How faith and social norms block young mothers from returning to school

It was March 1994 when Elizabeth Masiga, then a deputy inspector of schools, announced that the government had set up a programme to allow girls who dropped out due to pregnancy to return to school. Four years later, implementation guidelines were issued. The policy was comprehensively documented in 2007, and at the end of 2020, a new version of the re-entry guidelines was released.

Three decades later, the policy is back in the spotlight, and the verdict is damning.

A new study launched last week by Advancing Learning and Innovation on Gender Norms, a digital platform on gender justice and equality, has concluded that "implementation challenges are shaped not only by administrative gaps, but also by faith-based beliefs and gender norms." Based on research conducted in Kajiado, Kibra (Nairobi) and Nyeri, the study adds that the gap between policy aims and implementation is "the result of a wider social system that often overrides the law."

Also read: As schools reopen, adolescent mothers are still left at the gate

Why such a blunt verdict?

Around 57 per cent of the girl-mothers in the study had not returned to school since giving birth because of faith-based and gendered expectations that recast a legal right as something to be negotiated. The sticking point, the report notes, is that the girls are viewed "through a moral lens" rather than as rights-holders deserving of a second chance.

The policy guidelines, the report argues, are more aspirational than practical. They imagine and provide for "unconditional re-admission to school, flexible examination arrangements and breastfeeding support for girl-mothers, as well as mandatory reporting of the perpetrators." Yet these ideals do not translate into "change in social attitudes and institutional practices that determine whether a girl is genuinely supported to return and remain in school."

In the view of one faith leader in Nyeri, "the girl receives no justice, loses her chance to return to school and nobody points a finger at the perpetrator." This remark cuts to the heart of the problem: as long as perpetrators are not held to account, the issue will continue to fester.

Implementation is further constrained by what the study calls the 'triple shift', the three burdens of managing schoolwork, childcare and domestic responsibilities. Many schools, it observes, "lack spaces for breastfeeding or rest" and "are rarely designed with the needs of girl-mothers in mind." The consequences are stark: affected girls sit national examinations under extremely difficult conditions, even when they are in labour or immediately after delivery.

A stark irony is the discordance between apparent religiosity and actual practice. The report wonders why 82 per cent of respondents, who describe themselves as regular participants in religious life, still end up pregnant. If religious grooming does not influence behaviour in practice, what then is its value?

The report provides a concise snapshot of the implementation gaps across four levels. At individual level, it states, “the education system often overlooks the physical realities of pregnancy and recovery after childbirth”. At household level, “faith-based beliefs and gender norms mean that a girl-mother is seen as someone marked by shame”. 

At institutional level, “schools and faith organisations often act as gatekeepers, placing reputation and moral control above legal obligations, with counselling becoming a form of surveillance rather than support, and reporting duties not always enforced”. And at national level, “unconditional re-admission still depends on the efforts of individual champions (positive deviants)” - teachers, faith leaders, and community actors who have taken positive steps to accommodate the affected girls, assisting them to deal with their situation and to recover their educational opportunities. This raises a critical question. Should a national policy be left to be implemented through such individuals and ad hoc mechanisms? 

Also read: Who will take me back? Child mothers trapped outside the return-to-school policy

The report makes broad recommendations. One, “national policy and governance should move from broad commitment to active enforcement”. In this regard, it proposes piloting of “a digital case-tracking system that requires school heads to record each pregnant learner’s re-entry journey, shifting accountability from the girl to the institution”. 

Others include formal deferment of examinations and accountability for boy-fathers and adult offenders. Two, “curriculum and teacher development should equip schools with practical tools rather than relying on moral messaging alone”. At the centre of this is the vexed comprehensive and age-appropriate sexuality education. Three, “institutional climate and community practice should be strengthened through direct engagement with faith institutions as potential partners in change”. Faith leaders are urged to abandon their moralistic standpoints and look at this as a social justice and child protection issue. Four, “knowledge generation should focus on identifying, documenting and testing the support models that are already working”. 

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, one question must be asked. When will girl pregnancy generate enough public outrage to move the Kenyan nation towards addressing it?  

The writer is a lecturer in Gender and Development Studies at South Eastern Kenya University ([email protected])