Persistent female genital mutilation despite its illegality: Narratives from women and men in northern Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Globally, an estimated two million women have undergone Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), and approximately four percent of women who have been circumcised live in Ghana. In the Bawku Municipality and Pusiga District, sixty one percent of women have undergone the procedure. This study therefore aimed at identifying the factors that sustain the practice of FGM despite its illegality, in the Bawku Municipality and the Pusiga District. METHOD: This study used a descriptive qualitative design based on grounded theory. We used purposive sampling to identify and recruit community stakeholders, and then used the snowball sampling to identify, recruit, and interview circumcised women. We then used community stakeholders to identify two types of focus group participants: men and women of reproductive age and older men and women from the community. In-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted and qualitative analysis undertaken to develop a conceptual framework for understanding both the roots and the drivers of FGM. RESULTS: Historical traditions and religious rites preserve FGM and ensure its continuity, and older women and peers are a source of support for the practice through the pressure they exert. The easy movement of women across borders (to where FGM is still practice) helps to perpetuate the practice, as does the belief that FGM will preserve virginity and reduce promiscuity. In addition, male dominance and lack of female autonomy ensures continuation of the practice. CONCLUSION: Female Genital Mutilation continues to persist despite its illegality because of social pressure on women/girls to conform to social norms, peer acceptance, fear of criticism and religious reasons. Implementing interventions targeting border towns, religious leaders and their followers, older men and women and younger men and women will help eradicate the practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".