| Literature DB >> 23593257 |
Nacerdine Ouldzeidoune1, Joseph Keating, Jane Bertrand, Janet Rice.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To establish the prevalence of female genital mutilation (FGM) and force feeding (gavage) practices among children in Mauritania; to investigate factors related to FGM and gavage practices and attitude in Mauritania; and to explore implications related to the protection of children's rights and welfare.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23593257 PMCID: PMC3621896 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0060594
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Socio-demographic characteristics of the sample.
| Women (%) | Men (%) | |
| n = 7,728 | n = 2,191 | |
|
| ||
| Arab | 76.0 | 74.5 |
| Poular | 16.6 | 17.7 |
| Soninke | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| Wolof | 2.2 | 2.8 |
| Others | 1.0 | 0.8 |
|
| ||
| Single never married | 28.6 | 48.8 |
| Married | 58.8 | 48.9 |
| Divorced and widowed | 12.6 | 2.3 |
|
| ||
| Urban | 46.0 | 56.2 |
| Rural | 54.0 | 43.9 |
|
| ||
| Lowest | 35.1 | 28.1 |
| Second | 31.2 | 28.8 |
| Middle | 4.0 | 7.9 |
| Fourth | 16.4 | 20.9 |
| Highest | 13.3 | 14.3 |
|
| ||
| No | 30.5 | 21.1 |
| Koranic | 27 | 19.2 |
| Prim. Education | 27.8 | 26.1 |
| Second. Education | 13.6 | 28.3 |
| High (University) | 1.1 | 5.3 |
|
| ||
| 15–19 | 22.0 | 22.5 |
| 20–24 | 19.0 | 14.6 |
| 25–29 | 16.9 | 13.6 |
| 30–34 | 15.4 | 11.8 |
| 35–39 | 10.8 | 10.4 |
| 40–44 | 10.1 | 11.4 |
| 45–49 | 5.9 | 6.4 |
| 50–54 | – | 6.1 |
| 55–59 | – | 3.2 |
|
| ||
| Not working | 70.6 | 33.5 |
| Working | 29.4 | 66.2 |
Knowledge and attitude toward FGM.
| Women (%) | Men (%) | |
| n = 7,728 | n = 2,191 | |
|
| ||
| Yes | 91.7 | 82.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Social recognition | 34.8 | 29.6 |
| Curbs sexual desire | 31.2 | 25.1 |
| Religious requirement | 29.2 | 41.2 |
| Better for hygiene | 18.8 | 13.0 |
| Better chance to get married | 3.8 | 9.8 |
| Sexual desire of the other sex | 1.8 | 1.8 |
| Other | 8.5 | 10.6 |
| None | 21 | 19.9 |
|
| ||
| More sexual desire for women | 19.7 | 12.9 |
| Less health problems | 10.6 | 9.7 |
| Avoid suffering | 6.9 | 6.1 |
| More sexual desire for men | 5.7 | 4.9 |
| Less delivery problems | 4.4 | 1.6 |
| Accordance with religion | 2.4 | 3.4 |
| Other | 11.9 | 12.9 |
| None | 52.9 | 58.7 |
|
| ||
| Yes | 38 | 20.5 |
| No | 21.6 | 14.2 |
| Don’t know | 39.1 | 63.4 |
|
| ||
| Yes | 41.6 | 35.8 |
| No | 29.2 | 27.5 |
| Don’t know | 28.0 | 34.0 |
|
| ||
| Yes | 64.4 | 70.9 |
| No | 22.3 | 17.7 |
| It depends | 7.2 | 4.5 |
| Don’t know | 5.8 | 6.3 |
|
| ||
| Yes | 37.0 | 56.1 |
| No | 14.6 | 13.3 |
| It depends | 23.2 | 12.7 |
For some questions the columns do not equal 100% due to missing data.
