Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday July 14 2017, @03:25PM   Printer-friendly
from the cut-it-out! dept.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/07/12/536863961/michigan-laws-will-increase-penalties-for-performing-female-genital-mutilation

New legislation signed into law by Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder on Tuesday makes female genital mutilation a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison. The laws apply both to doctors who conduct the procedure and parents who transport a child to undergo it. "Those who commit these horrendous crimes should be held accountable for their actions, and these bills stiffen the penalties for offenders while providing additional support to victims," Gov. Snyder said in a statement. "This legislation is an important step toward eliminating this despicable practice in Michigan while empowering victims to find healing and justice."

The governor also signed a bill allowing for a health professional's license or registration to be revoked if he or she is convicted of female genital mutilation.

Michigan is the 26th state to ban the practice; the state laws go into effect in October. The practice was banned in the United States in 1996, but Michigan's laws impose harsher penalties than the federal law. The package of bills comes amid the federal criminal trial of an emergency room doctor in Michigan, Jumana Nagarwala, charged with performing the procedure on multiple girls at a clinic in suburban Detroit. The Department of Justice says it believes the case is the first to be brought under the federal law. Another doctor and his wife are also charged in the case, the AP reports.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by jcross on Sunday July 16 2017, @03:01PM

    by jcross (4009) on Sunday July 16 2017, @03:01PM (#539901)

    Thanks for the clarification.

    > I do find it interesting that it's often that those who decry the "nanny state" (e.g., attempting to criminalize parents who let their kids walk home alone), yet demand that the same state prevent parents from making health choices for their minor children.

    Actually this is no contradiction at all if what you believe in is freedom, and consider the rights of children on an equal footing with the rights of adults as much as possible. I think the most basic reason to have a government at all is to protect the rights of the weak from the strong, because if you don't want that then anarchy will work just fine in many respects. Unfortunately, although US law purports to protect the "natural rights of man", there is a cutoff at age 18 or so below which these rights don't apply. I'm not going to enumerate all the constraints on children's rights, and you may argue they're all necessary in any case, but just consider that a parent assaulting their child is perfectly legal as long as the marks don't last more than 24 hours. So if you believe that freedom is good for children, allowing parents the freedom to grant their children freedom is good (e.g. kids can walk home alone), and so is protecting the freedom of children from their parents in extreme cases (e.g. no elective surgery without consent).

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2