Forensic experts warn textbooks still promote discredited “virginity test” despite NMC directives

The new curriculum mandates that medical graduates be trained to inform courts that the two-finger test is unscientific. Representation pic/istock

Despite explicit directives from the National Medical Commission (NMC) to eliminate unscientific and discriminatory notions of "virginity" from medical education, several forensic medicine textbooks currently in circulation for the present academic year continue to retain outdated descriptions that indirectly legitimise the discredited "virginity test," forensic experts have warned. mid-day was the first to write on the directives from NMC.

Historically, forensic medicine textbooks described so-called "signs of virginity," such as the condition of the hymen, labia majora and minora, fourchette, clitoris and vaginal canal. They also promoted the insertion of one or two fingers to assess vaginal laxity - commonly referred to as the "finger test" to determine whether a woman was "accustomed to sexual intercourse" or to distinguish between virginity and defloration. These practices have long been criticised for lacking any scientific basis and for violating a woman's dignity, privacy and bodily autonomy.

Dr Indrajit Khandekar, professor, MGIMS

According to Dr Indrajit Khandekar, professor in the Department of Forensic Medicine at Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences (MGIMS), Sewagram, such concepts should have been completely removed from medical textbooks published after the NMC reforms. NMC had issued Competency-Based Medical Education (CBME) curriculum guidelines for the Under-Graduate Medical Education Board (UGMEB), released on September 12, 2024, it mentioned "Medical Textbooks should clearly state that these so-called signs of virginity were wrongly labelled in the past and have no scientific or evidentiary value," he said. "Medical graduates must also be trained to scientifically appraise and inform courts about the lack of validity of these tests, even when an examination is ordered."

The issue has been the subject of sustained advocacy by Dr Khandekar since 2011, when he began challenging the continued teaching and practice of virginity assessment in medico-legal examinations. Over the years, the campaign gained national attention, especially in the context of sexual assault cases, where such tests were often used to undermine survivors' credibility.

The revision

In 2022, following extensive deliberations, the NMC revised the undergraduate Forensic Medicine syllabus. The modified competencies explicitly declare that signs of virginity are unscientific, inhumane and discriminatory. The revised curriculum mandates that medical graduates be trained to inform courts that these tests lack any scientific foundation, even if such assessments are sought through judicial orders. Dr Khandekar was a member of the NMC expert committee that recommended these reforms.

Based on the committee's recommendations, the NMC also issued advisories to authors and publishers of medical textbooks, directing them to remove unscientific content related to virginity assessment and to update chapters in line with evidence-based medicine and human rights principles.

However, a review of recent editions of several forensic medicine textbooks suggests that compliance with these directives has been partial and largely cosmetic rather than substantive. While many textbooks now describe the finger test as "unscientific," they continue to include detailed descriptions of findings such as ease of finger insertion, vaginal laxity or the appearance of the hymen, often categorising women as "virgin," "false virgin," or "deflorated." Experts argue that such descriptions perpetuate the same myths under modified terminology.

In many cases, the revised NMC competencies are merely mentioned at the beginning of the chapter on virginity, while the main text reproduces older content on so-called signs of virginity almost verbatim. "Merely stating that the finger test is unscientific while continuing to teach its conclusions is misleading and dangerous," Dr Khandekar said. "There is no anatomical or clinical method to determine a woman's sexual history."

Why delay?

Asked the reason for the delay in implementation of NMC directives, Dr Khandekar said, "The NMC guidelines on virginity were issued at the end of 2022, so ideally textbook editions published from 2024 onwards should have incorporated these revisions. Unfortunately, recent editions continue to reproduce the same unscientific descriptions of so-called signs of virginity. I had expected these errors to be corrected in subsequent editions, but to my surprise, even 2025 editions retain the outdated content and continue to use finger insertion as a criterion to differentiate between ‘true' and ‘false' virginity. More concerning is the claim in some textbooks that while the finger test should not be conducted in rape cases, it may still be used in matrimonial disputes, such as divorce or nullity of marriage. It is difficult to understand how a test can suddenly become scientific and humane in matrimonial cases when it is acknowledged to be unscientific and inhumane in cases of sexual assault. This contradiction highlights the urgent need to challenge and correct these practices."

Medical myths

Global health authorities have consistently rejected the concept of virginity testing. The World Health Organisation (WHO) and other international bodies have stated that such examinations have no scientific basis and constitute a violation of human rights.

Experts are now calling for stricter enforcement of NMC directives and comprehensive revision of medical textbooks to ensure that outdated, harmful concepts are fully removed rather than superficially rebranded. They emphasise that ethical, evidence-based medical education is essential not only for protecting women's rights but also for ensuring that courts receive scientifically accurate medical opinions.

A forensic faculty from a city-based medical college said, "The two-finger test is unscientific, and its interpretation has no medical basis. We clearly instruct our students not to use terms such as ‘habituated to sexual intercourse'. In forensic medicine, this test has been declared scientifically invalid and therefore should not be performed. At our college, students are advised neither to conduct nor to record such examinations, including pelvic examinations of virgin girls for assessing sexual history. Doctors must provide courts with scientifically accurate opinions, as courts rely on medical expertise."

Expert view

Dr Rajesh Dhere, Secretary of the Indian Academy of Forensic Medicine and Chairman of the Junior Doctor Network, Indian Medical Association, Maharashtra

‘These guidelines must be strictly adhered to. Earlier, there was a mistaken belief that scientific examination in cases of sexual abuse or sexual assault depended on assessing the vaginal inlet. This approach was unscientific, and the Hon'ble High Court has clearly ruled that such tests, which are scientifically invalid and undermine the dignity of women, must be discontinued in practice. We no longer teach these methods. The problem lies in the fact that multiple textbooks are published by different authors without proper verification by competent authorities before they enter the market. There must be effective monitoring, especially of textbooks dealing with medico-legal instruction and procedures, as these are later relied upon as evidence in criminal proceedings. This is a serious concern, and the directions of the Hon'ble Court and the NMC guidelines must be followed strictly."