Knowledge, attitudes, and intentions toward the practice of gavage.
| Women (%) | Men (%) | |
| n = 7,615 | n = 2,158 | |
|
| ||
| Yes | 93.7 | 91.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| More beautiful | 40.2 | 30.8 |
| Show the social level | 27.1 | 20.8 |
| More chances for marriage | 13.8 | 3.7 |
| Other | 4.4 | 6.4 |
| None | 39.8 | 54.5 |
| Don’t know | 5.8 | 4.7 |
|
| ||
| Better for health | 44.8 | 55.0 |
| Make it easier to work and move | 34.7 | 50.1 |
| More attractive | 10.4 | 9.3 |
| Avoid pain | 9.8 | 11.4 |
| Avoid ugly look when you lose weight | 7.0 | 7.4 |
| Facilitate pregnancy and delivery | 3.7 | 5.0 |
| Avoid stretch marks | 3.6 | 4.7 |
| More chance to get married | 2.6 | 1.3 |
| Sexual pleasure of women | 1.5 | 0.6 |
| Accordance (in line) with religion | 0.4 | 1.4 |
| Other | 3.1 | 2.6 |
| None | 24.6 | 23.7 |
| Don’t know | 9.0 | 7.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Bad for health | 52.8 | 58.2 |
| Hamper ability to work and move | 28.4 | 33.3 |
| Very painful | 11.6 | 15.9 |
| Very expensive | 10.1 | 13.0 |
| Difficulty for pregnancy and delivery | 8.7 | 8.4 |
| Against Gavage | 6.5 | 22.5 |
| Ugly if you lose weight | 5.8 | 4.0 |
| Stretch marks | 5.7 | 4.2 |
| Less chances for marriage | 1.1 | 1.8 |
| None | 19.6 | 19.4 |
| Others | 5.1 | 6.6 |
| Don’t know | 10.9 | 4.6 |
For some questions the columns do not equal 100% due to missing data.
Multivariate analysis of factors related to practice and attitude toward FGM.
| Favorable attitude for continuing FGM | Experienced FGM | ||
| Women (n = 6,074) | Men (n = 1,583) | Women (n = 7,048) | |
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||
| Wolof | Reference | Reference | Reference |
| Other ethnic groups | 7.71 (3.76–15.83) | 5.22 (2.51–10.86) | 7.61 (4.56–12.68) |
|
| |||
| Urban | Reference | Reference | Reference |
| Rural | 1.20 (0.82–1.75) | 2.82 (1.09–7.31) | 1.45(.95–2.20) |
|
| |||
| Lowest | Reference | Reference | Reference |
| Second | 0.98 (0.79–1.21) | 0.81 (0.48–1.39) | 1.08 (0.85–1.37) |
| Middle | 1.14 (0.79–1.65) | 0.84 (0.38–1.87) | 0.67 (0.46–0.97) |
| Fourth | 0.74 (0.58–0.94) | 0.50 (0.29–0.86) | 0.63 (0.48–0.81) |
| Highest | 0.37 (0.28–0.50) | 0.52 (0.28–0.93) | 0.45 (0.32–0.63) |
|
| |||
| No | Reference | Reference | Reference |
| Koranic | 0.68 (0.52–0.88) | 1.18 (0.65–2.16) | 1.36 (1.06–1.73) |
| Prim. Education | 0.60 (0.47–0.76) | 0.67 (0.39–1.17) | 0.93 (0.75–1.14) |
| Second. Education | 0.35 (0.27–0.46) | 0.49 (0.29–0.82) | 0.65 (0.52–0.82) |
| High (University) | 0.19 (0.11–0.33) | 0.29 (0.16–0.52) | 0.69 (0.39–1.23) |
|
| |||
| 15–19 | Reference | Reference | Reference |
| 20–24 | 0.78 (0.64–0.94) | 0.77 (0.47–1.27) | 1.00 (0.84–1.20) |
| 25–29 | 0.67 (0.54–0.83) | 0.69 (0.41–1.15) | 0.88 (0.70–1.10) |
| 30–34 | 0.65 (0.52–0.82) | 0.64 (0.36–1.14) | 1.14 (0.89–1.47) |
| 35–39 | 0.47 (0.37–0.61) | 1.05 (0.53–2.11) | 0.89 (0.66–1.20) |
| 40–44 | 0.72 (0.53–0.97) | 0.57 (0.31–1.08) | 1.02 (0.74–1.38) |
| 45–49 | 0.54 (0.38–0.75) | 1.00 (0.46–2.18) | 0.72 (0.52–1.00) |
| 50–54 | NA | 0.68 (0.30–1.50) | NA |
| 55–59 | NA | 0.76 (0.33–1.76) | NA |
|
| |||
| Not working | Reference | Reference | Reference |
| Working | 1.10 (0.92–1.31) | 0.92 (0.63–1.36) | 1.80 (1.51–2.15) |
|
| |||
| Rural | 1.78 (1.15–2.75) | 0.94(0.41–2.18) | 1.27(0.83–1.93) |
p<.001;
p<.05.
