Children in South African Families : Lives and Times [1 ed.] 9781443899918, 9781443897358

Citation preview

Children in South African Families

Children in South African Families: Lives and Times Edited by

Monde Makiwane, Mzikazi Nduna and Nene Ernest Khalema

Children in South African Families: Lives and Times Edited by Monde Makiwane, Mzikazi Nduna and Nene Ernest Khalema This book first published 2016 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2016 by Monde Makiwane, Mzikazi Nduna, Nene Ernest Khalema and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-9735-3 ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-9735-8

The support of the DST-NRF Centre of Excellence in Human Development towards this book is hereby acknowledged. Opinions expressed and conclusions arrived at, are those of the authors and are not necessarily to be attributed to the CoE in Human Development

CONTENTS

Abbreviations and Acronyms ...................................................................... x Foreword ................................................................................................... xii Sibongile Mkhabela Introduction .............................................................................................. xiv Children in South African Families Monde Makiwane, Nene Ernest Khalema, Ntombizonke A. Gumede and Mzikazi Nduna Chapter One ................................................................................................. 1 Children’s Rights in South African Families Jace Pillay Theme 1: Family Structure and Childbearing Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 24 Continuity and Change: Relationships, Childbearing and Children’s Living Arrangements Monde Makiwane, Ntombizonke A. Gumede and Stanley Molefi Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 41 The Lives and Times of Children in Child-Headed Households Jace Pillay Chapter Four .............................................................................................. 58 The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children in South Africa Pedzisai Ndagurwa and Nompumelelo Nzimande Theme 2: Parenting Chapter Five ............................................................................................ 116 Revisiting the Gendered Discourse on Parenting in South Africa Marlize Rabe

viii

Contents

Chapter Six .............................................................................................. 139 Parent-Child Sexuality Communication in the South African and African Context Nwabisa Jama-Shai and Sanele Mdanda Chapter Seven.......................................................................................... 166 Re-claiming the Significance of Ulwaluko Initiation Rite in the Eastern Cape, South Africa Anele Siswana Chapter Eight ........................................................................................... 183 Fathers’ Expectations of Traditional Male Initiation for their Sons: Implications for the Uptake of HIV Prophylactic Voluntary Medical Adult Male Circumcision Lynlee Howard-Payne and Brett Bowman Theme 3: Fatherhood Chapter Nine............................................................................................ 200 The Need for Research on Father-Daughter Relationships in South Africa Elmien Lesch and Frederika Scheffler Chapter Ten ............................................................................................. 227 “Where are we going to find him now?”: Mothers Dealing with Absent and Undisclosed Fathers Livhuhani Manyatshe Chapter Eleven ........................................................................................ 242 Coping Strategies and Resilience of Young Women with Absent Fathers in Soweto, South Africa Thandeka Mdletshe Theme 4: Support to Children Chapter Twelve ....................................................................................... 262 Psychological Support for Young Women in Distress: Eastern Cape, South Africa Mzikazi Nduna

Children in South African Families: Lives and Times

ix

Chapter Thirteen ...................................................................................... 280 Child Disability and the Family Wiedaad Slemming and Sadna Balton Conclusion ............................................................................................... 307 Contesting Children’s Positioning in South African Families Nene Ernest Khalema, Mohammed Vawda, Catherine Ndinda and Monde Makiwane Contributors ............................................................................................. 313

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ACRWC AIDS CBR CCD CDAT CDG CHH CRC CSG DHS DLA DSA EAs ECD EPC FAO GHS GPs HIV HIV/AIDS HRiE HSRC ICF IMCI KZN MDGs NDoH NDP NGOs NMF OLS PCA

African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of Children Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome Community-based rehabilitation Care for Child Development Australian Child Disability Assessment Tool Care dependency grant Child-headed households United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child Child Support Grant Demographic and Health Survey UK Disability Living Allowance Demographic Surveillance Area Enumeration areas Early Childhood Development Education Policy Consortium Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations General Household Survey General practitioners Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus and Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome Human Rights in Education Human Science Research Council International Classification on Functioning, Disability and Health Integrated Management of Childhood Illness KwaZulu-Natal Millennium Development Goals National Department of Health National Development Plan Non-governmental organizations Nelson Mandela Foundation Ordinary least squares Principal component analysis

Children in South African Families: Lives and Times

PCs PEPFAR PHC RDP RRR SA SAIRR SASH SDGs SES SSA StatsSA STD STIs TCC TMC TMI UK UNAIDS UNCRC UNCRPD UNICEF USA USAID VMAMC WHO

Principal components United States President’s Emergency Fund for AIDS Relief Primary health care Reconstruction and Development Programme Rights, Respect and Responsibility South Africa South Africa Institute of Race Relations South African Stress and Health Sustainable Development Goals Socioeconomic status Sub-Saharan Africa Statistics South Africa Sexually transmitted disease Sexually transmitted infections Thuthuzela Care Centre Traditional male circumcision Traditional male initiation United Kingdom United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities United Nations Children’s Fund United States of America United States Agency for International Development Voluntary medical adult male circumcision World Health Organization

xi

FOREWORD

As our democracy has matured and as our country has faced seismic changes, the life of the South African child has been coloured, moulded and forever altered. What childhood means, and the roles played by families has been challenged and similarly gone through significant change. This has created an urgent need in South Africa today for current and innovative policy responses which are in tune with the conditions in which the South African child exists. “Children in South African Families: Lives and Times” is a valuable and necessary tool that responds to this crucial need to understand childhood and the societal, political and economic complex which will determine security and resilience of the African child. Over the years, the lives of children have been heavily impacted upon by economic transformation, social changes, and political emancipation. This anthology grapples with the social phenomenon that is childhood, but rather than simply list factors that may affect children, the authors anchor their contributions through a shared regard for social connectedness, complex social change, and conceptions of social justice. In its vision “to change the way society treats its children and youth”, the Nelson Mandela Children’s Fund has made it a central tenant, not only to address the needs of children, but also to enter into conversation with the broader societies in which childhood is realised and secured. Noteworthy in this anthology is the authors' dedication to addressing varied economic and political realities, resulting in unequal experiences of childhood in a South Africa where severe deprivation and relative privilege live side by side. This book presents a comprehensive overview of the lives of African children in times of transition, transformation, and change some twenty-two years since political emancipation in South Africa. Of particular interest is an attempt to locate the child's experience within conceptions of family and revised notions of parenting and child raising. In our work at the Children's Fund we are constantly reminded that diverse family forms are central to understanding the child's experience. The family, in its multiple manifestations and various locations is the site of the many value systems impacting on South Africa’s children, and shaping the future of our societies. With a focus on communities as the context in which children exist; we engage with children's networks of

Children in South S African Families: Lives aand Times

xiii

support beyyond the traansition from traditional or indigenou us family structures too models of the nuclear family. But we advocate that the structure of the family should be embeedded in comm munity structu ures and a people's ressponsibility toowards childreen who may not be their sons and daughters. T This contribuution grappless with what ffamily meanss and the forms it haas taken in our commun nities, and trracks the un nraveling, questioning and reformulaation of the modern m South A African family y. The afffirmation of child and family f diverssity in Soutth Africa articulates a demand for varying v degreees of practicaal and policy responses r that prioritiise the differrent needs of o diverse fam amily forms. It is an understandinng that the Affrican family has taken maany dynamic structures s and researchh, policy and civil society action a needs tto dive deeply y into the different w worlds of chhildren. We can easily identify chilld-headed households as one suchh family form m, that not oonly means providing p material suupport for suuch families,, but requirees psycholog gical and emotional suupport througgh counselling g, parental guiidance and co ommunity engagementt in individuaal families. It therefore maakes perfect sense s that this book shhould be incoorporated into learning, praactice, and po olicy as a invaluable rresource for sccholars and ass well as deveelopment pracctitioners, policy makeers and child advocates. Fo or African phhilanthropic in nstitutions with a focuus on child deevelopment, the t book willl prove most useful in demonstratinng the links between theory y and practice . The Neelson Mandella Children’s Fund cham mpions a rights-based approach aas an integraal element in n the work of developm ment and philanthropiic organisatioons, as enshrined in the U UN Conventio on on the Rights of thhe Child. “Chiildren in South h African Fam milies: Lives and a Times ” underpins the diversity of South Afrrican childrenn’s experiences and the importance of adoptinng both chiildren’s righhts and Afrro-centric perspectivess to account for f the comm monality and ddiversity of ch hildhoods and routes too children's em mpowerment in i diverse fam mily systems.

Sibongile Mkhabela M Chief Execu utive Officer,, Nelson Man ndela Children’s Fund 28 July J 2016

INTRODUCTION CHILDREN IN SOUTH AFRICAN FAMILIES MONDE MAKIWANE, NENE ERNEST KHALEMA, NTOMBIZONKE A. GUMEDE AND MZIKAZI NDUNA

We have produced this volume to inform, motivate and strengthen scholarship about and an understanding of children’s lives in postapartheid South African families. In the twenty-two years since political emancipation, children in many South African families have experienced true transformation. Since 1994, South African children have been born with the freedom to be who they want to be, unchained by the apartheid restraints of the past. The majority of these children live in varying degrees of disadvantage and privilege. For some, childhood is a state of enjoyment, fun, fulfilment, and positive growth, with most social, economic, and psychological needs met on a daily basis. For others though, their childhood days are a state of daily struggle with a lack of very basic amenities such as shelter, clothing, food, education and clean water; they suffer from neglect, abuse, and the absence of responsive support systems, and they live in a constant state of insecurity and with little time for fun and enjoyment. Demographically, there are almost 19 million children in South Africa’s present population of approximately 53 million (Statistics SA 2014). The average young South African goes to school for 13 years, and does not receive further education after completion of high school. 96% of children aged between 0 and 17 years are enrolled in educational institutions. What is the other 4% doing? According to the United Nations millennium goals the country should have 100% of its children receiving education. Furthermore, in South Africa three in every five children younger than 17 years old are living in poor households with a total income less than R1, 200, mostly in rural areas (StatsSA 2012).

