Michigan doctor says female genital surgery was a 'religious practice' -- not mutilation

[DonViejo]

Tresa Baldas
Detroit Free Press

DETROIT — In a stunning revelation in federal court Monday, an attorney for a Detroit-area doctor charged with mutilating the genitals of young girls admitted that her client performed a procedure on the juveniles' private parts, but maintained that it wasn't cutting.

Instead, the lawyer said Dr. Jumana Nagarwala, 44, of Northville, removed the membrane from the girls' genitals as part of a religious practice that is tied to an international Indian Muslim group that the doctor belongs to.

Attorney Shannon Smith said that her client removed the membrane from the girls' vaginal parts and gave it to the girls' parents, who would then bury it following a custom practiced by a small sect of Indian Muslims known as the Dawoodi Bohra.

All of this was disclosed at a detention hearing for Nagarwala, who was ordered locked up pending the outcome of her case. The judge concluded she was a danger to the community and a flight risk after hearing arguments from both sides.

The government argued that Nagarwala engaged in secretive practice that has potentially harmed numerous young girls across Michigan. And she did it after hours, in a private, unnamed clinic in Livonia, without keeping any records or billing anyone, the government said.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/04/michigan-doctor-says-female-genital-surgery-was-a-religious-practice-not-mutilation/

[ExciteBike66]

1. What exactly is

"The Membrane"?

I don't remember anything of that name from my sex ed classes.

[RedWedge]

3. The lawyer claims she only "wiped" the "mucous membrane."

[Wounded Bear]

4. I'm assuming it is the "excess" labial tissue that many women have around their vaginas...

Sweeten it up all they like, it is still mutilation. It's barbaric and it is horribly misogynistic to alter a woman's physique to satisfy some male standard. To think an actual Medical Doctor would countenance it is disgusting.

[Warren DeMontague]

23. I'm surprised more religions haven't declared the human head "excess unnecessary tissue"

God would prefer it if your body would stop at your neck. You would be much more compliant.

[HAB911]

2. Anything in the name of religion!

[mercuryblues]

5. Silly Dr

She should know only Christian religious beliefs get special consideration.

[leftynyc]

7. Christians have "beliefs"

that children should be mutilated so they can never enjoy sex? Do tell.

[mercuryblues]

10. That is not what I said

There are Christians who believe that women and LBGT should not be able to do a lot of things. They have even made laws to force this belief onto others. Some laws have failed, but give them time. I never would have believed that laws could be enacted allowing a Doctor to lie to a pregnant woman about her medical condition, but here we are in the 21st century. 11 states have a law on the books to allow a DR to lie to a pregnant woman about fetal anomalies and her health if they believe she might have an abortion. Retail stores can deny woman prescription coverage for Birth Control, based on religious beliefs.

More than once legislators have tried to push laws through that a woman has to have a man's permission for an abortion.

NC republicans are trying to make same sex marriage illegal, based on religious beliefs. They have already have a law stating what bathroom a person can use. Because of their religious beliefs.

While several states have or tried to have laws that make Sharia law illegal.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

27. I got exactly what you meant and ITA!

[whathehell]

13. Another rather tortured attempt at "equivalence"

that ends in transparently false equivalence.

[mercuryblues]

20. tortured attempt?

I had to endure a very painful, unnecessary medical procedure because I had a pregnancy go wrong and needed an abortion. Not to mention the 48 hour wait. All because some Christians think that a zygote is more important than my life and elect people that will enact laws to appease their religious beliefs. Not to mention having to wait 48 hours and hope that I didn't start hemorrhaging or develop sepsis. That is the real torture. I have a relative that went through the same thing. The difference was her husband was military, so the Hyde amendment kicked in and she had to wait 2 weeks for government approval for an abortion.

[whathehell]

24. Sounds awful, but I doubt even you would say it's equal to being mutilated as a child

in the interests of having your sexuality destroyed for your entire life. That is the "real" torture.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

28. And the Catholic Church would let you die from an ectopic pregnancy rather than

allow you to have an abortion.

[whathehell]

42. Sorry, even that doesn't equate to mutilating children..

to deprive them of natural sexual pleasure for the rest of their lives, but feel free to keep trying..

