual genital mutilation of intersex persons, as 1,700 operations had been conducted without consent and not for urgent reasons.

[…]

Responses by the Delegation

[…] The current Coalition Government included in its work programme the adoption of a statutory regulation to prevent unnecessary operations on intersex children. Sex alignment surgery was only allowed if it was a life-saving measure. A brochure for parents had been issued which encouraged the parents not to resort to surgery. […]

>>> Full Timeline CAT Germany 2011-2019

IGM in Germany: 2019 CAT Report
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
IGM in Germany • Stats • Complicity of the State • Inhuman Treatment
>>> Download as PDF (679 kb)

Germany to be examined by UN Committee against Torture (CAT) – Shadow Report documents ongoing Intersex Genital Mutilation

March 21, 2021April 28, 2019 by StopIGM.org

Next week, Germany will be examined by the UN Committee against Torture (CAT). The Committee already reprimanded Germany for IGM practices in 2011, explicitly urging the Government to, inter alia, “adopt legal provisions in order to provide redress to the victims of such treatment, including adequate compensation”.

A Thematic Intersex NGO Report by StopIGM.org / Zwischengeschlecht.org (PDF) provides solid evidence of ongoing IGM practices in Germany, and how despite repeated Government promises there are still no legal protections for intersex children at risk (p. 14-16, 21-22) and no access to redress and justice for IGM survivors (p. 22-23, 27-31), in clear contradiction of the 2011 CAT binding recommendations for Germany.

The report further documents recent developments including

Minister’s conference proposes “legal ban” of IGM (p. 17)

Inter-Ministerial Working Group on Intersexuality and Transsexuality states IGM “may constitute bodily injury”, suggests “clarifying prohibition” (p. 18)

Coalition Agreement promises legal prohibition of IGM (p. 19)

CCPR raises “non-emergency” surgery, “obstacles in access to justice” (p. 19)

CESCR64: Germany promises “legislation” to prohibit IGM (p. 19)

Minister of Justice promises “legal provision” to “end this practice” (p. 20)

Social Court: Involuntary, non-urgent Clitorectomy = “state of the art” legal medical Intervention “serv[ing] the well-being of the patient” (p. 20)

StopIGM.org will be reporting live from Geneva, hoping for tough questions on IGM – and for yet another strong reprimand for IGM practices for Germany!

>>> Full Timeline CAT Germany 2013-2019

>>> Intersex: How to Distinguish Medical Crimes from Health Care

Intersex Genital Mutilations • 17 Most Common Forms
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Sex Anatomy
IGM – Historical Overview • What is Intersex? • How Common is IGM?
>>> Download PDF (3.65 MB) >>> Table of Contents

UK > UN Press Release Highlights Intersex Genital Mutilation

March 21, 2021March 3, 2019 by StopIGM.org

IGM = CRIME, Not 'Health Care' or 'Therapy'! During its 72nd Session in Geneva, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) questioned the UK over Intersex Genital Mutilations (IGM), with the Head of Delegation basically repeating the same (non-)answer no less than 3 times (this blog reported).

The first intersex Q&A was also summarised in the UN press release of the UK’s review:

“Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women reviews the situation of women’s rights in the United Kingdom”
>>> UN Press Release (26.02.2019)

Questions by the Committee Experts

[…] The delegation was asked whether it would adopt legislation prohibiting irreversible surgery on intersex children and remove barriers to access to justice, including by lifting the statute of limitations.

[…]

Responses by the Delegation

Responding, the delegation said that England had issued a call for evidence in order to increase its understanding of the issues facing intersex persons and especially victims of intersex genital mutilation. […]

>>> IGM in the UK, 2019: CEDAW Intersex Briefing Update (PDF, 2 pages)
>>> Full Report: UK questioned on IGM by UN-CEDAW, 26.02.2019
>>> Why UK intersex advocate Dawn Vago can’t testify at the UN in Geneva
>>> UK > NHS Doctor admits to performing Intersex Genital Mutilation
>>> Timeline CEDAW UK 2018-19

IGM in the UK: 2018 CEDAW Report
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
IGM in the UK • Statistics • Complicity of the State • Harmful Practice
>>> Download as PDF (679 kb)

IGM in the UK: 2019 Follow-Up Report (for Session)
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
Impunity • International IGM Networks in the UK • Testimonies
>>> Download as PDF (430 kb)