Children in South African Families: Lives and Times

xv

Additionally, every fifth child in SA suffers from hunger and undernutrition. Additionally, four out of ten children have to travel more than 30 minutes to the nearest available clinic, which can jeopardize their lives. Furthermore, one in twenty infants dies before their first birthday. Despite numerous policy interventions by the government [i.e. the Child Support Grant (CSG), and what the National Development Plan (NDP) stipulates], half of our children younger than 17 years old do not have access to a clean and reliable water supply in their house or yard. Even more so, one in three children younger than 17 lives in informal housing settlements; and, on a daily basis, three children are killed by perpetrators close to them (StatsSA 2012). As a signatory of Article 19 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), South Africa has an obligation to guarantee all children the right to protection from physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse. Article 19 obliges states to provide legislative, administrative, social and educational interventions to protect children from all forms of undignified treatment including sexual abuse by those who provide care to children. The Article further specifies the elements of the protective systems that States must establish for the purpose of monitoring progress towards achieving the rights and wellbeing of children: different forms of prevention measures; measures for identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment and continuous provision of services for children affected by abuse and neglect; support for those who care for children; and when appropriate the measures should include judicial involvement.

Focus of the Book In the post-apartheid era there is a growing demand to channel collective energy towards justice and equity in ensuring that children live fulfilled lives, and to better understand the social processes that influence children’s livelihoods. Caregivers, parents, frontline advocates for children, early childhood development (ECD) educators, and communities play key roles in responding to this demand, in building new knowledge, raising critical questions, and initiating policies and proactive actions that are responsive to children’s issues, with the goal of transforming children’s lives in South Africa. Utilizing key topics, contexts, approaches, methods, and capacities (old and new) in explaining and expanding what is known about children’s lives in South African families, this book focuses on the everyday socialization of children in South Africa, particularly black children within diverse families. There is currency in understanding

xvi

Introduction

children’s lives and their positions within families in South Africa. These are understood from a life course perspective which recognises that developments during childhood, adolescence and young adulthood influence wellbeing and socio-economic outcomes in later life, while understanding that a life course trajectory is shaped and influenced by what Dornan & Pells (2014) and Dornan & Ogando-Portela (2014) suggest are broader socio-economic factors. The family, therefore, represents a key social unit to which children are born and subsequently socialised within the life course. The composition of South African families is a complex pattern of nuclear, multigenerational, extended and re-constituted families. The historical overview of families in South Africa reveals significant changes over the years brought about by the impact of colonisation and apartheid on traditional African family systems. In addition to the colonial impositions, the processes of development, modernisation, and globalisation have had an impact on how we understand family systems. Unlike earlier prediction, couple-headed families have only emerged in a small section of society. The majority of families are multigenerational, extended and single-headed in nature. This book examines the nature of the contemporary South African family where the majority of children are born, supported, socialised and protected. More importantly, the book examines whether the South African family is in crisis, unable to perform its obligations to children; or has it adjusted to the changes and found novel ways to perform its duties?

Families, Households, and Children in South Africa The concepts of ‘family’ and ‘household’ are sometimes used interchangeably, although they do not mean the same thing. Household is a useful concept in quantitative studies, as it easily lends itself to quantitative analysis. Household refers to people who share a physical space and jointly provide themselves with food and other essentials of living. The individuals may pool their incomes and share some budget, and may be related or unrelated or a combination of both. On the other hand, family refers “to persons who are related to a specific degree, through blood, adoption or socially approved sexual union” (Makiwane and Chimere-Dan 2010). Adoption is prevalent in many cultures, although in some societies, especially non-western, it might not be accompanied by legal formalities. While a traditional western family is confined to two adults maintaining a socially approved sexual relationship with or without minor children who are their own or adopted, a traditional African family is usually extended to aunts, uncles, grandparents, cousins and other

Children in South African Families: Lives and Times

xvii

relatives. Obligations to a wider kin might be invoked at certain occasions, typically during crises, or sometimes during certain lifetime events. A family might belong to the same household or, as is common in South Africa, may be dispersed across households and sometimes may be located across vast geographical spaces. The family structure in South Africa has been impacted by a society that has suffered damaging domination over an extended period. While a traditional South African family has changed over time, a prototype Western family that is nuclear and dominated by an intimate couple relationship has only emerged in a few instances. The current South African family is in most instances multi-generational, co-existing with other emergent family types which include single-parent families, polygamous couple relationships, same-sex couples, and skipped generational, child-headed and reconstituted families. Factors that have influenced such changes are diverse and include modernisation, labour migration, the AIDS pandemic and the post-colonial and post-apartheid legal reforms. Many previous studies on family have concentrated on understanding the changes in the structure, and their antecedents. The modernisation theory and its variants have been the most frequently used lens to analyse family structural changes that are observed in many parts of the world. Industrial capitalism has been thought to have a homogenising effect on family structures leading to nuclearisation of families; Western and non-Western alike (see Burch 1967, Goode 1963, and Parsons 1951). In South Africa, this global theory was mostly expressed through ‘convergence thesis’, a project that sought to monitor how far was the black family teetering towards the conventional white family structure (Steyn 1993a 1993b). As a result of recent evidence, some of which is presented in this book, which shows that previous predictions of changes in family structures have not been realised, the approach of this book is to accept and affirm the diversity of family structures that exist in South Africa, and examine how these diverse family structures function, specifically focussing on how they raise the next generation. This change of focus is in line with a genre of family scholarship that is critical of the overemphasis of certain preferred family structures (Siqwana-Ndulo, 1998). This ideological bias has left a wide gap in the understanding of the dynamics of family life in changing African societies. The departure point of this book is that changes in the family structure, in conjunction with wider societal changes, have had a significant impact on family function. Historically, the functioning of the African family was underpinned by values of ubuntu that bound individuals beyond the

xviii

Introduction

confines of narrowly defined blood relations. This value is expressed in a popular African proverb, which has been cited in a number of chapters in this book, which states that ‘it takes a village to raise a child’. The values expressed in this proverb are also explained in Mandela’s biography ‘Long Walk to Freedom’. Mandela says: ‘My mother presided over three huts at Qunu, which as I remember, were always filled with babies and children of my relations. In fact, I hardly recall any occasion as a child when I was alone. In African culture, the sons and daughters of one’s aunts and uncles are considered brothers and sisters, not cousins.’

Mandela lost a father at the tender age of nine, and was left to be raised by a ‘single’ mother. Yet it would be a misnomer to refer to Mandela’s mother, Nosekeni, as a ‘single’ mother and Mandela as a paternal orphan. Such concepts did not exist in that society at the time. The Mandela household benefited from social parenting and, in the same way, other families who were less privileged also benefited from them. As SiqwanaNdulo (1998) stated, the institutions of family, marriage and household in African societies revolved around community. Thus, not only is the family formation broader, its function is greatly enhanced by being interlocked with the general community. The widespread practice of social parenting is one manifestation of how family and community worked in unison for the benefit of children. The book does not indulge in a nostalgic voyage into the past, for those days when the extended family and the community worked in unison are gone. It is neither an exercise in explaining how the family institution adapted to the onslaught of colonialism and apartheid nor is it based on how the newly established rights-based society has or has not been able to reach children locked in South African families. It is also not a rehash of the often told African story of a clash between modernity and traditionalism. The book is not meant to narrate an aftermath of a society that has been one of the worst ravaged by a 21st century pandemic. Rather, it is about the functioning of the contemporary South African family that is impacted by all of the mentioned issues.

Organization of the Volume Following this introductory chapter, the book begins with a critical exposé of a children’s rights framework to conceptualize the role of families in the lives of children in South Africa. This commentary chapter (Chapter 1) emphasizes the importance of collective justice and equity by

Children in South African Families: Lives and Times

xix

highlighting complications in the implementation of a children’s rights framework in South Africa. The chapter gives particular attention to the changing dynamics of South African families and their impact on children’s rights. Following this commentary chapter, the book proceeds by highlighting four themes, which include: 1) family structure and childbearing; 2) parenting; 3) fatherhood; and 4) support for children. Theme 1- family structure and childbearing - Chapter 2 tackles the issue of how family formations have drifted beyond the boundaries of the marriage establishment. Reproductive life - which was constituted within this institution – has broken into new paradigms with an escalation of childbearing couples who do not live together. Chapter 3 highlights the notable growth of child-headed households in South Africa and looks at the everyday lives and lived experiences of children in child-headed households. The chapter further examines adaptations, adjustments and survival mechanisms of children from child-headed families within an African socio-cultural context of child rearing practices. Chapter 4 investigates the impact of family structure on schooling outcomes for children as measured by odds of school enrolment, grade repetition and average highest grade completed at any given time for children in South Africa. Theme 2 – Parenting - Chapter 5 explores the fluidity of parenting in South Africa. It provides an overview of parental realities within South Africa in order to analyse parental dynamics or relational aspects in more detail. It seeks to understand how mothers and fathers in South Africa are trying to cope with the demands of parenting by drawing our attention to similarities, differences and the difference which differences may entail. Chapter 6 explores the nature and practice of sexuality communication between parents & children, particularly adolescent girls, and the factors which promote or impede sexuality communication between a parent and a child. Chapter 7 explores the lived experiences of young amaXhosa men in relation to Ulwaluko kwa Xhosa traditional male initiation [TMI]) and its impact on their sense of masculinity. Chapter 8 raises important questions about the role of fathers in their adult sons’ lives, health and decisionmaking regarding their bodies, and the impact of this on the uptake of HIV interventions such as VMAMC in South Africa. Theme 3 – Fatherhood - Chapter 9 draws attention to the importance of father-daughter relationships, and highlights the need for research on this relationship dyad in South Africa. Chapter 10 explores the probable reasons why mothers and guardians do not disclose the identity of the