This analysis was done among those women who know (heard of) the practice of FGM; we excluded women who did not know of FGM, did not belong to one of the 4 major ethnic groups, and the missing variables.
This analysis was done among those women who either approve or disapprove the continuation of FGM; we excluded women who did not know of FGM, did not belong to one of the 4 major ethnic groups, and the missing variables.
Multivariate analysis of factors related to the practice and attitude toward gavage.
| Favorable attitude for continuing | Experienced | ||
| Women (n = 6,190) | Men (n = 1,803) | Women (n = 7,208) | |
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||
| Other ethnic groups | Reference | Reference | Reference |
| Arab | 4.96 (3.07–8.00) | 2.52 (1.53–4.18) | 17.46 (10.75–28.35) |
|
| |||
| Urban | Reference | Reference | Reference |
| Rural | 1.47 (1.13–1.92) | 1.33 (0.69–2.56) | 1.45 (1.12–1.89) |
|
| |||
| Lowest | Reference | Reference | Reference |
| Second | 0.76 (0.63–0.90) | 0.75 (0.54–1.04) | 0.91 (0.77–1.08) |
| Middle | 1.00 (0.70–1.43) | 1.01 (0.60–1.71) | 0.94 (0.68–1.28) |
| Fourth | 0.63 (0.50–0.79) | 0.52 (0.32–0.84) | 1.19 (0.95–1.50) |
| Highest | 0.58 (0.45–0.74) | 0.57 (0.34–0.95) | 1.23 (0.96–1.57) |
|
| |||
| No | Reference | Reference | Reference |
| Koranic | 0.77 (0.64–0.93) | 0.81 (0.56–1.18) | 2.13 (1.76–2.59) |
| Prim. Education | 0.64 (0.52–77) | 0.45 (0.31–0.66) | 1.27 (1.00–1.60) |
| Second. Education | 0.35 (0.28–0.44) | 0.32 (0.22–0.47) | 1.05 (0.79–1.39) |
| High (University) | 0.27 (0.15–0.50) | 0.13 (0.06–0.26) | 0.75 (0.41–1.35) |
|
| |||
| 15–19 | Reference | Reference | Reference |
| 20–24 | 0.86 (0.70–1.06) | 0.60 (0.40–0.92) | 1.43 (1.14–1.79) |
| 25–29 | 0.82 (0.66–1.02) | 0.69 (0.46–1.05) | 1.63 (1.28–2.07) |
| 30–34 | 0.75 (0.60–0.93) | 1.90 (0.52–1.56) | 2.18 (1.66–2.87) |
| 35–39 | 0.51 (0.40–0.67) | 0.54 (0.30–0.95) | 2.73 (2.10–3.55) |
| 40–44 | 0.49 (0.37–0.64) | 0.46 (0.25–0.86) | 4.10 (3.03–5.55) |
| 45–49 | 0.51 (0.38–0.68) | 0.50 (0.26–0.98) | 4.14 (3.02–5.67) |
| 50–54 | NA | 0.60 (0.29–1.24) | NA |
| 55–59 | NA | 0.55 (0.25–1.21) | NA |
|
| |||
| Not working | Reference | Reference | Reference |
| Working | 0.84 (0.69–1.03) | 1.56 (1.06–2.29) | 1.01 (0.85–1.20) |
|
| |||
| Rural | 1.67 (1.22–2.28) | 0.75 (0.40–1.39) | 0.69 (0.51–0.93) |
p<.001;
p<.05.
This analysis was done among those women who know (heard of) the practice of gavage; we excluded women who did not know of gavage, did not belong to one of the 4 major ethnic groups, and the missing variables.
This analysis was done among those women who either approve or disapprove the continuation of gavage; we excluded women who did not know of gavage, did not belong to one of the 4 major ethnic groups, and the missing variables.