CEDAW72 > UK questioned about Intersex Genital Mutilation by UN

March 21, 2021February 26, 2019 by StopIGM.org

>>> Why UK intersex advocate Dawn Vago can’t testify at the UN in Geneva
>>> UK > NHS Doctor admits to performing Intersex Genital Mutilation

CEDAW 72nd Session @ Palais des Nations, Geneva 26.02.2019, 09:57h: Getting ready

StopIGM.org together with UK intersex NGOs IntersexUK (iUK) and UK Intersex Association (UKIA) submitted 2 comprehensive NGO Reports on the situation of intersex people in the UK to CEDAW, which demonstrate that intersex genital mutilation continues in in all 4 devolved nations, and during the Lunchtime meeting of CEDAW with UK NGOs on 25.02.2019 further briefed the Committee with a Joint Intersex Briefing Update (PDF).

>>> Full CEDAW Timeline UK 2018-2019

During the 72nd Session of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Committee is examining the human rights record of the UK on Tuesday 26 February 2019, 10-13h CET + 15-17h CET (= 9am-noon UK time + 2pm-4pm UK time), with both Session being transmitted LIVE on webtv.un.org. StopIGM.org was reporting LIVE from Geneva, hoping the Committee will ask tough questions on IGM practices in UK!

Session 1, Tue 26 February 2019, 10-13h CET

11:55h (Video @ 1:54:35): YAY!! Committee expert Ms. Bandana Rana (Nepal) who covers CEDAW article 5 on “harmful cultural practices” just raised “intersex genial mutilation” and the lack of access to redress and justice! Notes the UK didn’t reply to the pre-session question in the List of Issues (LOI) on data about IGM. Repeats demand for statistics and asks if UK does plan to implement legislation to stop IGM and address lack of access to justice, including the statutes of limitations? :-) Unofficial Transcript:

«The Committee is concerned about reports of Intersex Genital Mutilation, and the lack of redress and compensation in such cases. As the number of such procedures was also not included in the List of Issues, can you provide data on the number of such surgeries on intersex children? Do you plan to adopt legislation to eliminate this practice, and to address obstacles to access to justice, namely the statutes of limitations?»

12:09h (Video @ 2:07:56): Weak answer on IGM by Head of Delegation Ms. Elysia McCaffrey (Deputy Head, Government Equalities Office), refers to the Call for Evidence (which reportedly “fails to adequately consider human rights, namely the non-derogable rights to protection from harmful practices, and to justice and redress for victims”, see Joint Briefing Update (PDF, p.1, last para)), claims UK wants to really understand. :-( Unofficial Transcript:

«I would just like to start if I may a little bit out of order around the question on intersex genital mutilation. We have just issued a Call for Evidence in England where we recognise that we don’t have sufficient understanding of this issue and the issues that have affected these individuals, and we want to really understand that, and that Call for Evidence has been issued recently. So I’m afraid that I don’t have detailed answers on that today but I do [indiscernible] we’re happy to follow up with the Committee once we’ve completed that exercise.»

12:30h (Video @ 2:28:55): Head of Delegation Ms. Elysia McCaffrey (Deputy Head, Government Equalities Office) gives some more info on the “Call for Evidence” (which reportedly “fails to adequately consider human rights, namely the non-derogable rights to protection from harmful practices, and to justice and redress for victims”, see Joint Briefing Update (PDF, p.1, last para)), states it is a complicated issue issue, claims UK wants to do the right thing. :-( Unofficial Transcript:

«My colleague has just helpfully let me know I mentioned the intersex Call for Evidence that was launched on the 17 January and it’s a 10 week Call for Evidence and it is designed to understand the experiences of people who have variations in their sex characteristics. So this is, obviously it’s an emerging and complicated area policy and we’re looking to use this Call for Evidence to help us really do the right thing and make sure the position is significantly improved for those people.»

Session 2, Tue 26 February 2019, 15-17h CET

16:21h (Video @ 1:22:12): Committee expert Ms. Ana Peláez Narváez (Spain), of CRPD13 fame, follows up on forced sterilisation of women with disabilities, as well as intersex genital mutilation (the question’s wording was perhaps not entirely clear at first, as“surgeries to reassign sex or change sex” gererally refer to consensual trans surgery, not IGM) – however, this was soon clarified in the answer, see below), what measures is the UK taking to repeal those practices? :-) Unofficial Transcript:

«I also wanted to ask something else. I’m concerned by the fact that forced treatment can be used in the State party for sterilisation for example or surgeries to reassign sex or change sex. So I would like to know what measures the State party has taken in order to repeal these practices and bring it into line with a human rights based focus.»