xx

Introduction

biological fathers to the children under their care. Chapter 11 seeks to investigate what makes some children more resilient and able to cope with having an absent father, in comparison to others who are not able to cope with this. Theme 4 - Support to children - Chapter 12 describes strategies used by young women in accessing psychosocial help in the small town of Butterworth in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Its focus is on the subjective experiences of distress. Chapter 13 examines the issues of the support and assistance required by children and their families that will enable them to realise their rights, as outlined in international and national legal instruments, and to function optimally as a family unit. The conclusion offers a collection of ideas that summarise some of the important points highlighted by the authors, reflects on the implications of those findings arising from the review of the collected works, and discusses emerging key issues. The emerging issues are by no means absolute, but will guide further discussion about the nature of family dynamics and children’s welfare with respect to: family structure, child bearing and wellbeing; parenting; fatherhood; and support to children in South Africa. While some ideas are distinctive and cut across themes as highlighted in the chapters, this concluding chapter centers on a brief discussion on further interrogation, placing the family and children in those families at the center of the synthesis.

References Dornan, P. and M. J. Ogando Portela 2014. How Does Where Children Live Affect How They Develop? Evidence from Communities in Ethiopia and Vietnam, Chapter 1 in M. Bourdillon and J. Boyden, Growing up in Poverty: Findings from Young Lives, London: Palgrave. Dornan, P and K. Pells 2014. From Infancy to Adolescence: Growing Up in Poverty, Preliminary Findings from Round 4 of Young Lives, Oxford: Young Lives. Makiwane M. and Chimere-Dan O. 2010. “The people Matter”: The state of the Eastern Cape Population. A report prepared for the Eastern Cape Department of Social Development, Unpublished. Burch, J. 1967. “The size and structure of families: A comparative analysis of census data”. American Sociological Review 32(3): 347-363. Goode, W. 1963. World Revolution and Family patterns. New York: Free Press.

Children in South African Families: Lives and Times

xxi

Parsons, T. 1951. The structure of social action. New York: The Free Press. Statistics SA 2014. Statistical release P0302. Pretoria. http://www.stassa.gov.za/publications/p0302/p03022014.pdf Steyn, A. (1993a). Gesinlewe in die RSA. Kooperatiewe Navorsingsprogram oor die Huweliks- en Gesinslewe, RGN Verslag HG/MF-4. —. (1993b). Stedelike gesinstrukture in die Republiek van Suid-Afrika, South African Journal of Sociology 24 Siqwana-Ndulo, N. 1998. Rural African Family Structure in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 29:2, pp. 407-417. Statssa (2012) Census_2011_municipal_factsheet.pdf Report No. 03-0158 Pretoria.

CHAPTER ONE CHILDREN’S RIGHTS IN SOUTH AFRICAN FAMILIES JACE PILLAY

“Children don't vote but adults who do must stand up and vote for them”

2

Chapter One

Introduction There are various chapters in this book that shed light directly on the experiences of children in South African families. For example, one of the earliest chapters focuses on the complex relationships that result in the birth of children. Subsequent chapters articulate the challenges of children growing in changing family structures, such as single-parent, absent father, and child-headed families. The author of this chapter asserts that a critical understanding of children’s rights within families is essential for the conceptualization of the role that families play in the lives of children in South Africa, as depicted in other chapters in this book. Hence, this chapter commences with an emphasis on the inception of children’s rights and their implementation in South Africa. Particular attention is paid to the changing dynamics of South African families and their impact on children’s rights. The author then summarizes findings of a study he conducted on the advancement of children’s rights in South Africa and explores the implications of the results for children’s rights in South African families. Finally, the author proposes the adoption of a social justice framework embedded in a rights-based approach to promote children’s rights in South Africa.

Inception of children’s rights The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), held in 1989, coordinated a worldwide focus on children’s rights (Covell and Howe 1999; Covell and Howe 2001; Gose 2002; Howe and Covell 2007; Covell et al. 2009). The UNCRC defines children’s rights as: “… a set of universal entitlements for every child and young person below the age of 18. These entitlements apply to children of every background and encompass what they need to survive and have opportunities to lead stable, rewarding lives.” (Save the Children 2006, 4).

The definition of children’s rights is controversial because it is dependent on different people’s views about children, childhood, and the disciplines from which they interact with children (Franklin 2001; Arts and Popvoski 2006; Covell et al. 2010; Pillay 2014a). The problems around the definition of children’s rights are further compounded by the wide spectrum of civil, cultural, economic, social and political rights that children are entitled to. All of these rights have a common purpose of empowering and protecting children (Mangold 2002), through: provision, which relates to the right to adequate education and health services

Children’s Rights in South African Families

3

(Freeman 2000); protection, which is the right to be protected from all forms of abuse, neglect and discrimination (Hodgkin and Newell 2007; Nikku 2013); and participation, which concerns children as decisionmakers in community programmes (Viviers 2010; Viviers and Lombard 2013). Generally children’s rights fall into four categories, namely: the rights to survive, to be safe, to belong, and to develop. Despite the challenges around the definition of children’s rights, its acceptance by the UNCRC has resulted in numerous activities across the globe directed at promoting the rights of children (Verhellen 1993; Verhellen 1994; Detrick 1999; Ludbrook 2000; Smith 2000, Smith 2002; Child Rights Information Network 2008). As early as the 1990’s, countries such as Belgium (DeCoene and De Cock 1996) and Canada (Covell and Howe 1999; Covell and Howe 2001) recognized education as a vehicle to promote children’s rights, and designed programmes for use in schools to educate children about their rights. Robust programmes on children’s rights have been developed over the years. For example, the Rights, Respect and Responsibility (RRR) initiative in Hampshire County, England, is known as one of the best models of children’s human rights education (Covell et al. 2010; Covell and Howe 2008). Its purpose was to transform school cultures, build shared values, and promote educational practices based on the principles of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). In New Zealand the Human Rights in Education/Mana Tika Tangata (HRiE) initiative, based on children’s rights and improved academic achievement of all children, aimed at developing positive school cultures from early childhood (HRiE 2009). Even where the initiatives of education departments around the globe are recognized and appreciated, it can be argued that they are not the only ones responsible for the promotion of children’s rights. Children are part of various systems and sub-systems which require an interactive and holistic approach. As such, Bronfenbrenner’s bio-ecological systems model (1986) provides an ideal theoretical perspective for the conceptualization of children’s rights. The family is the first system in which children find themselves, giving rise to the expectation that the parents, as their first custodians, know children’s rights and how to implement them. As children grow older, their rights should be extended into other systems with which they interact, such as other families, peers, schools, communities, and places of worship. The role of the family plays a pivotal role in the understanding, implementation and advancement of children’s rights. The focus on the family in this chapter should not undermine the importance of other systems which function interactively to provide a holistic experience of children’s rights. In alignment with the

4

Chapter One

focus of this chapter, and the book as a whole, the transitions in South African families are discussed next.

South African families A single definition of the family may be contentious since families differ in various ways. In the South African context, the definition of the family is complicated by the inclusion of not only nuclear families, but also extended families, care-givers and guardians (Holborn and Eddy 2011). The following definition, presented in the Green Paper on Families by the Department of Social Development (RSA 2011, 73), will be adopted in the context of this chapter: “A family is a group of persons united by the ties of marriage, blood, adoption or cohabitation, characterised by a common residence (household) or not, interacting and communicating with one another in their respective family roles, maintaining a common culture and governed by family rules.” Generally, definitions of family have positive connotations, such as: a family is a pillar of society; it provides psycho-emotional and economic support to its members; it is responsible for socialization, nurturing and care, and the transmission of values, norms and morals (RSA 2011). However, families can also be viewed negatively, especially in the reinforcement of patriarchal traditions and the oppression of women. Historically, family life in South Africa has been shaped by industrialization, urbanization, the migrant labour system, colonialism, apartheid, race and economic relations (RSA 2011). All of these factors placed, and continue to place, considerable strain on the African family. For example, the absence of able-bodied men in African villages, due to the migrant labour system, resulted in absent fathers and female-headed households (RSA 2011). The ravaging effects of poverty and HIV/AIDS have also radically changed family structures in the country (see below for a more detailed discussion). Census 2011 (Statistics South Africa 2012) shows the following: there is an increase in the number of couples that are cohabiting and delaying marriage; 15 per cent of households have female breadwinners; and a quarter of South African households have ‘other’ family structures, such as grandmothers living with their grandchildren, gay couples, and child-headed households. Children living in rural areas seem to be most affected by single-parent families, absent fathers and childheaded households. The above description of South African families shows that many children grow up in unsafe and insecure families. Whilst poverty and the effects of HIV/AIDS appear to be the primary contributory factors to this

Children’s Rights in South African Families

5

scenario, the effects of substance abuse, migrant labour and unresponsive parents must be taken into account. Clearly there are several challenges that negatively impact on children’s rights in South African families, and this is evident in the discussion that follows.

