Introduction: Female genital mutilation (FGM), also known as female genital cutting or circumcision, threatens the health and well-being of millions of girls, women, and their children around the world. In Senegal, FGM practices persist despite numerous interventions. This study aims to analyze the determinants of FGM in Senegal. Methods: This article uses data from the 2018 Senegal Demographic and Health Survey (DHS), a nationally representative survey of 9413 women aged 15-49 years. In the descriptive analysis, variables were presented in terms of frequency and percentage of data. The significance level was set at 5, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used. Variables with p values less than 0.25 in the bivariate analysis were selected for multivariate analysis. The dependent variable was a composite variable generated from 3 DHS variables that described the types of post-FGM genital lesions that exist in women. The analysis was performed using STATA/SE 17. Results: The prevalence of FGM is 17.14%. Eleven-point fifty-two percent (11.52%) or 999 women believe that FGM is a religiously recommended practice. Ninety-nine percent (993) of these women were Muslim (p=0.0017). Fifteen-point thirty-nine percent (15.39%) or 1,334 women think it is a practice that should continue to be practiced and 80.59% (or 6,988 women) think it should be stopped. The protective factors for the occurrence of FGM were female empowerment (high level of education of the woman (primary ajOR=0.64 [0.50-0.83] and secondary ajOR=0.43 [0.32, 0.57]) and the fact that the head of the family was a woman ajOR (0.75 [0.59-0.97]); belonging to the central region of Senegal (Diourbel, Kaolack, Thiès, Louga and Fatcick) and Christian religion (ajOr=0.05 [0.02-0.13]). The risk factors for female genital mutilation in Senegal were ethnicity and belonging to certain regions in the northeast and southeast of Senegal (Tambacounda, Matam, Kedougou). Conclusion: This study showed that FGM practices are still persistent in Senegal. This study underlined that the empowerment of women would allow the fight against FGM. Health interventions should be multisectoral, involving the education sectors with a strong investment in girls' education and retention.
Published in | Central African Journal of Public Health (Volume 7, Issue 3) |
DOI | 10.11648/j.cajph.20210703.15 |
Page(s) | 121-126 |
Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Female Genital Cutting, Determinants, Senegal
[1] | Koski A, Heymann J. Thirty-year trends in the prevalence and severity of female genital mutilation: a comparison of 22 countries. BMJ Global Health: 8. |
[2] | Reisel D, Creighton SM. Long term health consequences of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). Maturitas. janv 2015; 80 (1): 48-51. |
[3] | Berg RC, Underland V. The obstetric consequences of female genital mutilation/cutting: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2013; 2013: 496564. |
[4] | Female genital mutilation [Internet]. [cité 26 avr 2021]. Disponible sur: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation. |
[5] | Weltgesundheits organisation, éditeur. Eliminating female genital mutilation: an interagency statement; OHCHR, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNECA, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UNIFEM, WHO. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008. 40 p. |
[6] | SDG Indicators — SDG Indicators [Internet]. [cité 26 avr 2021]. Disponible sur: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=5&Target=5.3. |
[7] | Les mutilations sexuelles féminines (MSF). Division de l’Information, de la Documentation et des Recherches de l’Ofpra. 2019, 15p [Internet]. [cité 26 avr 2021]. Disponible sur: https://ofpra.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/atoms/files/1905_sen_mgf.pdf |
[8] | ICF International. 2012. Demographic and Health Survey Sampling and Household Listing Manual. MEASURE DHS, Calverton, Maryland, U.S.A.: ICF International. 98p. |
[9] | Croft, Trevor N., Aileen M. J. Marshall, Courtney K. Allen, et al. 2018. Guide to DHS Statistics. Rockville, Maryland, USA: ICF https://dhsprogram.com/data/Guide-to-DHS-Statistics/index.cfm. |
[10] | Collett D. Modelling Binary Data, Second Edition. CRC Press; 2002. 406 p. |
[11] | Prevalence of female genital mutilation [Internet]. [cité 28 avr 2021]. Disponible sur: https://www.who.int/teams/sexual-and-reproductive-health-and-research/areas-of-work/female-genital-mutilation/prevalence-of-female-genital-mutilation. |
[12] | Kandala N-B, Ezejimofor MC, Uthman OA, Komba P. Secular trends in the prevalence of female genital mutilation/cutting among girls: a systematic analysis. BMJ Global Health. 1 oct 2018; 3 (5): e000549. |
