In the UK, there is a disconnect between how FGM is defined in law and how it is talked about in public. This article looks at why that contradiction exists.
FGM is often spoken about as something that happens elsewhere, to “other” people, in “other” communities, beyond the UK’s own responsibility. When harm is framed as distant, action slows, responsibility blurs, and abuse continues without being named or challenged. If we can’t talk about FGM, we can’t prevent it.
Neutrality protects systems, not people
FGM is frequently described as “sensitive” or “complex.” In practice, this framing often leads professionals to avoid direct language and delay decisive action. Neutrality is not a neutral act; It functions as a buffer for institutions. By institutions, we mean the systems and organisations with safeguarding responsibility or influence, including healthcare, local authorities, education, faith institutions, and the justice system.
Talking about and challenging FGM requires sensitivity; however, sensitivity should never replace safeguarding. When it does, systems respond incorrectly. Safeguarding thresholds rise, intervention is delayed, and professionals wait for certainty despite clear indicators of risk. Concerns are documented as contextual information rather than acted upon as safeguarding alerts. Decision-making becomes dispersed across services, leaving no single point of accountability. This is not an individual failure, but a systemic pattern in which uncertainty is managed instead of abuse being confronted.
FGM shows up across everyday parts of life: healthcare, education, social care, and the justice system. When the language used is vague or careful to the point of avoidance, then accountability weakens, and early chances to protect people are missed.
Polite avoidance leads to unequal protection
The consequences of this discomfort are not evenly felt. Evidence reviewed by the Women and Equalities Committee shows that access to specialist healthcare and appropriate support for FGM survivors varies significantly across the UK. Outcomes depend heavily on whether professionals are trained, confident, and empowered to engage directly.
Some survivors describe feeling shame or humiliation when they try to access care. When that happens, people are less likely to engage further with services. Which leads to a decrease in disclosures and an increase in risk, not because harm has stopped, but because people disengage. Avoidance does not reduce harm. It shifts the burden away from institutions (such as healthcare services, safeguarding bodies, and other public systems responsible for protection) and onto individuals who are already at risk.
Silence leaves survivors without language
A major blind spot in how FGM is handled is that many survivors aren’t aware of the language to name what happened to them. They may not know the term “female genital mutilation”, may have been told it is “normal”, and may only discover it when they access healthcare, often during cervical screening or pregnancy.
Speaking at a Savera UK FGM & Healthcare event in 2024, survivor ambassador Babs explained:
“About 85 – 90 per cent of survivors don’t know anything because in their society they are told that’s the norm – the pain, the suffering, all the problems that come with FGM, they are told that it’s part of life. It’s not. As healthcare professionals, we need to have these questions in us. We need to think about the perspective of the survivor.”
When professionals avoid naming FGM, they withhold essential information. Survivors are left unprepared for pain, complications, and the realities of pregnancy and childbirth. This is a failure of informed consent and safeguarding, not a matter of language choice.
If we want prevention and protection, FGM must be named plainly and explained clearly, so survivors can understand what has happened, what it means, and what care they have a right to.
FGM is a crime, but enforcement is weak
FGM has been illegal in the UK for decades, where there is a clear legal framework. Despite this, there have been only three convictions for FGM offences in England and Wales. This sits alongside evidence that FGM is occurring within the UK and that UK residents are being taken abroad and subjected to the harmful practice.
This gap exists because abuse that is not clearly identified is not responded to effectively. When FGM is misunderstood or minimised, safeguarding fails and survivor protection is delayed. Laws cannot protect people if the harm they address is treated as too uncomfortable to confront or is poorly understood across professional practice and communities. Where language is vague, enforcement weakens, and survivors and those at risk bear the consequences.
Survivors are not evidence; they are experts
FGM causes long-term physical, emotional, and psychosexual harm. Survivors often require specialist, lifelong care.
At Savera UK, we see how survivor expertise is routinely sidelined in policy discussions. Survivors are asked to provide testimony, but their analysis of risk, coercion, and system failure is rarely treated as authoritative.
When decision-makers prioritise abstract “evidence gaps” over lived expertise, care is delayed and prevention stalls. Survivors understand where systems fail because they have navigated those failures themselves. Their knowledge is not just an illustration of these failures. It is vital to ensure they do not happen again.
Why this matters to Savera UK
At Savera UK, we work with people at risk of or who have been subjected to FGM and other forms of ‘honour’-based abuse and harmful practices. The team regularly see risks missed not because warning signs are absent, but because they are misidentified or reframed as something else.
Their work is grounded in early intervention. To name the abuse early, centre survivor expertise, and challenge the idea that institutional discomfort should take priority over safeguarding.
FGM prevention depends on precision and clarity: in language, in data, and in decision-making. When systems default to caution rather than action, people are left exposed to ongoing harm.
If we can’t talk about it, we can’t prevent it
Prevention requires clarity. That means stating plainly that:
- FGM is a crime
- It happens in the UK
- FGM affects people assigned female at birth, including trans men and non-binary individuals (a reality that is often overlooked in public discussion)
However, prevention does not sit with professionals alone. It also sits with you, with all of us. In how willing we are to learn, talk, and challenge the silence. Talking about FGM does not cause harm, but avoiding it does. Open conversations at home, in communities, and online are often where awareness begins, and stigma breaks down.
FGM persists not because it is invisible, but because too many people still feel uncomfortable naming it and calling it out. We’re working to change that.
If you want to learn more about FGM, you can visit our free resources in our learning hub here.