Right to an adequate standard of living Family income is a key factor that determines children’s standard of living. At the time of writing, the situation in South Africa is dire, with 11.9 million children (64%) living in poverty (RSA 2011). Almost four out of ten children live in homes where no member is employed, whilst seven out of ten children live in homes with no economically active family members (RSA 2011). The incidence of children suffering from hunger increased to 22 per cent in 2009, with most of this percentage made up of children in the poorest and female-headed households. There has been a moderate decline in child poverty due to the Child Support Grant, but many eligible children do not access this, mainly because of a lack of documentation. Almost 1.7 million children (9%) still live in informal settlements despite the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) or state-subsidised dwelling programmes (RSA 2011). Most children (83%) have access to safe water and sanitation but 1.4 million children (8%) have neither safe water nor toilet facilities in their homes.

Right to life and basic health Research has shown that, in South Africa, HIV/AIDS and poor care are major causes of the over 270 maternal and child deaths that occur daily (South African Human Rights Commission/UNICEF 2011). An alarming revelation is that almost 75 000 children die before they reach the age of five (South African Human Rights Commission/UNICEF, 2011). Even though the school nutrition programme reaches six out of ten children in public schools, one in five children are stunted, one in ten are underweight, and nearly five per cent suffer from wasting and are at risk of death (South African Human Rights Commission/UNICEF 2011, 34). However, antiretroviral therapy for children living with HIV has increased since 2010.

Right to early childhood development and education The South African government has made great progress in ensuring Grade R enrolment and community centre-based care for younger children.

6

Chapter One

However, only 43 per cent of children younger than five years are exposed to an early childhood development programme at home or elsewhere (RSA 2011). The right to education has been strongly promoted by the state through the provision of free education for poor children in public schools. Because of the free education policy school attendance has steadily increased at the primary school level. However, at the secondary school level almost 582 000 children are unable to attend school mainly for lack of money or because of disabilities. Learners perform poorly in international and national assessments, which indicate a major problem with the quality of education in South Africa. Research has shown that children from the poorest of households are more likely to repeat grades, perform poorly and drop out of school (RSA 2011). Violence in schools has also become a barrier to learning, especially when children feel unsafe to go to school.

Right to a family environment and alternative care Statistics indicate that only one in three children in South Africa live with both biological parents, while one in five children have lost one or both parents (RSA 2011). The AIDS pandemic has resulted in an escalation in the number of orphans and child-headed households. The provision of alternative care has been quite successful in South Africa. For instance, many children have successfully been placed in foster care, children’s homes, industry schools, or back into the care of parents or caregivers under the supervision of a social worker (RSA 2011). The adoption of orphaned and abandoned children has increased to almost 6000 annually. However, there has been an increase in the number of cases of sexual and physical abuse of children in the country, often with close family members being the perpetrators.

Right to special protection The South African constitution makes provision for special protection of children who are in conflict with the law, or who may be open to exploitation. This special protection is offered through correctional services, secure care centres, places of safety or under home-based supervision. Rather than exposing them to the criminal justice system, child offenders are offered life skills or anger management programmes.

Children’s Rights in South African Families

7

Challenges to children’s rights in South African families In a study conducted to determine the advancement of children’s rights in South Africa, Pillay (2014a) intended to shed light on, and reach a deeper understanding of, children’s rights issues within the African context (Bless and Higson-Smith 1995). For the study, participants were purposively selected who were actively engaged in the promotion of children’s rights in South Africa (Henning et al. 2004; Krefting 1991; Merriam 1998; Merriam 2002). The sample was made up of eight reputable leaders in their fields: academics, policy analysts, directors of children’s centres, legal experts, and members of national, regional and international committees on children’s rights issues. The findings from the study shed light on some of the critical challenges facing the promotion of children’s rights in South African families.

Children’s rights and policies not adequately put into practice The study revealed that there has been a phenomenal advancement of children’s rights in South Africa through policies and instruments designed to protect the rights of children. This is explicit in the ratification by the South African government of the international legal framework for children’s rights, and is further endorsed by national legislation and policies, such as the Children's Act, the Child Justice Act, and the Schools Act. Undoubtedly, the legal framework has created the opportunity for all children in the country to receive the essential services that they were previously deprived of, for example, early childhood education, free prenatal care for pregnant mothers, and free health care facilities for impoverished communities. Policies that make it possible for extremely poor families to receive child grants have been welcomed. Even though the grant is small, it keeps many poor families from starvation. Many aspects of the legal framework provide for greater visibility of children in the community and society. However, it appears that most of the policies are only good on paper and do not necessarily materialise in practice. The reality is that the most needy children and families do not actually receive the services.

Negative effects of poverty It would be logical to expect that families living in abject poverty would experience difficulty in promoting children’s rights. The reality of

8

Chapter One

the situation is that 40 per cent of families in South Africa live in extreme poverty with the worst cases in the rural areas (Department of Education 2001). Numerous studies show a significant correlation between poverty and its negative influence on early childhood development (Lee, et al. 2006; Conger and Donnellan 2007; Crosby, et al. 2010; Duncan et al. 2010). This is evident in poor cognitive development (Shonkoff 2010; Huston 2011); lower educational achievements (Holzer et al. 2007); health problems (Grantham-McGregor et al. 2007); low positive social behaviour (Halle et al. 2009); and psychological problems (Pillay and Nesengani 2006; Pillay 2012; Pillay 2014b). The Department of Education (2001, 12) stated that “children raised in poor families are most at risk of infant death, low birth-weight, stunted growth, poor adjustment to school, increased repetition and school dropout”. Other studies found that children from low-income families are more exposed to detrimental social and physical environments (Benveniste et al. 2003; Bornstein and Bradley 2003; Bradley and Corwyn 2002; Evans and English 2002). These children are “exposed to more turmoil, violence, separation from their families, instability, and chaotic households” (Evans 2004, 77). Therefore, it makes perfect sense that there should be a deliberate focus on strengthening families for the promotion of children’s rights. According to Minister Xingwana (from the Department for Women, Children and People with Disabilities): “Childhood should be a happy time for all children. It should be a time when children have opportunities to grow, learn and develop; receive love and care; play freely and be active; feel safe and protected; be healthy; and be listened to when they share their views on matters that are important to them” (RSA 2011, ii). The minister aptly sums up the rights of children, but the serious issue is how to make this a reality in poverty-stricken families. Since the demise of apartheid, essential services have been extended in various ways to advance the rights of children. This is evident in the following policy endeavours: the extension of the age eligibility of the Child Support Grant; state provision of treatment for all infants who are infected with HIV; provision of early treatment and care for all HIV-positive pregnant women in state-run facilities; early childhood development support for young children; waiving school fees for children in the poorest schools; gender parity in primary and secondary education; nutrition support for children and families in distress; and sanitary dignity campaign for girls (RSA 2011, 3). In addition, child protection has become a major focus through the Children’s Act and Child Justice Act. Despite all of these promising policy interventions, there are still significant disparities in children’s access to the most essential services. This is largely due to the barriers

Children’s Rights in South African Families

9

experienced by children in the poorest of households - that is 7 million children in 20 per cent of households in South Africa (RSA 2011). Despite the progressive constitution, laws and policies, inequities remain that prevent children from accessing the services that are meant for them. Most of the time services cannot be accessed at all or only with difficulty by children in the poorest households mainly in rural areas. As such achieving equity and children’s rights is fraught with obstacles in South Africa. The Department for Women, Children and People with Disabilities (RSA 2011, 2) notes that there are approximately 49.9 million people in South Africa of whom 18.6 million are children. Further analysis reveals that “85 per cent are Black African; 8 per cent are Coloured; 5 per cent are White and 2 per cent are Indian/Asian” (RSA 2011, 2). Even though the South African economy is the largest on the African continent, unemployment remains a major concern with more than 4.5 million people without jobs. Of these, 41 per cent are young people between the ages of 18 to 24 (RSA 2011, 2). The challenge posed by inequality and poverty reduces the ideal of children’s rights in families to mere myth.

Negative effects of HIV/AIDS The negative effects of HIV/AIDS have further compounded the problems experienced in families to such an extent that Holborn and Eddy (2011, 1) have identified ‘fractured families’ as a disaster for South Africa. They argue that fractured families are clearly visible in the escalation of orphans, child-headed households, single-parent households, and absent fathers. According to a Medical Research Council report in 2006 (cited in Holborn & Eddy 2011, 1): “… by 2015 some 5 700 000 children would have lost one or both parents to AIDS. Some 3 100 000 children under 18 years would be maternal orphans, and 4 700 000 would be paternal orphans”. These statistics are discouraging, especially when research has indicated that orphans are at greater risk of school dropout, food insecurity, and experiencing psychological problems associated with anxiety and depression (Pillay 2014a). The death of mothers seems to be a greater risk to the stability of families and the care of children, especially in terms of health-related and educational concerns (RSA 2011). The experiences of children in child-headed households are expected to be worse since parents are the custodians of nurturance, love, and support (Pillay and Nesengani 2006).

