Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
User Journal

Iamthefallen's Journal: [Sick] 11 year old forced to undergo gyn exam 20

Journal by Iamthefallen

Uppsala, Sweden.
An eleven year old girl in Uppsala was taken from school by police and forced to undergo a gynecological exam.

But the suspicions that the girl had been mutilated turned out to be unfounded. Now the department of social services, county board of health services (Kinda*), and police have been reported.

The reason for the examination was that a nurse suspected that the girl had been taken away to undergo genital mutilation. The nurse reported her suspicions to social services who in turn reported it to police.

Ah how I miss ye olde country on days like these. Where children can be raped by the government without anyone losing their job or getting anything more than a stern talking to. If that.

The end result will be a half-assed excuse where the agencies involved blame the parents for acting suspcicios (Or, more likely, for being darkies), and how they had no choice but to act.

Sometimes, humanity sucks.

Happy Friday morning all.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

[Sick] 11 year old forced to undergo gyn exam

Comments Filter:
  • the way I am reading this is that they suspected she'd be mutilated not that the Gov't mutilated her.

    Seems to me they were doing the right thing although they appear to have been wrong.
    • Right. The govt suspected it, and were wrong. I tend to think there are better ways of handling it than to have police take her away for a forced exam.
      • by ellem (147712) *
        well... but the thing of it is a scared child might not diviluge the truth if they were molested/mutilated by a family member and unlike molestation this is pretty easy to spot.

        Let's see, nope, no clitoris.
        • A scared 11 year old child might not divulge details concerning their private parts when prompted by a nurse.

          Which is what started the whole thing.

          If you're going to take a kid away for any exam without parental consent, you better be real fucking sure that you're going to find something.
          • by ellem (147712) *
            Look you're not likely to find many people who disdain government intervention more than I do.

            I just don't feel like there was any ill will or covert reasoning behind what they did.

            Perhaps you can spare a few grams of rage for the people that DO ACTUALLY mutilate their women that made the nurse suspicious in the first place?
            • I just don't feel like there was any ill will or covert reasoning behind what they did.

              Does that make it right or acceptable?

              I can almost guarantee that they think it was. Perhaps it's because I know the Swedish system and culture that this gets under my skin.

              You're taken away from your school by the police, by social services, the very people who are supposed to protect you, to undergo a humiliating and extremely invasive examination without consent. It turns out that they were wrong. They did this to you
            • Perhaps you can spare a few grams of rage for the people that DO ACTUALLY mutilate their women that made the nurse suspicious in the first place?


              What about parents who mutilate their boys? Removing a foreskin is like removing a clitoral hood. They are analogous organs.

              • by ellem (147712) *
                They remove their clitorises. More like ripping the ring off your cock. Or. Ow.
                • They remove their clitorises. More like ripping the ring off your cock. Or. Ow.

                  Not always. There are different levels. It's just easier to get people upset about it happening to girls by focusing on the most extreme version.
                  In some cases they sew the inner labia together, in some they remove them. In some cases, they remove the clitoral hood. Only in the most extreme (I think it's called pharaonic?) do they actually remove the clitoris.

                  Don't buy into the oversimplification of what's going on: whichever le

                  • by NeMon'ess (160583) *
                    Except that practitioners of female genital mutilation wait until the girl is old enough to remember it. Furthermore, how often is it done without anesthesia or under unsanitary conditions?
                    • Except that practitioners of female genital mutilation wait until the girl is old enough to remember it. Furthermore, how often is it done without anesthesia or under unsanitary conditions?

                      Do a little research, will you? In many cultures, male circumcision is the rite of passage to manhood. A stone knife or a razorblade, without anaesthesia (you would be surprised how many hospitals in the USA still performed it without anaesthesia on infants, up until recently), and definitely not in clean conditions.

                      Eve

                    • by NeMon'ess (160583) *
                      I happen to know I was circumcised without anesthesia, and I'm 25, so I'm not surprised.

                      Even in cases where it is done with anaesthesia and in infancy and in a clean setting, you still think that's acceptable?

                      Yes, because the man will still be able to have an orgasm.
                      No, because I am against parents indoctrinating their children with religion. If a religion is true for a person, he or she should be able to learn about it as a young adult and become a member of it. If a man chooses to embrace Judaism, he ca
                    • In the US, many infant boys are circumcised due to nothing more than cultural inertia. The rates are depressingly high [cirp.org] considering how few are getting it done for religious reasons.

                      Things are changing slowly. In my clinic, we have eight pediatric MDs. Six of them refuse to perform male circumcisions at all. (And of course none would do a female circ.) The other two do it only as a matter of customer service: if the parent insists it be done after being informed that it is not medically necessary or theraput
  • Nobody should be forced to undergo a gynecological exam.

    ~Some Woman, who tried with no success to hire Sparky4's services [slashdot.org] prior to her appointment this week.
  • Uppsala isn't in the United States, just so people know. Europe has a large number of East African immigrants, and they have a problem with people cutting off the parts of little girls. That's against the law, and the state does have a compelling interest in stopping the problem. The suspicion that the girl was mutilated was the basis of this examination. It turned out to be wrong, but I doubt that they just went right to the exam. They would have asked the girl questions first, and obviously the girl misle
    • You're projecting a US standard of evidence, and accountability, on Swedish government.

      That doesn't work.

      If nothing else, the fear of getting sued and/or fired would be enough to ensure that the parties involved had more than a suspicion. In Sweden neither one applies. I'm completely serious in that I believe that no one will face any punishment whatsoever because of this. Because there is no punishment, no risk, there's no reason for the government not to do it.

      You also assume that they asked questions, th
      • I think that's a fair criticism, since I'm pretty much ignorant of the laws and customs of Sweden. I worked in Stockholm for a few weeks a while ago, but it wasn't nearly long enough to learn the essential things.
  • by leoPetr (926753)
    I am with the Swedes on this. Genital mutilation of children needs to be stamped out. I don't have any problems with medical practitioners beings able to see people naked.
    • by FroMan (111520)
      With a sig like that, it sounds like you don't care what anyon sees! :-)

      I tend towards the outrage of the journal entry. This kind of behavior is found in the US already within the state and school systems. Schools will encourage and send children to abortion clinics without parental notification or consent. The idea that the state or school can impose medical care or even not notify parents of medical care is absurd.

      Parent's have all the rights and responsibilities for children up until the child is an
  • Children's protective services, wherever they are, face a terrible dilemma. If they intervene on insufficient evidence, they are seen as the most evil kind of government oppression. If they fail to intervene before harm is done, they are seen as the most evil kind of government negligence. And the evidence is almost always insufficient before the child has been obviously harmed. Worse still, even a proper intervention means placing the child in foster care, where the chances for additional abuse are depress

No problem is so formidable that you can't just walk away from it. -- C. Schulz

Working...