16:37h (Video @ 1:36:52): Head of Delegation Ms. Elysia McCaffrey (Deputy Head, Government Equalities Office) answers on forced sterilisation and intersex genital mutilation, again referring to the “Call for Evidence” (which reportedly “fails to adequately consider human rights, namely the non-derogable rights to protection from harmful practices, and to justice and redress for victims”, see Joint Briefing Update (PDF, p.1, last para)), but else remains vague (and didn’t answer at all regarding forced sterilisation of women with disabilities). :-( (Though kudos for correctly answering on IGM.) Unofficial Transcript:

«In relation to forced sterilisation and for changing sex, I think if I understand this question rightly you were referring to intersex genital mutilation and this is something that we’re aware of the debate around and we are aware of the debate on the practice of medical interventions in this area. Really we require more govern- more evidence of the nature and the scale of this issue, and the call for evidence which I talked about earlier today should help us to determine whether and what government intervention is necessary.»

In March, the Committee will publish its “Concluding observations” with binding recommendations – hopefully including yet another strong reprimand for IGM practices for the UK! Fingers crossed!

>>> Full Chronology CEDAW UK 2018-19
>>> Intersex human rights at the UN are under attack!!!

>>> IGM in the UK, 2019: CEDAW Intersex Briefing Update (PDF, 2 pages)
>>> UK > NHS Doctor admits to performing Intersex Genital Mutilation
>>> Why UK intersex advocate Dawn Vago can’t testify at the UN in Geneva

>>> Intersex human rights at the UN are under attack!!!
>>> Intersex: How to Distinguish Medical Crimes from Health Care

Why UK intersex advocate Dawn Vago can’t testify at the UN in Geneva

March 21, 2021February 26, 2019 by StopIGM.org

Today Tuesday 26 February 2019, 10-13h CET + 15-17h CET (= 9am-noon UK time + 2pm-4pm UK time) the UK’s human rights record will be examined by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in Geneva – to be transmitted LIVE on webtv.un.org!

IntersexUK’s Dawn Vago, co-rapporteur of the Thematic Intersex NGO Reports, was scheduled to testify before the Committee in Geneva. Unfortunately, this wasn’t meant to be. Below Dawn explains why, and what this has to do with her being an IGM survivor (taken from an email to fellow UK NGOs present in Geneva):

I am Dawn Vago from IntersexUK and the designated speaker on behalf of the Intersex NGO Coalition, and I’d like to second Daniela’s email, as I am not ok and have not agreed to not getting speaking time.

I recently sustained significant injuries from a fall (shattered eye socket and cheekbone, fractured wrist, broken rib) which have kept me from beeing as vocal in the email chain that I would I have liked to have been, and which unfortunately will prevent me from travelling to Geneva without further injuring my health. However, I will follow the session remotely.

Unfortunately, the severity of my injuries is a direct consequence of having been submitted to intersex genital mutilation, namely the removal of vital hormone producing organs (gonadectomy) at age 8, of which a known complication is osteoporosis (weak bones), from which I have been suffering since 2005.

I am desperately trying to find someone else to come and speak from IntersexUK but time is short and in case we can’t find anybody, IntersexUK officially designates our co-rapporteur Daniela Truffer to speak on my behalf.

We must be allowed to speak out about our grievances during the public briefing, as the UK continues to illegally perform intersex genital mutilation against past UN condemnations. For example I just heard that a young intersex girl age 7 underwent gonadectony at my local hospital not so long ago, and being told the same cancer risk lie they told my parents 30 years ago! AND my adopted son was also told he needed his penis surgically ‘corrected’ on and his female body parts removed for no other reason than cosmetic purposes only less than 1 year ago.The UK has not moved on, and we desperately need IGM to stop!

I plea with you to allow us adequate time to speak and not silence us the same way surgeons and society silence us in the UK. We understand the value of everyone else’s voice but we cant sit by unnoticed. Please help.

Best regards and respect

Dawn Vago
IntersexUK
Co-Director

>>> UK > NHS Doctor admits to performing Intersex Genital Mutilation
>>> Timeline CEDAW UK 2018-19

IGM in the UK: 2019 Follow-Up Report
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
Impunity • International IGM Networks in the UK • Testimonies
>>> Download as PDF (430 kb)

UK > NHS Doctor admits to performing Intersex Genital Mutilation: ‘We are talking about relatively small numbers’ – really!?