10

Chapter One

Poor government support for families There are several governmental issues that have a negative impact on the support provided, especially to poor families. The first issue relates to the inefficient role that local governments play. Virtually all of the participants in Pillay’s (2014) study were highly critical about the role local government played in providing essential services to families. For example, some regions were without electricity, water and proper sanitation, and this was seen as an infringement of children’s rights. Some participants believed that local government should be given more power and responsibility by the national government to advance children’s rights in local communities. Every local government should have development plans, which should include children’s rights. Some examples would be the provision of: parks, recreation halls, and facilities so children could exercise the right to play; safe ways of crossing roads; child protection mechanisms, such as child abuse centers and police protection units; and appropriate facilities for children with disabilities. Local governments are closest to the local communities and it would be logical for them to have greater political and economic capability to support and empower local families. In the last decade there have been a number of service delivery protests in many local communities, often orchestrated by the poorest community members. This is a clear indication that the needs of families are not being met. As such, one could anticipate that the rights of children in local families would be an area for serious concern. The second issue raised by participants is that of poor interdepartmental collaboration amongst government departments, which negatively inhibits the implementation of children’s rights in families. In many instances the various government departments operate in ‘silos’, often duplicating services which results in substantial wastage of finances and resources. The general sentiment amongst participants was that much more could be achieved if the different government sectors strategically worked together to support local communities and families. The notion is that if the basic needs of local communities are met, there is a stronger possibility of children’s rights being met. This is because limited or poor service delivery is one of the biggest obstacles to the establishment of a culture of children’s rights. Most participants expressed a strong discontent with corrupt government officials who misappropriate funds for their personal gain, at the expense of needy families and children. Unfortunately, this was seen as a widespread practice which leads to local communities and families

Children’s Rights in South African Families

11

being denied essential services. Some participants were concerned that children see the corruption and are aware of the reasons why they do not receive basic services. This may send children the wrong message: that it is acceptable to steal and be corrupt in order to succeed in life. Most participants also criticized the lack of political will and leadership commitment of government in promoting children’s rights. As far as they were concerned, the government’s inability to allocate sufficient funds for ensuring children’s rights is a clear indication of the government not taking the concerns of children seriously. As such, the government does not see an investment in children as a priority even though they are the future leaders of the country.

Inadequate stakeholder collaboration Pillay (2014) pointed out that it is not the responsibility of government alone to promote children’s rights. It is the joint responsibility of families, schools, non-governmental and community organizations to collaborate with the government. Schools have a prominent role to play in educating children about their rights, since school-going children spend most of their time at school. This education can only take place if: children’s rights are adequately integrated across the school curriculum; teachers are properly trained to teach children their rights and responsibilities; and teaching commences from the foundation phase of education until children leave school at the end of grade 12. Strategically, schools are ideal places for the rolling out of prevention and support programmes to safeguard children’s rights. The role of the school in promoting children’s rights becomes virtually impossible, however, when schools are unable to provide a safe environment for teaching and learning due to school- and communitybased violence, dilapidated classrooms and unhygienic conditions. Professionals such as psychologists, nurses and social workers could collaboratively provide support for children and their families through schools or community-based organisations as a means of ensuring that children’s rights are protected. Many parents are not aware of children’s rights, especially if they grew up during the years of apartheid when it was normal to deprive black people of their human rights. There is general consensus amongst all professionals working with children that the collaboration of professionals, NGOs, community and religious organisations in promoting children’s rights in local families needs to be strengthened in the country (Pillay 2014a).

12

Chapter One

Deleterious cultural practices Certain African cultural practices, rigidly and ritually entrenched in African families, may have deleterious consequences for children, inadvertently violating their rights (Kendal 2008; Phiri and Webb 2007). For example, there are blurred boundaries between physical punishment and some African childrearing practices. Child marriages are sometimes condoned on the basis of culture (Sewpaul and Matthias 2013), while there have been many cases where girl children are given to older men in exchange for monetary gain, thus promoting child trafficking (Kasirye 2007). It is common practice in the poorest of families for children to be taken out of school before the mandatory school leaving age so that they can work and supplement the family income. This is tantamount to child labour. Initiation ceremonies for boys and genital cutting of girls (Kasirye 2007; Prazak and Coffman, 2007; Winterbottom et al. 2009; Twum-Danso Imoh 2011) are cultural practices that received strong negative comments from participants in Pillay’s (2014a) study. Initiation practice was recognised as an important African tradition that assisted boys in their transition to manhood (Hernlund 2001). There was, however, unanimous discontent amongst participants about the unsafe methods used during the initiation process, which are evident in the significant number of boys who die or are injured during initiation ceremonies. The author concurs with Zimba (2011) that African culture has a great fund of cultural wisdom but it should be dynamic and sensitive to the harm that could be done to children. All of the challenges discussed are graphically illustrated in Figure 1.1. below.

Children’s Rights in South African Families

13

Negative effects of poverty Policies not adequately practiced

Negative effects of HIV/AIDS Challenges to Children's Rights in South African Families

Deleterious cultural practices

Poor Government support Inadequate stakeholder collaboration

Figure 1.1: Diagram illustrating challenges to children’s rights in South African families

A social justice perspective This chapter, as others in this book, portrays the family as a crucial entity that is vital for the positive development of children. For this positive development to occur, the author contends that families have a critical role to play in the promotion of children’s rights. There are, however, gross inequalities that exist in South African families largely as a result of the apartheid legacy, poverty, and the HIV/AIDS pandemic. These inevitably have a negative impact on the promotion of children’s rights. As such, the author proposes a social justice theoretical framework for promoting children’s rights in the country. He identifies the family as the heart of children’s rights (see Figure 1.2 below) since it is the vital organ that gives life to children. Children are first born into families, so it makes sense that parents should be the primary custodians of promoting children’s rights, but this becomes extremely difficult if many South African families are in crisis (Holborn and Eddy 2011), facing the possibility of being single parent, child-headed, or absent father families. A social justice framework emphasizes that children’s rights be maintained at all times, irrespective of the different situations the children

14

Chapter One

may be in (Shriberg et al. 2011). All children should be treated with respect and dignity, and given equal opportunities to grow and function optimally in society irrespective of race, gender, class, creed, ethnicity, and (dis)ability (Pillay 2014a). A social justice framework postulates that the rights of children should be a central focus. A focus on children’s rights would have the effect of inadvertently fulfilling their various needs. So if parents understand that their children have a right to be fed, to be safe, to be protected, and to be educated, then they as parents will provide the means of fulfilling these rights and in this way meet the needs of their children. A social justice framework empowers children by giving them the opportunity to voice their needs, thoughts and feelings, especially when decisions have to be taken about their own welfare (Woodhead 1997; Smith 2002; Pufall and Unsworth 2004; Stainton Rogers 2004). In the light of what has been noted about many South African families earlier, however, one would expect that the government should make deliberate efforts to ensure that all families have equal and fair opportunities to promote children’s rights – this is what social justice is all about. As children grow, their rights and responsibilities are extended to their schools, communities, relatives, peers and other families, creating a bioecological systems model of interaction (Bartolo 2010; Benedetto and Olisky 2001). At all times children’s rights should be enforced by the laws and policies stipulated in the constitution of the country. In turn, these laws and policies should endorse the binding legal instruments on children’s rights, namely the CRC and African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of Children (ACRWC). The CRC and ACRWC promote a social justice framework to ensure that all children are treated with respect and dignity and are provided with equal opportunities to develop their full potential to succeed in life.

Childrenn’s Rights in Sou uth African Fam milies

15

Figure 1.2: Diagram illusstrating a sociial justice perrspective for promoting children’s rigghts in South Affrican families

Conclu usion The prom motion of chiildren’s rights is crucial forr their holisticc positive developmennt. This point has been entrenched e inn the United d Nations Convention on the Rightss of the Child as well as thhe ACRWC. The T South African govvernment has taken t both theese legal instru ruments seriou usly since their ratification and thhis is clearly evident in iits constitutio on, laws, regulations and policies directed at protecting p chiildren’s rights. Whilst South Africaa may have taaken the lead in children’s rights policiees in SubSaharan Affrica, it does appear that the wheels oof implementtation are

16

Chapter One

moving slowly. A significant number of children, mostly from the poorest families in rural areas, do not have access to the opportunities that have been afforded to them on paper. As such, the government has a responsibility to promote social justice by ensuring that poor families are provided with the resources needed to raise children so that their rights are not compromised in any way. Local government structures should be awarded sufficient resources and funds to promote children’s rights by meeting the basic needs of families through more effective delivery of services. Special attention should be given to strengthening families affected by poverty and HIV/AIDS, and stronger mechanisms need to be put in place to ensure that certain cultural practices do not violate the rights of children. The government must work collaboratively with NGOs, schools, community and religious organizations to ensure that all families are able to foster a culture of children’s rights. In concluding, the author points out that there are some poor families, and children from some poor families, that are resilient and able to promote a culture of children’s rights (Pillay 2011; Lethale and Pillay 2013). As a way forward, lessons should be learned from these families and children to benefit those that transgress children’s rights.

Note ‘This work is based on the research supported by the South African Research Chairs Initiative of the Department of Science and Technology and National Research Foundation of South Africa’. South African Research Chair: Education and Care in Childhood: Faculty of Education: University of Johannesburg South Africa. Grant Number: 87300

References Arts, K. and V. Popvoski. 2006. “International Criminal Accountability and the Rights of Children.” From Peace to Justice Series, London: Cambridge University Press. Bartolo, P.A. 2010. “Why School Psychology for Diversity?” School Psychology International 31 (6): 567--580. Benedetto, A. E. and T. Olisky. 2001. “Biracial Youth: The Role of the School Counselor in Racial Identity Development.” Professional School Counseling 5(1), 66--71. Benveniste, L., M. Carnoy and R. Rothstein. 2003. All Else Equal. New York: Routledge-Farmer. Bless, C. and C. Higson-Smith. 1995. Fundamentals of Social Research Methods – An African Perspective. Cape Town: Juta and Co. Ltd.

