Female genital mutilation refers to all procedures involving partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons. It is a deeply entrenched – and deeply damaging – social and cultural norm in many places.

The practice can cause short- and long-term health complications including chronic pain, infections,, anxiety and depression, birth complications, infertility and, in the worst cases, death. It is internationally recognized as an extreme violation of the rights of women and girls.

In 2012, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted the first-ever resolution against female genital mutilation, calling for intensified global efforts to eliminate the practice. In 2015, female genital mutilation was included in the Sustainable Development Goals under Target 5.3, which calls for the elimination of all harmful practices.

Yet it remains widespread. In 2023, UNFPA estimated that nearly 4.3 million girls were at risk of female genital mutilation that year. Research also suggests that, if female genital mutilation continues at current rates, an estimated 68 million girls would be subjected to this practice between 2015 and 2030 in the 25 countries where it is routinely practised and where relevant data are available. But from 2020 through 2022, COVID-19 compounded the vulnerability of girls and women at risk of female genital mutilation. The pandemic further entrenched the gender inequalities, economic disparities and health risks faced by women and girls and disrupted programmes to prevent female genital mutilation and other harmful practices. UNFPA has estimated that, due to COVID-19, millions more cases of female genital mutilation could take place over the next decade if action is not scaled up.

In every society where it is practiced, female genital mutilation is a deeply entrenched social norm . In some societies, for example, it is considered a rite of passage. In others, it is seen as a prerequisite for marriage. Some religious communities, including those of Christian, Jewish and Muslim traditions, attribute the practice to their beliefs.

Because female genital mutilation may be considered an important part of a culture or identity, it can be difficult for families to decide against having their daughters subjected to it. People who reject the practice may face condemnation or ostracism, and their daughters are often considered ineligible for marriage. As a result, even parents who do not want their daughters to undergo female genital mutilation may feel compelled to participate.

Collective abandonment, in which a whole community chooses to no longer engage in female genital mutilation, is an effective way to end the practice. It ensures that no girl or family will be disadvantaged by the decision. Many experts hold that female genital mutilation will only end through collective abandonment.

The decision to collectively abandon the practice requires a process in which communities are encouraged to discuss and evaluate the traditions and beliefs that drive the practice, positive and negative effects of the practice and then discuss, reflect and reach consensus on abandonment. Issues on health and human rights  are raised in these dialogues, and local and grassroots organizations should play an important role in raising awareness and educating communities.

When communities choose to abandon female genital mutilation, they often participate in a collective public declaration to keep their girls unharmed or as perfect as they are born, such as signing and circulating a public statement or hosting festivities to celebrate the decision. Neighbouring communities are often invited to these events so they can see the successful process of abandonment, helping to build momentum for collective abandonment elsewhere.

According to recent UNFPA estimates, around one in four girls and women between the ages of 15 and 49 who have been subjected to female genital mutilation – amounting to 52 million people – by health workers. In some countries, this ratio can reach as high as three in four girls, withthe proportion twice as high among adolescents compared to older women).

Female genital mutilation can never be “safe” and there is no medical justification for the practice. Even when performed in a sterile environment by a health workerl, there can be serious consequences immediately and later in life. Medicalized female genital mutilation offers those subjected to it  a false sense of safety. Health workers who perform it are violating girls’ and women’s rights to life, to physical integrity and to health as well as violating their professional code of conduct to "do no harm".

UNFPA is working with the health sector and health workers, including midwives, to resist social pressure to perform female genital mutilation and to become advocates for prevention and protection in the communities they serve.

The  UNFPA-UNICEF Joint Programme on the Elimination of Female Genital Mutilation is the largest global programme to accelerate the elimination of the practice. The Joint Programme supports holistic and integrated approaches and interventions at global, regional, and national levels with the aim of establishing policy and legal frameworks, galvanising communities to abandon the harmful practice, providing related services, and supporting data and evidence generation to better inform advocacy and programme initiatives. The programme has been working in partnership with governments, civil society, communities and development partners at different levels.The Joint Programme provides direct support to 17 countries (Burkina Faso, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Kenya, Mali, Mauritania, Nigeria, Senegal, Somalia, Sudan, Uganda, and Yemen). It also has various initiatives and forums to share technical knowledge and expertise to other countries and organizations. 

UNFPA has also been undertaking various analyses that include estimating the cost and the new investments that must be made to achieve the elimination of the practice, returns from investing in ending the practice, estimating the number of girls at risk of undergoing the practice by 2030, and other related studies. 

Last updated 11 March 2024