[13] | Satti A, Elmusharaf S, Bedri H, Idris T, Hashim MSK, Suliman GI, et al. Prevalence and determinants of the practice of genital mutilation of girls in Khartoum, Sudan. Annals of Tropical Paediatrics. 1 déc 2006; 26 (4): 303-10. |
[14] | Oduro AR, Ansah P, Hodgson A, Afful TM, Baiden F, Adongo P, et al. Trends in the prevalence of female genital muti-lation and its effect on delivery outcomes in the kassena-nankana district of northern Ghana. Ghana Medical Journal [Internet]. 2006 [cité 28 avr 2021]; 40 (3). Disponible sur: https://www.ajol.info/index.php/gmj/article/view/55258. |
[15] | Odukogbe A-TA, Afolabi BB, Bello OO, Adeyanju AS. Female genital mutilation/cutting in Africa. Transl Androl Urol. 2017; 6 (2): 138-48. |
[16] | Sénégal_-_2018_01.pdf [Internet]. [cité 28 avr 2021]. Disponible sur: https://www.rhsupplies.org/uploads/tx_rhscpublications/S%C3%A9n%C3%A9gal_-_2018_01.pdf. |
[17] | Puppo V. Female genital mutilation and cutting: An anatomical review and alternative rites. Clin Anat. janv 2017; 30 (1): 81-8. |
[18] | Al Awar S, Al-Jefout M, Osman N, Balayah Z, Al Kindi N, Ucenic T. Prevalence, knowledge, attitude and practices of female genital mutilation and cutting (FGM/C) among United Arab Emirates population. BMC Womens Health. 22 avr 2020; 20 (1): 79. |
[19] | Awolola OO, Ilupeju NA. Female genital mutilation; culture, religion, and medicalization, where do we direct our searchlights for it eradication: Nigeria as a case study. Tzu Chi Med J. 2019; 31 (1): 1-4. |
[20] | Dicko-Traoré F, Diakité FL, Diakité AA, Konaté D, Keïta JT, Traoré F, et al. Connaisssances, attitudes et pratiques des mères relatives a l’excision a bamako. Mali Med. 31 mars 2014; 30-5. |
[21] | Berg RC, Denison E. Interventions to reduce the prevalence of female genital mutilation/cutting in African countries. Campbell Systematic Reviews. 2012; 8 (1): 1-155. |
[22] | Shabila NP, Ahmed HM, Safari K. Knowledge, attitude, and experience of health professionals of female genital mutilation (FGM): A qualitative study in Iraqi Kurdistan Region. Health Care Women Int. nov 2017; 38 (11): 1202-18. |
[23] | Sylla PS. Interdiction de l’excision au Sénégal: pour comprendre les raisons de l’inefficacité de la loi. Centre Interdisciplinaire d’Études et de Recherche de la Vallée (CIERVAL), Université Gaston Berger. 2002; 18p. |
[24] | Diop NJ, Askew I. The Effectiveness of a Community-based Education Program on Abandoning Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting in Senegal. Studies in Family Planning. 2009; 40 (4): 307-18. |
[25] | Doucet M-H, Delamou A, Manet H, Groleau D. Beyond will: the empowerment conditions needed to abandon female genital mutilation in Conakry (Guinea), a focused ethnography. Reprod Health. déc 2020; 17 (1): 61. |
[26] | Williams-Breault BD. Eradicating Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting. Health Hum Rights. déc 2018; 20 (2): 223-33. |
APA Style
Ndeye Mareme Sougou, Jean Baptiste Niokhor Diouf, Oumar Bassoum, Ibrahima Seck. (2021). Analysis of the Determinants of Female Genital Mutilation Practices in Senegal: A Secondary Analysis of the 2018 DHS. Central African Journal of Public Health, 7(3), 121-126. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.cajph.20210703.15
ACS Style
Ndeye Mareme Sougou; Jean Baptiste Niokhor Diouf; Oumar Bassoum; Ibrahima Seck. Analysis of the Determinants of Female Genital Mutilation Practices in Senegal: A Secondary Analysis of the 2018 DHS. Cent. Afr. J. Public Health 2021, 7(3), 121-126. doi: 10.11648/j.cajph.20210703.15
AMA Style
Ndeye Mareme Sougou, Jean Baptiste Niokhor Diouf, Oumar Bassoum, Ibrahima Seck. Analysis of the Determinants of Female Genital Mutilation Practices in Senegal: A Secondary Analysis of the 2018 DHS. Cent Afr J Public Health. 2021;7(3):121-126. doi: 10.11648/j.cajph.20210703.15
@article{10.11648/j.cajph.20210703.15, author = {Ndeye Mareme Sougou and Jean Baptiste Niokhor Diouf and Oumar Bassoum and Ibrahima Seck}, title = {Analysis of the Determinants of Female Genital Mutilation Practices in Senegal: A Secondary Analysis of the 2018 DHS}, journal = {Central African Journal of Public Health}, volume = {7}, number = {3}, pages = {121-126}, doi = {10.11648/j.cajph.20210703.15}, url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.cajph.20210703.15}, eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.cajph.20210703.15}, abstract = {Introduction: Female genital mutilation (FGM), also known as female genital cutting or circumcision, threatens the health and well-being of millions of girls, women, and their children around the world. In Senegal, FGM practices persist despite numerous interventions. This study aims to analyze the determinants of FGM in Senegal. Methods: This article uses data from the 2018 Senegal Demographic and Health Survey (DHS), a nationally representative survey of 9413 women aged 15-49 years. In the descriptive analysis, variables were presented in terms of frequency and percentage of data. The significance level was set at 5, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used. Variables with p values less than 0.25 in the bivariate analysis were selected for multivariate analysis. The dependent variable was a composite variable generated from 3 DHS variables that described the types of post-FGM genital lesions that exist in women. The analysis was performed using STATA/SE 17. Results: The prevalence of FGM is 17.14%. Eleven-point fifty-two percent (11.52%) or 999 women believe that FGM is a religiously recommended practice. Ninety-nine percent (993) of these women were Muslim (p=0.0017). Fifteen-point thirty-nine percent (15.39%) or 1,334 women think it is a practice that should continue to be practiced and 80.59% (or 6,988 women) think it should be stopped. The protective factors for the occurrence of FGM were female empowerment (high level of education of the woman (primary ajOR=0.64 [0.50-0.83] and secondary ajOR=0.43 [0.32, 0.57]) and the fact that the head of the family was a woman ajOR (0.75 [0.59-0.97]); belonging to the central region of Senegal (Diourbel, Kaolack, Thiès, Louga and Fatcick) and Christian religion (ajOr=0.05 [0.02-0.13]). The risk factors for female genital mutilation in Senegal were ethnicity and belonging to certain regions in the northeast and southeast of Senegal (Tambacounda, Matam, Kedougou). Conclusion: This study showed that FGM practices are still persistent in Senegal. This study underlined that the empowerment of women would allow the fight against FGM. Health interventions should be multisectoral, involving the education sectors with a strong investment in girls' education and retention.}, year = {2021} }
TY - JOUR T1 - Analysis of the Determinants of Female Genital Mutilation Practices in Senegal: A Secondary Analysis of the 2018 DHS AU - Ndeye Mareme Sougou AU - Jean Baptiste Niokhor Diouf AU - Oumar Bassoum AU - Ibrahima Seck Y1 - 2021/05/31 PY - 2021 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.cajph.20210703.15 DO - 10.11648/j.cajph.20210703.15 T2 - Central African Journal of Public Health JF - Central African Journal of Public Health JO - Central African Journal of Public Health SP - 121 EP - 126 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2575-5781 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.cajph.20210703.15 AB - Introduction: Female genital mutilation (FGM), also known as female genital cutting or circumcision, threatens the health and well-being of millions of girls, women, and their children around the world. In Senegal, FGM practices persist despite numerous interventions. This study aims to analyze the determinants of FGM in Senegal. Methods: This article uses data from the 2018 Senegal Demographic and Health Survey (DHS), a nationally representative survey of 9413 women aged 15-49 years. In the descriptive analysis, variables were presented in terms of frequency and percentage of data. The significance level was set at 5, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used. Variables with p values less than 0.25 in the bivariate analysis were selected for multivariate analysis. The dependent variable was a composite variable generated from 3 DHS variables that described the types of post-FGM genital lesions that exist in women. The analysis was performed using STATA/SE 17. Results: The prevalence of FGM is 17.14%. Eleven-point fifty-two percent (11.52%) or 999 women believe that FGM is a religiously recommended practice. Ninety-nine percent (993) of these women were Muslim (p=0.0017). Fifteen-point thirty-nine percent (15.39%) or 1,334 women think it is a practice that should continue to be practiced and 80.59% (or 6,988 women) think it should be stopped. The protective factors for the occurrence of FGM were female empowerment (high level of education of the woman (primary ajOR=0.64 [0.50-0.83] and secondary ajOR=0.43 [0.32, 0.57]) and the fact that the head of the family was a woman ajOR (0.75 [0.59-0.97]); belonging to the central region of Senegal (Diourbel, Kaolack, Thiès, Louga and Fatcick) and Christian religion (ajOr=0.05 [0.02-0.13]). The risk factors for female genital mutilation in Senegal were ethnicity and belonging to certain regions in the northeast and southeast of Senegal (Tambacounda, Matam, Kedougou). Conclusion: This study showed that FGM practices are still persistent in Senegal. This study underlined that the empowerment of women would allow the fight against FGM. Health interventions should be multisectoral, involving the education sectors with a strong investment in girls' education and retention. VL - 7 IS - 3 ER -