Children’s Rights in South African Families

17

Bornstein, M.H. and R.H. Bradley (Eds.). 2003. Socioeconomic Status, Parenting, and Child Development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Bradley, R. H. and R .F. Corwyn. 2002. “Socioeconomic Status and Child Development.” Annual Review of Psychology 53: 371--399. Bronfenbrenner, U. 1986. Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspective. Developmental Psychology, 22(6), 723-742. Child Rights Information Network. 2008. Convention on the rights of the child. Retrieved 26 June 2012. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Rights_of_the_Child Conger, R. D. and M. B. Donnellan. 2007. “An Interactionist Perspective on the Socioeconomic Context of Human Development.” Annual Review of Psychology 58: 175-199. Covell, K. and R. B. Howe. 1999. “The Impact of Children’s Rights Education: A Canadian study.” International Journal of Children’s Rights 7L 171–183. —. (2001). “Moral Education Through the 3 Rs: Rights, Respect and Responsibility.” Journal of Moral Education 30: 31–42. Covell, K., R. B. Howe and J. K. McNeil. 2008. ǥIf there’s a dead rat, don’t leave it.’ Young children’s understanding of their citizenship rights and responsibilities. Cambridge Journal of Education 38 (3): 321–339. —. (2009). “Reducing Teacher Burnout by Increasing Student Engagement.” School Psychology International 30(3), 282–290. —. (2010). “Implementing Children’s Human Rights Education in Schools.” Improving Schools 13(2): 117–132. Crosby, D. A., C. J. Dowsett, L.A. Gennetian, A.C. Huston. 2010. “A Tale of Two Methods: Comparing Regression and Instrumental Variables Estimates of the Effects of Preschool Child Care Type on the Subsequent Externalizing Behaviour of Children in Low-income Families. Developmental Psychology 46: 1030--1048. DeCoene, J., and R. De Cock. 1996. “The Children’s Rights Project in the Primary School ‘De vrijdagmarkt’ in Bruges.” In Monitoring Children’s Rights, edited by E. Verhellen, 627–636. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Department of Education. 2001. Education White Paper 6. Special Needs Education. Building an Inclusive Education and Training System. Pretoria: Government Printers. Detrick, S. 1999. A Commentary on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

18

Chapter One

Duncan, G. J., K. M. Ziol-Guest and A. Kalil. 2010. “Early Childhood Poverty and Adult Attainment, Behaviour, and Health.” Child Development 81: 306--325. Evans, G. W. 2004. “The Environment of Childhood Poverty.” American Psychologist 59 (2), 77--92. Evans, G.W., & English, K. 2002. “The Environment of Poverty. Multiple Stressor Exposure, Psychophysiological Stress, and Socioemotional Adjustment.” Child Development 73, 1238--1248. Franklin, B. 2001. The New Handbook of Children’s Rights: Comparative Policy and Practice, 19. Routledge. Freeman, M. 2000 “The Future of Children’s Rights.” Children and Society 14(4) 277 – 93 Gose, M. 2002. The African Charter in the Rights of the Child. Bellville: Community Law Centre, University of Western Cape. Grantham-McGregor, S., Y. B. Cheung, S. Cueto, P. Glewwe, L. Richter, Strupp and the International Child Development Steering Group. 2007. The Lancet 369, 60--70. Halle, T., N. Forry, E. Hair, K. Perper, L. Wandner, J. Wessel and J. Vick. 2009. Disparities in Early Learning and Development: Lessons from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study - Birth Cohort (ECLS - B). Washington, DC: Child Trends. Henning, E., W. Van Rensburg and B. Smit. 2004. Finding Your Way in Qualitative Research. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers. Hernlund, Y. 2001 “Cutting without Ritual and Ritual without Cutting: Female “Circumcision” and the Re-ritualization of initiation in the Gambia”, in Female ‘Circumcision’ in Africa: culture, change and controversy, edited by B. Shell-Duncan and Y. Hernlund. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Reiner Publishers. Hodgkin, R. and P. Newell. 2007. Implementation Handbook of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 3rd ed. New York: UNICEF. Holbourn, L. and G. Eddy. 2011. First Steps to Healing the South African Family. Johannesburg: South African Institute of Race Relations. Holzer, H, Schanzenbach, D, Duncan, G. and Ludwig, J. 2007. The economic costs of poverty in the United States: subsequent effects of children growing up poor. Center for American Progress, Washington, D.C. Howe, R. B. and K. Covell. 2007. Empowering Children: Children’s Rights Education as a Pathway to Citizenship. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Human Rights in Education. 2009. HRiE Report. Retrieved 20/03/2015. http://www.rightsined.org.nz/

Children’s Rights in South African Families

19

Human Rights Commission/UNICEF. 2011. South Africa’s Children: A review of equity and children’s rights. Johannesburg: SAHRC/ UNICEF Huston, A. C. 2011. “Children in Poverty: Can Public Policy Alleviate the Consequences?” Family Matters 87, 13--26. Kasirye, R. 2007. Rapid Assessment Report on Trafficking of Children into Worst Form of Child Labor, Including Child Soldiers in Uganda. Kampala: ILO. Kendall, N. 2008. “‘Vulnerability’ in AIDS-affected states: Rethinking child rights, educational institutions, and development paradigms,” International Journal of Educational Development 28: 365–383. Krefting, L. 1991. Rigor in Qualitative Research: The Assessment of Trustworthiness. Canada: School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen’s University. Lee, V. E., D. T. Burkham, J. Honigman, D. D. Ready, and S. J. Meisels. 2006. “Full-day vs Half-day Kindergarten: In Which Program do Children Learn More?” American Journal of Education 112, 163--208. Lethale, P. S. and J. Pillay. 2013. “Resilience against All Odds: A Positive Psychology Perspective of Adolescent-headed Families. Africa Education Review 10(3): 581--596. Ludbrook, R. 2000. “Victim of Tokenism and Hypocrisy: New Zealand’s failure to implement the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.” In Advocating for children: International perspectives on children’s rights, edited by A. B. Smith, M. Gollop, K. Marshall and K. Nairn. Dunedin: University of Otago Press. Mangold, S. V. 2002. Transgressing the Border between Protection and Empowerment of Domestic Violence Victims and Older Children: Empowerment as Protection in the Foster Care System.” New England School of Law. Retrieved 4/3/15. http://www.nesl.edu/userfiles/file/lawreview/vol36/1/mangold.pdf Merriam, S. B. 1998. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. —. 2002. Qualitative Research in Practice – Examples for Discussion and Analysis. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Nikku, B. R. 2013. “Children’s Rights in Disasters: Concerns for social work – Insights from South Asia and possible lessons for Africa.” International Social Work 56(1) 51– 66. Phiri, S. N. and D. Webb. 2007 “Programmed and Policy Responses to the Impact of HIV and AIDS on Children.” In Public Policy and Child Well-being, edited by G. A. Cornia. UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. Florence, Italy.

20

Chapter One

Pillay, J. and R. I. Nesengani. 2006. “The Educational Challenges Facing Early Adolescents Who Head Families in Rural Limpopo Province.” Education as Change 10(2), 131--147. Pillay, J. 2011. “Challenges Counsellors Face While Practising in South African Schools: Implications for Culturally Relevant In-service Training.” South African Journal of Psychology 41(3), 351–362. —. 2012. “Experiences of Learners from Child-headed Households in a Vulnerable School that Makes a Difference: Lessons for School Psychologists.” School Psychology International 33(1), 3–21. —. 2014a. “Advancement of Children’s Rights in Africa: A Social Justice Framework for School Psychologists. School Psychology International, 35(3): 225--240. —. 2014b. “Challenges Educational Psychologists Face Working with Vulnerable Children in Africa.” In Psychology in Education, edited by T. Corcoran, 95--111. Australia: Sense Publishers. Prazak, M. and J. E. Coffman. 2007. “Anthropological Perspectives on Female Genital Cutting: Embodying Tradition, Violence, and Social Resilience.” Africa Today 53 (4): v-- xi. Pufall, P. B. and R. P. Unsworth. 2004. “The Imperative and the Process of Rethinking Childhood.” In Rethinking Childhood, edited by P. B. Pufall and R. P. Unsworth, 1–21. New Brunswick, Canada: Rutgers University Press. Queens University School of Rehabilitation Therapy. Republic of South Africa. 2011. ‘Green Paper on Families: Promoting Family Life and Strengthening Families in South Africa’, in Government Gazette No. 34657, 3—86 Save the Children. 2006. Children’s Rights: A Teacher’s Guide. London: Save the Children. Sewpaul, S. and C. Matthais. 2013. “Editorial.” International Social Work 56 (1) 3--6 Shonkoff, J. P. 2010. “Building a New Biodevelopmental Framework to Guide the Future of Early Childhood Policy.” Child Development 81, 357--367. Shriberg, D., M. E. Wynne, A. Briggs, G. Bartucci, and A. C. Lombardo. 2011. “School Psychologist’s Perspectives on Social Justice.” School Psychology Forum 5, 37–53. Smith, A. B. 2000. “Children’s Rights and Early Childhood Education: The Rights of Babies and Young Children.” In Advocating for Children: International Perspective on Children’s Rights, edited by A. B. Smith, M. Gollop, K. Marshall and K. Nairn, 191–205. Dunedin: University of Otago Press.