March 21, 2021February 24, 2019 by StopIGM.org

NHS Bristol paediatric surgeon Mark Woodward, “the chair of the NHS England review of surgery on intersex people”, publicly admits to performing involuntary genital surgery on intersex children, according to the BBC “the majority of [it] not medically needed”. (However, according to a recent UK Study there are rather 2900 IGM procedures annually.)

We’re saying kudos to Dr Woodward for going public in a >>> 15-minutes BBC video report about “Intersex surgeries” (which actually are not about “assigning sex”, but according to the UN simply a serious human rights violation – also the often-repeated wrong number of allegedly “as many as 1.7% of the world have intersex traits” is unfortunately as false as claiming “the UN” would say this, actually there are rather 0.2% intersex people, see this excellent rebuke by BBC’s Tim Harford).

The following is a transcript of Mark Woodward’s statements in the video:

[Previous segment: Holly Greenberry, co-founder IntersexUK denounces the “huge detrimental impact” of unnecessary genital surgery on intersex children.]

[ video @ 11.46 min ] Mark Woodward (Consultant Paediatric Urologist [Surgeon], NHS Bristol): But that’s just focusing on that small aspect of health. And that’s not necessarily looking at psychology, the social impact of it.

Commentary: Mark Woodward will be the chair of the NHS England review of surgery on intersex people.

Moderator: Of the numbers of surgeries that are happening on DSD children in the UK, how many of those are necessary medically?

Woodward: It looks like roughly 150 children a year are assessed as new patients with DSD, and maybe between 20 and 40 surgical procedures a year in the whole of the UK, so we are talking about relatively small numbers.

Moderator: Of those 20 to 30 who are having surgery, how many of those would you estimate are absolutely required to happen in childhood?

Woodward: Yes, so I mean that is the big question, if you said are these procedures absolutely medically necessary? I.e. is a child going to come to harm if they don’t have surgery, well that number would be not that whole group, it would be smaller than that.

Voiceover: So while the majority of UK surgeries on intersex or DSD children are not medically needed, Mark Woodward, like Joyce Mbogo in Kenya, says it is often the parents pushing for them.

Woodward: So yes sometimes when you hear people talking about surgery, it’s as if we, the surgeons, are kind of dragging the children out of the parent’s arms and doing the surgery somehow against what the parents want. I mean that has never been my experience with the UK approach in DSD. I mean I feel, as do most of the people I speak to involved is that our position s we do not want to do any surgery, we would rather not do any surgery at all. I can imagine some teenagers saying, I wish I hadn’t had to make this surgery decision for myself.

Moderator: But are these imagined scenarios?

Woodward: Yeah they are totally imagined, yeah. Yeah.

Moderator: So we don’t know.

Woodward: Yeah that’s the problem we have absolutely no idea.

[Next segment: The Lohmans in Milwaukee, parents of intersex child Rosie: “All of the horror stories we were told Rosie’s life was going to be like if we just left her be and none of which have come true. […] Rosie is fine.“]

By the way, you’ll find the entire statistics of the recent Huddersfield Intersex Study (which found 2900 IGM surgeries annually in England alone!) and more evidence in the CAT Intersex NGO Report (PDF, see p. 11-16).

>>> 40 UN Reprimands for IGM – and counting …

CRC80 > Intersex Genital Mutilation: UN reprimands Belgium, Italy

March 21, 2021February 7, 2019 by StopIGM.org

[ Français ] [ Deutsch ]

Photo: Nonviolent Intersex Protest @ UNHRC UPR #14, Geneva 20.10.2012

During its 80th Session in Geneva, the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) examined the human rights record of Belgium and Italy, grilling both State parties specifically on intersex and IGM.

Intersex advocates are delighted that the Committee today sternly reprimanded both States for Intersex Genital Mutilations (IGM) under CRC art. 24(3) “harmful practices” (same as FGM), and in particular explicitly urged Belgium to “[p]rohibit the performance of unnecessary medical or surgical treatment on intersex children” and to “ensure […] access […] to effective remedies, including by lifting the statute of limitations”, referring to the CRC-CEDAW Joint General Comment No. 18/31 “on harmful practices”, and to target 5.3 of the Sustainable Development Goals (“eliminate all harmful practices”).

This latest reprimands for IGM practices by a UN treaty body mark
• the first reprimand for IGM for Belgium,
• already the 2nd reprimand for IGM for Italy,
• now 40 UN reprimands condemning IGM as a serious violation of non-derogable human rights.