[50 Shades Of Blue]

45. I wonder how many of the women condemned by the Catholic Church to die excrutiating, unnecessary

deaths in lieu of terminating a pregnancy (even a pregnancy with a nonviable fetus) before it kills them (per Catholic Church teaching) would agree.

[whathehell]

50. The church can't "condemn" her to anything, as a woman is free

to disobey the teaching -- A seven year old is not.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

51. Right! Some choice, huh? Have a lifesaving abortion, or get an express ticket to hell.

Oh and by the way, it's regardless of age and ability to disobey. A ten-year-old rape victim impregnated by her rapist, and who is too small to survive childbirth, whose parents follow Catholic teaching, will also be allowed to die rather than have a life-saving abortion.

Non-Catholic women whose only hospital option is a Catholic hospital will also be allowed to die.

[whathehell]

68. No, sorry, the melodrama is impressive, but can't override the facts.

There's no "express ticket to hell", in that surviving gives one the chance to 'repent' should one feel the
need.

Your need to reach for extreme hypothetical scenarios to counter something that's real and happening every day

strongly suggests that your 'equivalence' argument is a failed one.

[leftynyc]

73. I'm going to remember this thread

And EVERY SINGLE TIME someone here posts something that trashes some form of Christianity, especially involving women, is going to make me post something about Islam. Some people here want false equivalence, that's exactly what they're going to get. I'm tired of this board proving Bill Maher right.

[whathehell]

74. Sounds good.

[Warren DeMontague]

44. And NASA bombed the moon, too.

Still, it's not the topic of this thread.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

46. It has everything to do with it.

[Warren DeMontague]

48. I don't think anyone here agrees with the RCC on reproductive choice or the lack thereof.

But the point here is that a doctor was doing some seriously fucked up shit to baby girls in the name of religion, and hopefully she will be sent to prison for a long, long time.

Or were you talking about the moon bombing?

[50 Shades Of Blue]

54. This subject is too important and the abuse is too widespread not to point out the similarities.

The woman abuse of the Catholic Church doesn't get a pass just because another religious belief system is being discussed. That system is barbaric, and it's right to point it out, and the fact that it shares the exact same anti-female dynamic means that there is never a time that isn't right to expose how barbaric the Catholic Church also is to women. The whole reason the Catholic Church forbids abortion is precisely to punish women for experiencing sexual pleasure without risking their lives in childbirth.

[Warren DeMontague]

56. I agree with pretty much every point you're making here

except your justification for hijacking the thread.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

58. There are 57 replies in this thread but *I* hijacked it.

I will try to remember my place from now on.

[Warren DeMontague]

59. Most of those replies are on topic.

You can do whatever you want. So can I. That's how this works.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

61. I wasn't aware you were the on topic arbiter.

[Warren DeMontague]

62. so--- how about that moon bombing, huh?

[mercuryblues]

36. again, that is not what I said

So stop trying to say I did. I said the DR needs to realize that only Christians get special consideration under the law.


Genital mutilation is horrid, so is what I went through. Why does it have to be either/or? Or one has to be worse than the other to be considered inhumane? Both are.

According to you the days I had to wait fearing complications that could kill me or make me infertile wasn't real torture. Nor was the mandated vaginal ultra sound that hurt so much I screamed and they had to hold me down. All mandated by law. IOW I was forced, by law, to endure physical pain and trauma. Laws that some very vocal Christians pushed for to shame women.

[whathehell]

41. I didn't say that you did...

but you're inferring it by deflecting from the hideous Islamic practice of FGM to talk about supposed "special" rights granted Christians
.If you want that to be the main subject, you need to start your own thread, instead of trying to hijack this one.

[whathehell]

11. Maybe because Christian 'beliefs" don't mandate sexual mutilation

Just a thought.

[mercuryblues]

37. So just some christian

beliefs will kill pregnant women.

[whathehell]

40. You're trying hard..

but it's still a bad analogy. Sorry.

.



.

[jberryhill]

66. They do in quite a few countries

...because it is an African practice which pre-dates Christianity and Islam.

