New de-infibulation clinic for Royal Women’s in Melbourne.

Aust Nurs J. 2011 Apr;18(9):39. New de-infibulation clinic for Royal Women’s in Melbourne. Waters J. Women’s Health Information Centre, Well Women’s Services, Royal Women’s Hospital, Melbourne. No abstract is available for this article. There is no LINK to view this article online.

Fashions in genital fashion: where is the line for physicians? Commentary on Veale and Daniels (2011).

Arch Sex Behav. 2012 Jun;41(3):735-6. Fashions in genital fashion: where is the line for physicians? Commentary on Veale and Daniels (2011). Levine SB. Center for Marital and Sexual Health, 23230 Chagrin Blvd., #350, Beachwood, OH 44122-5402, USA. stephenblevine@sbcglobal.net Comment in Arch Sex Behav. 2012 Aug;41(4):1057-8. Comment on Arch Sex Behav. 2012 Jun;41(3):725-30. No abstract available for thisContinue reading “Fashions in genital fashion: where is the line for physicians? Commentary on Veale and Daniels (2011).”

Assessing how a woman feels about her clitoris: commentary on Veale and Daniels (2011).

Arch Sex Behav. 2012 Jun;41(3):731-4. Assessing how a woman feels about her clitoris: commentary on Veale and Daniels (2011). Friedman RC. rcf2@columbia.edu Comment in Arch Sex Behav. 2012 Aug;41(4):1057-8. Comment on Arch Sex Behav. 2012 Jun;41(3):725-30. No abstract available for this article. No LINK to view this article online.

Female genital mutilation: whose problem, whose solution? Psychological damage is immense.

BMJ. 2006 Jul 29;333(7561):260. Female genital mutilation: whose problem, whose solution? Psychological damage is immense. Menage J. Comment on BMJ. 2006 Jul 15;333(7559):106-7. Editor—Conroy’s concerns about cosmetic surgery in the West are understandable, but he seems to have missed the fundamental differences between it and the genital mutilation of children. When a child is mutilated byContinue reading “Female genital mutilation: whose problem, whose solution? Psychological damage is immense.”

Sexual medicine: Pain and pleasure-reconstruction after female genital mutilation.

Nat Rev Urol. 2012 Aug 7. Sexual medicine: Pain and pleasure-reconstruction after female genital mutilation. Razzak M. In 2004, the French National Health Service began to subsidize surgical reconstruction to treat dyspareunia in women who had undergone genital mutilation. The operation is now also offered to those seeking to improve their sex lives and physicalContinue reading “Sexual medicine: Pain and pleasure-reconstruction after female genital mutilation.”

Comment: Reconstructive surgery for female genital mutilation.

Lancet. 2012 Jul 14;380(9837):90-2. Epub 2012 Jun 12. Reconstructive surgery for female genital mutilation. Abdulcadir J, Boulvain M, Petignat P. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva 1211, Switzerland. jasmine.abdulcadir@hcuge.ch Comment on Lancet. 2012 Jul 14;380(9837):134-41. This article can be purchased in this LINK

Reconstructive surgery after female genital mutilation: a prospective cohort study

The Lancet. 2012 July 380(9837):134 – 141. Reconstructive surgery after female genital mutilation: a prospective cohort study Foldes P, Cuzin B, Andro A ABSTRACT Women who have undergone female genital mutilation rarely have access to the reconstructive surgery that is now available. Our objective was to assess the immediate and long-term outcomes of this surgery.Continue reading “Reconstructive surgery after female genital mutilation: a prospective cohort study”

No (wo)man is an island–the influence of physicians’ personal predisposition to labia minora appearance on their clinical decision making: a cross-sectional survey.

J Sex Med. 2011 Aug;8(8):2377-85. 2011 May 19. No (wo)man is an island–the influence of physicians’ personal predisposition to labia minora appearance on their clinical decision making: a cross-sectional survey. Reitsma W, Mourits MJ, Koning M, Pascal A, van der Lei B. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen,Continue reading “No (wo)man is an island–the influence of physicians’ personal predisposition to labia minora appearance on their clinical decision making: a cross-sectional survey.”

Obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women with reversed and non-reversed type III female genital mutilation

International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. 2011 May; 113(2):141-143 Obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women with reversed and non-reversed type III female genital mutilation Raouf SA, Ball T, Hughes A, Holder R, Papaioannou S Abstract  Objective To record and compare obstetric and neonatal complication rates in women with reversed and non-reversed type III femalegenital mutilation (FGM). Methods A retrospective observational study comparing cesareanContinue reading “Obstetric and neonatal outcomes for women with reversed and non-reversed type III female genital mutilation”