Children’s Rights in South African Families

21

—. 2002. “Interpreting and Supporting Participation Rights: Contributions from Sociocultural Theory.” International Journal of Children’s Rights 10, 73–88. Stainton Rogers, W. 2004. “Promoting Better Childhoods: Constructions of Child Concern.” In An Introduction to Childhood Studies, edited by M. J. Kehily, 125–144. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Statistics South Africa. 2012. Census 2011. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa. Twum-Danso Imoh, A. 2011. “Searching for a Middle Ground in Children’s Rights in Ghana.” The Journal of Human Rights 10(3): 376–392. Verhellen, E. 1993. “Children’s rights and education.” School Psychology International 14 (3), 199–208. —. 1994. Convention on the Rights of the Child. Kessel-Lo, Belguim: Garant. Viviers, A. and A. Lombard. 2013. “The Ethics of Children’s Participation: Fundamental to Children’s Rights Realization in Africa.” International social work 56 (1) 7–21. Viviers, A. 2010. The Ethics of Child Participation. Unpublished Masters dissertation, University of Pretoria. Winterbottom, A., J. Koomen and G Burford. 2009. “Female Genital Cutting: Cultural Rights and Rites of Defiance in Northern Tanzania,” African Studies Review 52 (1): 1–22. Woodhead, M. 1997. Psychology and the Cultural Construction of Children’s Needs. In Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood, edited by A. James and A. Prout, 63–77. Basingstoke: Falmer Press. Zimba, R.F. 2011. “Promoting Children’s Development and Rights: Lessons for Teachers in Southern Africa.” In Handbook of African Educational Theories and Practices: A Generative Teacher Education Curriculum, edited by A. B. Nsamenang and M. S. Tchombe, 140-153. Cameroon: Presses Universitaires d’ Afrique.

THEME 1: FAMILY STRUCTURE AND CHILDBEARING

“A family is like a forest, when you are outside it is dense, when you are inside you see that each tree has its place”.

CHAPTER TWO CONTINUITY AND CHANGE: RELATIONSHIPS, CHILDBEARING AND CHILDREN’S LIVING ARRANGEMENTS MONDE MAKIWANE, NTOMBIZONKE A. GUMEDE AND STANLEY MOLEFI

“It takes a village to raise a child”

Continuity and Change

25

Introduction South African families are characterised by their pluralistic nature, with some ethnic groups (e.g. Africans) emphasising the tradition of the larger kinship group (Kayongo-Male and Onyango 1984; Ziehl 2001), while others embrace the cultural ideology of the nuclear family. The different practices and customs prevalent amongst the population of South Africa have an influence on the wide variety of family structures that have formed in the society (Takyi 2011). The transformation observed in contemporary family formations has, however, been engendered by longstanding changes which include, but are not limited to: lower fertility rates, reduced influence of the family member on the decisions and behaviours of the individual, change in sexual norms, increase in femaleheaded households, strain of HIV/AIDS on families and households, attitudinal change to the conventional nuptial form and social factors that contribute to the decline in marriage rates, as well as South Africa’s socioeconomic and political system (which plunged many people into the depths of poverty) (Holborn and Eddy 2011; Makiwane 2011). All of these circumstances have impact by creating a diversity of children’s living arrangements, including separation, parental deaths, divorce, remarriage, non-marital childbearing and cohabitation (Kreider and Ellis 2011). The aim of this chapter is to give a background to the context of childbearing in South Africa and to show how the complexity of relationships impacts on children’s living arrangements. Subsequent chapters explain the life of children in those family environments in more detail. The rest of the chapter gives a brief explanation of early childbearing in South Africa, which is one of the reasons that some children do not grow up with biological parents. Most of the data used for the analysis is based on the publicly available national datasets from Statistics South Africa. The datasets include three national censuses (10% samples from 1996, 2001 and 2011), 2007 Community Survey, 2014 Household Survey and the national database of registered marriages (2006--2013) and births (1998-2014). Also included in the analysis are the General Household Surveys (2008--2013) and the 2008--2013 waves of the National Income Dynamic Survey.

The socio-historical role of family, marriage and reproduction in South Africa Community, which played a critical role in the care of everyone, was the essence of the institution of family, marriage and household in African

26

Chapter Two

families (Siqwana-Ndulo 1998). The interdependent relationships between individuals, families and communities is evident in the African proverb, “It takes a village to raise a child” (Kapolo 2001, 130; Hudgins, Holmes and Locke 1990), as well as “Umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu”-- a Zulu saying, meaning that a person is a person through other people. These proverbs illustrate that, in the traditional black South African family, socialisation and upbringing of children was not the sole responsibility of the immediate family. Children were raised by members of the extended family, which allowed them to observe a number of behaviours, and exposed them to various values and beliefs. It is in this context that the absence of biological parents in the lives of children must be understood: traditionally, there were a number of social parents from the extended family and the community at large who played a big role in taking care of the children, sharing the responsibility of the biological parents for their upbringing. It should be noted, though, that a number of chapters in this volume show that the social, economic and emotional gaps caused by the absence of biological parents are not easily filled by social parenting in contemporary South Africa. The main thrust of this chapter is to show changes in the reproductive lives of the majority of South Africans. In order to appreciate these changes, there is a need to understand the historical background to the reproductive life of traditional societies in South Africa. The shared process of upbringing meant that, from an early age, adolescents were exposed to sexual context through observation, sometimes overhearing indiscreet conversations between adults (Delius and Glaser 2005). In addition, initiation schools for both males and females educated young people about marriage, pregnancy and sexually responsible behaviour (Mudhovozi, Ramarumo and Sodi 2012). Sexual exploration by young people was normal amongst some African societies, but was regulated by sexual behavioural norms. Although sexual exploration was permitted in some black South African societies, premarital pregnancy was generally frowned upon. Premarital pregnancy resulted in shunning, ostracism, forced abortion, forced marriages and, in extreme cases, infanticide (Delius and Glaser 2002). This was because it created disputes in terms of familial and custodial rights. This was, by no means, a mechanism to restrict reproduction (Caldwell and Caldwell 1987), since high importance was placed on fertility as it ensured continuation of the lineage and emphasised femininity. This was evident in marriage being the marker of the onset of reproductive life.

Continuity and Change

27

In African families, marriage was based on the principle of collectivity and interdependence (Siqwana-Ndulo 1998). Lobola, the provision of gifts to the bride’s family in the form of cattle, is an important aspect of the marriage union. Lobola serves three functions: it gives the family of the husband rights to all children born to his wife; it serves the purpose of distribution of consumable and productive resources; and it marks the transition into adulthood (Ansell 2001; Posel et al., 2011). Early marriage of females was normal because of the high value placed on fertility, and widows of reproductive age were pressurised to remarry by levirate (Caldwell and Caldwell 1987; Delius and Glaser 2005; Mswela 2009). In most cases pre-marital pregnancy resulted in forced marriages, to lessen the shame of the families. Therefore, pre-marital pregnancy devalued a young girl, decreasing bride wealth and in some cases making them unmarriageable.

The changing role of marriage as a marker of the onset of reproductive life As in most societies of the world, especially in Africa, marriage in South Africa was historically regarded as the event that marked the start of reproductive life and shaped family formation. This has changed in some societies, more so in South Africa where the rate of marriage is exceptionally low. South African society is notable in that there are fewer chances of getting married or less inclination to do so than in many parts of the world. Only 34.8 per cent of women, who are in the reproductive ages between fifteen and forty nine, are married in South Africa. Namibia is the only country in the world that is known to have even lower marriage rates (Chimere-Dan 2015). The trend in low and declining marriage rates, accompanied by low cohabitation rates among the African majority, is shown in Figure 2.1.

Chapter Two

28

Source: Richtter et al (2012) Figure 2.1: M Marriage and coohabitation ratees among womeen (20—30 yeaars), South Africa

Low maarriage rates are common n in societiees that have suffered domination over a long period, p as exeemplified by the African-A American society in thhe United Stattes (King 1999 9). In the abssence of marriiage, men and womenn in South Africa have not postponned the initiation of reproductivee life, becomiing sexually active at the onset of pub berty. Not only this, but childbearinng is almost universal amo mong married and nonmarried wom men.

Whyy are marriage rates so s low in Soouth Africa a? The dataa on marriage rates in South h Africa may not be record ded with a high degree of precision. This is due to o changes, froom time to tim me, in the official definnition of marrriage. Historiccally, the officcial definition n of being married excluded certain religious and traditional m marriages. Currrently, an inclusive deefinition of maarriage has beeen adopted byy the official statistical office. This definition inncludes civil, traditional annd religious marriages, m and allows rrespondents too self-classify their marital status. Notwitthstanding problems oof capturing marriage datta in South Africa, all available evidence pooints to the facct that marriag ge rates are eexceptionally low. l This

Continuity and Change

29

has been attributed to the long lasting effect of colonisation and the apartheid system, especially aspects related to the migrant labour system. This resulted in long periods of separation of the men from their families, thus severing the strong family bonds that use to exist among Africans (Makiwane 1998). It is also argued that the low rate of marriage is partly due to the commercialisation of lobola. A key to the process of marriage in South Africa is lobola, an age-old African custom that entailed a gift from the bridegroom’s to the bride’s family, as a symbol of commitment. Traditionally this gift was paid in the form of cattle, but over the years it has become customary to offer cash in annually appreciating increments, and is sometimes linked to the woman’s educational status. This commercialisation of lobola has resulted in a dilemma for many couples, with some preferring not to marry, as they cannot afford the cost (Posel and Rudwick 2011). To illustrate the point, in a study conducted by Posel and Rudwick in 2011, it was reported that half of all participants who had never married cited the prohibitive costs of lobola as the chief reason that couples reject marriage. An added complication is that lobola may be paid over an extended period. This may raise conflict between spouses, one asserting that they were married when the first payment was made, and the other believing the marriage was constituted by the final payment. Low marriage rates in South Africa could also be the result of the low male to female ratio (sex ratio) in the country, especially at traditional marriage ages (Letamo 1993), with women outnumbering men. According to the census conducted in 2011, South Africa has a sex ratio of 95 males per 100 females. The sex ratio is remarkably lower at mature ages because of the different mortality rates between men and women. Thus, at ages 55 to 64 there are 87 men to 100 women, and from the age of 65 and above, there are 73 men to 100 women. Another feature of South African society is the higher mobility of men compared to women. As a result, more industrialised areas of South Africa have higher proportions of men compared to women, whereas rural areas have a higher proportion of women. For instance, Gauteng has a sex ratio of more than 100 (thus more men than females), but rural provinces, such as the Eastern Cape and Limpopo, consistently have a ratio of less than 90 men per 100 women. Fewer women get married as compared to men, due to higher male mortality, compounded by the fact that men generally marry late to younger women; and thus women are likely to survive their mate in marriage. Internationally, cohabitation is associated with a decline of marriage rates. Research indicates that in countries where marriage rates have