While this fact is inconvenient to various agendas, it is not exclusive to any one religious group, nor is it broadly practiced by any one religion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_female_genital_mutilation_by_country

Burkina Faso
The prevalence varies with religion in Burkina Faso; FGM is prevalent in 82% of Muslim women, 73% of traditional religions, 69% of Roman Catholics and 65% of Protestants.

Eritrea
A 2002 survey reported by Unicef shows FGM prevalence among 99% of Muslim, 89% of Catholic and 85% of Protestant women aged 15-49 years

Kenya
By religion, it is more prevalent in Muslim women (51.1%) and women listing no religion (32.9%) and less prevalent in Roman Catholic (21.5%) and Protestant or other Christian women (17.9%).

[whathehell]

67. In Africa...

Last edited Wed Apr 19, 2017, 01:04 AM - Edit history (1)

and even tthere, it's most prevalent among Muslims, in some cases, far more prrevalent.

This Muslim mutilated a child in America, and is trying to justify it as a "religious practice". To say that she and those like her have

assimilation problems would be an extreme understatement.

[Initech]

6. And this makes me glad I'm an atheist.

Fuck these monsters and their "religion".

[TBA]

8. Like Circumcision?

[whathehell]

12. Um, no., FGM, circumcision doesn't eliminate sexual feeling in boys..

Female genital mutilation removes sexual pleasure for females -- So they can be simple objects and repositories for males....It's aggressively,, obscenely dehumanizing.

[Blue_Tires]

16. +1

False equivalencies out the yin-yang today...

If folks are that anxious to dredge up the old circumcision debate, let them start a new discussion...

[whathehell]

25. Oh yes..

Last edited Tue Apr 18, 2017, 09:14 PM - Edit history (1)

and it's quite predictable.

[grossproffit]

33. Fail

[safeinOhio]

9. "Religious practice"

My new excuse for farting on an elavator.

[Thor_MN]

31. Gawd speaks in mysterious ways...

[Calculating]

14. And yet male genital mutilation is ongoing and encouraged in our society

Because it supposedly 'looks better' or something.

[pennylane100]

15. I thought that it was done for health reasons.

I was under the impression that the uncircumcised penis is more prone to infections. I could be wrong, however.

[Calculating]

17. That's mostly wrong

Assume that the male follows proper hygiene and washes under the foreskin it's not likely to be an issue.

[Yupster]

19. Bigger issue in third world countries

where proper hygiene is not always possible.

Christianity is neutral on circumcision. The Council of Jerusalem 2,000 years ago said it wasn't necessary.

[Baconator]

18. You get a couple of percentage point bump if you live in Africa...

... in unhygienic circumstances.

In the western world, it's all moot and purely for aesthetic and cultural/religious reasons.

[csziggy]

32. Health reasons would eliminate the traditional method of circumcision

NYC to automatically ban mohels linked to newborn herpes cases
March 31, 2017 7:07am

(JTA) — The New York City Health Department said it will ban ritual circumcisers automatically if the infant they treated orally develops a herpes infection.

The ban would affect those who perform the ritual known as metzitzah b’peh, in which the person performing the circumcision, known as a mohel, sucks blood from the wound following circumcision. It is a common practice among many haredi Orthodox Jews. When performed directly with the mouth as opposed to through a sterile pipette, it has been linked directly to the transmission of the herpes virus.

Under the new regulation, “every time there is a mohel who performed metzitzah b’peh on an infant who has contracted HSV-1, the Health Department will serve them with Commissioner’s orders banning them from performing the ritual,” The Jewish Week of New York reported Thursday, quoting city officials. HSV-1 is a type of herpes.

The Health Department will now ban the mohels linked to cases of herpes in newborns without testing for the virus, the newspaper reported. Prior to the regulation, the ban would be issued only pending tests both of the mohel and the baby.
http://www.jta.org/2017/03/31/news-opinion/united-states/nyc-to-automatically-ban-mohels-if-children-they-treated-orally-get-herpes

[Warren DeMontague]

21. I think that ought to be a different conversation.

Personally I take issue with surgically modifying the body of someone - like a baby - without their consent for any reason not supported by direct medical necessity (and no, male circumcision is not) ... however, there are major differences btw. male circumcision and female "circumcision".

