Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

IJIR publishes special/guest-edited issues and topical collections. The peer review process for articles included in topical collections/special issues is the same as the peer review process of the journal in general. Additionally, if the Guest Editors author an article in their topical collection/special issue, they will not handle the peer review process.​

Drawing and critiquing ethical distinctions among diverse forms of genital modification: Commentary on Fusaschi (2022)

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it


Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout


  1. American Psychological Association. Resolution on supporting sexual/gender diverse children and adolescents in schools. 2020.

  2. Brussels Collaboration on Bodily Integrity. Medically unnecessary genital cutting and the rights of the child: moving toward consensus. Am J Bioeth. 2019;19:17–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. The fundamental rights situation of intersex people. 2015.

  4. Kehrer I. Cuts into children’s future: a comparative analysis between FGM, male circumcision and intersex genital surgeries. Peace Hum Rights Gov. 2019;3:333–63.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Svoboda JS. Promoting genital autonomy by exploring commonalities between male, female, intersex, and cosmetic female genital cutting. Glob Discourse. 2013;3:237–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Promoting the human rights of and eliminating discrimination against intersex people. Assembly debate on 12 October 2017. 35th Sitting. Text adopted by the Assembly on 12 October 2017.

  7. United Nations Human Rights. Office of the high commissioner. Intersex awareness day. End violence and harmful medical practices on intersex children and adults. 2016.

  8. Chodzen G, Hidalgo MA, Chen D, Garofalo R. Minority stress factors associated with depression and anxiety among transgender and gender-nonconforming youth. J Adolesc Health. 2019;64:467–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Heylens G, Verroken C, De Cock S, T’Sjoen G, De Cuypere G. Effects of different steps in gender reassignment therapy on psychopathology: a prospective study of persons with a gender identity disorder. J Sex Med. 2014;11:119–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kraemer B, Delsignore A, Schnyder U, Hepp U. Body image and transsexualism. Psychopathology. 2008;41:96–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Weyers S, Elaut E, De Sutter P, Gerris J, T’Sjoen G, Heylens G, et al. Long-term assessment of the physical, mental, and sexual health among transsexual women. J Sex Med. 2009;6:752–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wierckx K, Van Caenegem E, Elaut E, Dedecker D, Van de Peer F, Toye K, et al. Quality of life and sexual health after sex reassignment surgery in transsexual men. J Sex Med. 2011;8:3379–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cornell University. Center for the study of inequality. What does the scholarly research say about the effect of gender transition on transgender well-being? Center for the study of inequality. 2017.

  14. Bustos VP, Bustos SS, Mascaro A, Del Corral G, Forte AJ, Ciudad P, et al. Regret after Gender-affirmation Surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2021;9:e3477.

  15. Hess J, Neto RR, Panic L, Rübben H, Senf W. Satisfaction with male-to-female gender reassignment surgery: results of a retrospective analysis. Dtsch Ärzteblatt Int. 2014;111:795–801.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



MC wrote the first draft based on his specialized knowledge on the subject. His knowledge was also key in the subsequent editing and translation process that MR conducted. MR was also the one in charge of revising the manuscript according to the editor’s indications.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Moises Catalan or Mariyka Emilova.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Catalan, M., Emilova, M. Drawing and critiquing ethical distinctions among diverse forms of genital modification: Commentary on Fusaschi (2022). Int J Impot Res 35, 16–17 (2023).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


Quick links