Female genital mutilation/cutting in North America and Europe.

Last reviewed for this presentation: 18 September 2026

Summary

Female genital mutilation or cutting (FGM/C) refers to non-medical procedures that alter or injure external female genital tissue. It is most often carried out during childhood and is associated with social expectations, ideas about marriageability, identity, or religious interpretation. It is not required by Islam or by any other major religion, although it has occurred in communities of several faiths and in communities that describe the practice as cultural rather than religious.

FGM/C can cause immediate and long-term physical and psychological harm. International health and human-rights bodies oppose the practice when it is performed on children or without free, informed consent. This article uses the term FGM/C while recognizing that affected communities and institutions use different terminology.

Where the practice is reported

FGM/C has been documented in parts of Africa, the Middle East and Asia, and among some diaspora communities in North America and Europe. The existence of a practice within a community should not be used to characterize an entire religion, nationality, or immigrant population. Decisions are shaped by family expectations, local custom, gender norms, social pressure, and access to accurate information.

Many countries in Europe, as well as Canada and the United States, prohibit FGM/C through criminal law or child-protection law. Some jurisdictions also prohibit taking a child abroad for the procedure. Laws and enforcement arrangements differ, so current advice must be checked against the relevant jurisdiction rather than relying on an old list.

Medical care and intersex children

Intersex refers to people born with sex characteristics that do not fit typical definitions of male or female bodies. Intersex traits are distinct from FGM/C. In some cases, infants or children have historically undergone irreversible procedures intended to make their bodies conform to customary expectations. Critics argue that non-urgent interventions should generally wait until the person can participate in the decision; clinicians and families may consider medical factors differently in individual cases.

These questions involve bodily autonomy, informed consent, the child’s welfare, privacy, and the responsibilities of healthcare professionals. They should not be collapsed into a single category, but both topics raise important questions about who has authority to make irreversible decisions for children.

Legal responses in North America

In the United States, federal and state approaches to FGM/C have changed over time. A federal prohibition enacted in the 1990s was challenged in a Michigan case decided in 2018. The trial court held that Congress had exceeded its constitutional authority under the statute used in that prosecution. The decision did not declare the practice lawful in every setting, and state criminal and child-protection provisions continued to matter. Subsequent legislative developments mean that older summaries should not be treated as current legal advice.

U.S. states do not all use identical definitions, penalties, or reporting duties. The possibility of crossing a state border or leaving the country has also led policymakers to consider travel-related offences, safeguarding measures, education, and support for survivors alongside criminal prosecution.

Canada treats FGM/C as a serious criminal and child-protection issue. Canadian law also addresses taking a child outside the country for prohibited conduct. Public education materials have emphasized equality, bodily integrity, and the protection of children while debates continue about how to communicate these principles without stigmatizing particular cultural communities.

Legal responses in Europe

European states generally prohibit FGM/C, but reporting, investigation, prosecution, and prevention vary. A small number of prosecutions have resulted in convictions, while many cases remain difficult to identify because children may be unable to disclose what happened, families may fear authorities, and evidence may be unavailable years later.

Effective prevention therefore involves more than legislation. Health professionals, teachers, social workers, community organizations, and law-enforcement agencies need training that is culturally informed, survivor-centered, and clear about safeguarding duties. Support should be available without treating a whole community as suspect.

Prevention and support

• Explain bodily autonomy and consent in age-appropriate ways.
• Provide confidential healthcare and psychological support for survivors.
• Train professionals to recognize risk without relying on stereotypes.
• Work with affected communities and local advocates to challenge social pressure.
• Use law consistently while ensuring that children and survivors are not discouraged from seeking care.

References and further reading

This website page summarizes the themes and historical material in the original essay. Laws, population estimates, clinical guidance, and institutional policies change over time. Readers researching a current case should consult current publications from national health authorities, child-protection agencies, courts, and international public-health organizations.