Yes, have that debate, but not in the context of this one. Just my 2 cents.

[whathehell]

43. Yes, it's a poor analogy..

since FGM, destroys sexual feeling in it's victims, and male circumcision does not -- Big difference.

[radius777]

65. agree, all forms of circ/mod of children should be illegal.

female circumcision is worse, as it is essentially amputation (im not sure this particular case is that though) with the intent to restrict sexual pleasure, and rooted in the oppression of women.

but make no mistake about it, there are many men who suffer lifelong sexual impairment/dysfunction due to circumcision.

bottom line, it should be a serious crime to perform unneccessary and potentially harmful surgery on a child, period.

[Warren DeMontague]

71. that isn't necessarily my position, but this isn't the place to debate it.

I put male circumcision in the category of things that I have an opinion on as far as how I personally would handle them but am not prepared to legislate as far as what other people do.

But again, this isn't the thread for that debate anyway.

[grossproffit]

34. Give me a break.

[RandySF]

55. Female genital mutilation is the equivalent of loping off the penis altogether.

Wrong analogy.

[Warren DeMontague]

22. But But DERPLY HERLD RELERGERS BERLERFS

Throw the book at her. Next.

[elleng]

26. No difference.

religious practice = mutilation

[Binkie The Clown]

29. Gosh. Cruelty in the name of religion. Who could have imagined such a thing? n/t

[whathehell]

47. Oh please...

Attempts to deflect responsibility for this barbaric practice by condemning "religion" generally, is both transparent and lame.

[Binkie The Clown]

49. I didn't condemn religion in general.

I condemned the all too common practice of cruelty in the name of religion.

Not all religious people are guilty of cruelty, and not all cruelty is done in the name of religion. But there is a significant subset of cruel acts that have been committed with "god's blessing" or in response to "god's command".

I don't recall ever hearing of cruelty in the name of the Buddha, or cruelty in the name of the Quaker religion. But then there's the Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades, assorted Jihads and religious wars, as well as pretty much the whole history of Ireland, and of the Middle East.

Or, by "deflect" do you mean my refusal to blame only Islam for barbaric acts?

[GulfCoast66]

57. Look deep enough and there is creulty in all religions

If and when they gain power.

Name a religion that has not been cruel and I will name one that has never had any power in society. And I would bet that there are lots of Quaker kids who felt marginalized in their own families if they chose not to follow the family religion.

I am by no means a Marxist and believe that tightly regulated capitalism is the key to prosperity but Marx nailed the whole religions thing. Of course, he was not the first going back thousands of years.

[Binkie The Clown]

70. +1000 ! n/t

[Warpy]

30. If she can point to it in the Quran, she can be let go

but it's nowhere in that book. It's a vicious tribal practice that predated Islam, perpetuated by men who want women to be property and grandmothers who know their granddaughters will have to marry them to survive.

[RandySF]

53. No she can't

Not everything in the name of religion is protected. Parents have lost custody of kids because they refused to take them to the doctor. Cult leaders have been thrown in jail for molesting young girls in their cults.

[Greybnk48]

35. He should be castrated, penis and all.

In the name of religion.

[rug]

39. The surgeon is a woman.

[oasis]

38. Lock that kook up and throw away the keys.

[RandySF]

52. Fuck that.

It's mutilation. It's illegal. Throw her in jail.

[MFM008]

60. Fuck these people

And their medieval bullshit.

[Ilsa]

63. This is why I hate these religious freedom bills.

The bills enable criminal acts.

[Warren DeMontague]

64. whats funny is all manner of oppressive, theocratic bullshit would be okay

but people still wouldn't be allowed to religiously put a "forbidden" chemical in their own bodies without risking going to prison.

[Blue_Roses]

69. This breaks my heart...

a doctor--especially a gynecological specialist--is someone that women have to put all their trust in, while hoping to have a favorable outcome. Just getting in those stirrups alone is frightening for young girls ( hell, sometimes we older women too)

This is disgusting, especially knowing it happened in the US. I had heard of this horrendous procedure being done in 3rd world countries, but never here.

Very sad...