Intersex NGO StopIGM.org together with intersex advocates Claudia Balsamo (Italy) and Thierry Bosman (Belgium), with the support of Intersexioni, Intersex Esiste and Intersex Belgium, and with additional help from Michela Balocchi, Daniela Crocetti and Londé Ngosso, had submitted substantial evidence of the ongoing IGM practices in both countries.

Please find below the full binding intersex recommendations for both Belgium and Italy, as well as links to the evidence submitted to the Committee and to the shocking denials and excuses of both States when questioned by the Committee in Geneva:

Belgium

Intersex Genital Mutilation in Belgium: 2018 CRC Report
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
IGM in Belgium • Complicity of the State • Harmful Practice
>>> Download as PDF (376 kb)

IGM in Belgium: 2018 Follow-Up Report (for Session)
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
Gov sidelines Intersex NGOs • International IGM Networks in Belgium
>>> Download as PDF (210 kb)

>>> CRC80 Belgium: Full Session Report, Transcripts, Videos
>>> Belgique > Communiqué de l’ONU souligne l’absence de protection législative
>>> Full CRC Timeline Belgium 2018-2019

Belgium: Full Binding CRC80 Intersex Recommendations
>>> Download Full Concl Obs: CRC/C/BEL/CO/5-6 –> paras 25(b)+26(e)

Harmful practices

25. The Committee notes with concern that:

[…]

(b) Intersex children are subjected to medically unnecessary surgeries and other procedures.

26. With reference to joint general recommendation No. 31 of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women/general comment No. 18 of the Committee on the Rights of the Child on harmful practices (2014) and taking into account target 5.3 of the Sustainable Development Goals, the Committee urges the State party to:

[…]

(e) Prohibit the performance of unnecessary medical or surgical treatment on intersex children where those procedures can be safely deferred until children are able to provide their informed consent; ensure that intersex children and their families have access to adequate counselling and support and to effective remedies, including by lifting the statute of limitations.

Italy

Intersex Genital Mutilations in Italy: 2018 CRC Report
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
IGM in Italy • Complicity of the State • Harmful Practice
>>> Download as PDF (391 kb)

IGM in Italy: 2018 Follow-Up Report (for Session)
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Reprod. Anatomy
IGM Statistics • International IGM Networks in Italy • Testimonies
>>> Download as PDF (450 kb)

>>> CRC80 Italy: Full Session Report, Transcripts, Videos
>>> Italy > Intersex Genital Mutilation: Gov Denial makes UN Press Release
>>> Full CRC Timeline Italy 2018-2019

Italy: Full Binding CRC80 Intersex Recommendations
>>> Download Full Concl Obs: CRC/C/ITA/CO/5-6 –> para 23

Harmful practices

23. The Committee recommends that the State party:

(a) Develop and implement a child rights-based health-care protocol for intersex children, setting the procedures and steps to be followed by health teams, ensuring that no one is subjected to unnecessary medical or surgical treatment during infancy or childhood, guarantee bodily integrity, autonomy and self-determination to children concerned, and provide families with intersex children with adequate counselling and support;

(b) Educate and train medical and psychological professionals on the range of sexual, and related biological and physical, diversity and on the consequences of unnecessary surgical and other medical interventions for intersex children.

How the Maltese GIGESC Act Fails Intersex Children

Session 1, Tue 7 May 2019, 10-13h CEST

Session 2, Wed 7 May 2019, 15-18h CEST

>>> Intersex: How to Distinguish Medical Crimes from Health Care

>>> Full Timeline CAT Germany 2011-2019

>>> Full Timeline CAT Germany 2013-2019

>>> Intersex: How to Distinguish Medical Crimes from Health Care

Session 1, Tue 26 February 2019, 10-13h CET

Session 2, Tue 26 February 2019, 15-17h CET

>>> Full Chronology CEDAW UK 2018-19 >>> Intersex human rights at the UN are under attack!!!

>>> Intersex human rights at the UN are under attack!!! >>> Intersex: How to Distinguish Medical Crimes from Health Care

>>> 40 UN Reprimands for IGM – and counting …

Belgium

Italy

>>> Full Chronology CEDAW UK 2018-19
>>> Intersex human rights at the UN are under attack!!!

>>> Intersex human rights at the UN are under attack!!!
>>> Intersex: How to Distinguish Medical Crimes from Health Care