Although an increasing number of African immigrants in the United States have experienced or are at risk of experiencing female genital cutting (FGC), there is limited research on the experiences of health care and social service practitioners who work with these individuals in the United States. This study employed indepth qualitative interviewing to understand the experiences, knowledge, and practices of 31 practitioners in New York who provide medical, mental health, and social services to African female immigrants who have experienced FGC. Results indicate that although all service providers demonstrated basic knowledge about the FGC procedure, many expressed uncertainty about its current legal standing in the United States and frustration about their lack of formal training in issues related to FGC. Recommendations include expanded training for service providers, especially mental health and social service providers, with the goal of providing more comprehensive and culturally informed holistic care to individuals affected by FGC. Public Significance StatementThis article documents the encounters of U.S. medical, psychological, and social service professionals who provide services to immigrant females who have experienced female genital cutting (FGC). As the prevalence of immigration from countries where FGC is widely practiced increases, it is increasingly important that health care practitioners in the U.S. understand how to provide culturally competent care to women who have experienced this procedure.

Given the increase of African immigrants from countries with high female genital cutting (FGC) prevalence, this study explored U.S. healthcare providers’ beliefs and attitudes regarding FGC. A total of 31 professionals who have provided services to FGC-experienced women in New York City were interviewed; data were analyzed using grounded theory. Results indicated that, although a majority of respondents emphasized maintaining a nonjudgmental and open-minded attitude toward clients’ experiences, some only focused on the negative aspects of FGC. Also, multifaceted efforts by providers to understand the cultural meanings of FGC and resolve their own cultural dissonance were identified. The implications for practice were discussed.

No abstract

No abstract