30

Chapter Two

declined this has, by and large, been accompanied by an increase in cohabitation partnerships (Posel and Rudwick 2013). Incidentally, in South Africa, racial differences exist in both cohabitation and marriage patterns. Compared with black women, white young women are not only more likely to be ever married, but, as single mothers, they are also more likely to be in cohabiting partnerships (Posel and Rudwick 2013). Albeit that the majority of both black and white women disapprove of cohabitation as an alternative to marriage, there are distinctive differences in attitude between the two groups. Africans associate marriage with a higher socio-economic status. This is linked to the commercialisation of lobola, where a male who can afford the bride price is seen as financially stable. In spite of some objection to cohabitation, it might be accepted as a conciliatory move towards marriage, making non-marital childbearing acceptable (Posel and Rudwick 2013). This reasoning is indicative of cultural factors that play a role in reproduction and family formation in the African societies, where fertility emphasises femininity and marriage is central to family formation. Most noteworthy though is that Figure 2.1 shows that, in spite of low marriage rates among the African population, the rate of cohabitation remains low. Furthermore, because families break up and then re-form, not all children who live with two parents live with both biological parents. Essentially, most children co-reside with at least one adult, and in most households there are usually two or more adults. In such cases, the child often lives with one of the biological parents, usually the mother, but this does not mean that the mother is a ‘single’ parent in the classical sense, as she may not be the only caregiver in the house (Hall and Meintjies 2013).

The relationship between low marriage rate and the structure of the family Researchers have shown interest in the complex interactions of marriage and reproductive health among the youth in South Africa (Kaufman 1997; Chimere-Dan 2015). A number of social and demographic factors, including household size and intergenerational relations, make the timing of marriage important. It has also been associated with risky sexual behaviour, especially in sub-Saharan Africa (Clark et al. 2006; Garenne et al. 2007; Dixon-Mueller 2008).

Continuity and Change

31

Source: Chimere-Dan 2015. Figure 2.2: Recent trends (%) in couple and single families, 1996-2014

One of the most significant consequences of the low marriage rates in South Africa is the high number of single headed compared to couple headed families. In 1996, 54.7 per cent of all households in South Africa were couple headed families, as opposed to 45.3 per cent which were single headed families. More importantly, couple headed families continued to decline in the democratic dispensation and, by 2014, only 37.8 per cent of families were couple headed, as opposed to single headed families which constituted 62.2 per cent.

Relationship between decline in marriage rates, teenage childbearing and the overall rate of childbearing As a result of low marriage rates in South Africa, seven out every ten births in 2014 were by women who have never been married (ChimereDan 2015). This is the case in spite of the fact that women who are not married give birth to fewer children than married women. In 2014, the Total Fertility Rate (an estimate of a number of live births during a life time, based on current age-specific fertility rates) of women who were never married was 2.5, as opposed to those who were ever married which was 3.5 (Chimere-Dan 2015). The relationship between marriage patterns and childbearing trends is multifaceted. Women in South Africa give birth to children both inside and outside marriage, which can lead to the superficial interpretation that

32

Chapter Two

marriage is not a factor in the childbearing patterns of South Africans. In reality, the situation is more complex than such an observation would suggest. First, although childbearing happens both inside and outside marriage, the fertility rate is considerably less among non-married women than that of married women (Makiwane 1998, Makiwane and ChimereDan 2010; Chimere-Dan 2015). Thus, the decline in the marriage rate is the biggest single factor contributing to South Africa having lower childbearing rates than other societies in mainland sub-Saharan Africa (Makiwane 1998). The interaction between marriage and teenage childbearing is more complex. For many young women, their first unplanned birth usually occurs at the onset of reproductive life (Makiwane 1998). Following the first birth, among non-married women there is usually a long delay before the birth of their next child, normally long after their teenage years and following a carefully considered childbearing plan. On the other hand, marital childbearing is more likely to have shorter intervals between pregnancies even if the married woman is young. Thus, because of these complex processes, non-marriage is likely to have less of an impact on reducing teenage childbearing than on the reduction of the overall rate of childbearing. The overall rate of childbearing has declined faster than that of the teenage population, thus the proportion of teenage childbearing to the overall rate of childbearing has increased over the years (Chimere-Dan 2015). This must be understood within the context of what is happening in other countries. The rising share of births to young women is visible in most countries of the world that are undergoing demographic transition (United Nations 2007). The general trend, worldwide, is that where fertility rates are lower, the share of births to young women is among the highest. In line with this trend, as the rate of childbearing in South Africa declines, so the proportion of childbearing attributable to young women is somewhat higher than the overall fertility rates in the country.

The role of contraception usage in shaping childbearing patterns As stated earlier, unintentional childbearing is common in South Africa either due to issues related to non-use of contraceptives or to low efficacy in their usage. Socio-economic and cultural factors greatly influence all aspects of an individual’s life, and this is no different in relation to sexual and reproductive health. It is accepted that women living in rural areas have access to family planning to a lesser extent than women living in urban areas (Khalema et al. 2014, 42). Although oral contraception is the

Continuity and Change

33

most important factor for low childbearing in developed countries, its usage has remained low in Africa -- which partly explains the high rate of childbearing on the continent. The use of contraception in South Africa is much lower than in the West, but generally higher than in the rest of subSaharan Africa. The use of oral contraception is influenced by socioeconomic status, being considerably higher among women of higher socioeconomic status than the rest of society (Makiwane 1998). Gribble and Haffey (2008) also state that, in relation to sexual and reproductive health, the intersection of educational levels, socio-economic status and contraceptive use is much more complex than it at first appears. This is evident in the similarity between the adolescent fertility rates of South Africa and Botswana, in spite of the relatively high contraceptive usage in the former. This shows the complex interaction of similar factors in different societies. Notwithstanding, oral contraceptives have never been the contraceptive tool of choice among South African teenagers. Before the period when condoms were commonly used in South Africa, the relatively few teenagers who used them generally resorted to injectables. A study on fertility in what was then the Transkei homeland found that women generally began using oral contraception after their first birth, and the average age of women using contraception was much higher than the age of sexual debut (Makiwane 1998). The widespread use of condoms has somewhat changed the dynamics of contraception, especially among young people (Maharaj 2006). The correct and consistent use of condoms has been shown to be highly effective in preventing transmission of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), pregnancy and HIV. It is relevant, therefore, to consider condom use in analyses of the impact of partnership patterns on STDs (Finer, Darroch and Singh 1999). General condom usage increased with the growing scourge of the AIDS pandemic. The use of condoms began slowly at the end of the last century, and now enjoys wide usage. The major drawback is that, in spite of condoms being widely distributed, young people generally use them inconsistently. The use of condoms is generally low at sexual debut, and again condom usage gets lower towards the end of the teenage years (Makiwane and Makomane 2010). Thus, unplanned pregnancies, some of which result in live births, are still common in a society where the means of birth control are within reach.

Multiple and concurrent sexual partnerships The pervasion of cultural constructions of sexual relationships has resulted in the normalisation of late marriages in South Africa. This

Chapter Two

34

normalisation of late marriages has implications in that it may influence a high sexual partner turnover and number of sexual partners in a lifetime (Parker et al. 2007). In addition to the proliferation of multiple and concurrent sexual partnerships, the probability of contracting sexually transmitted diseases, and the undermining of efforts to improve sexual and reproductive health outcomes, it leads to the separation of children from their biological fathers. “There are many underlying factors to this phenomenon, but for the most part it involves an intersection between socioeconomic and cultural contexts that are intertwined with individual psychological factors related to self-esteem and fatalism.” (Parker et al. 2007, 46).

Consequently, paternity contestations, early childbearing and children not co-residing with one or both of their parents may be consequences of such relations. Table 2.1 shows a major difference between young men and young women regarding sexual partnerships. About 8 per cent of females reported that they had multiple sexual partners in the past twelve months in 2002, and the figure had declined to 6 per cent by 2005. In contrast, as many as 23 per cent of males reported that they had multiple sexual partners in 2002; this figure increased to 27.2 per cent in 2005 and 30.8 per cent in 2008. Table 2.1: Percentage of 15-50+ years people who reported having more than one sexual partner in the past 12 months. South Africa 2008, 2012 Male (M) 15-24yrs and Female(F) M F 2012 37.5 8.2 2008 30.8 6 2005 27.2 6 2002 23 8.8

•50yrs

25-49yrs

M 18.3 14.8 14.4 11.5

F 4.9 3.0 1.8 2.5

M 6.5 3.7 9.8 7.5

F 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.6

all 12.6 8.5 9.4 8.9

Source: Shisana et al. 2014.

As shown above, multiple sexual partners are not uncommon among South African youth. Most notable is that the incidence of multiple sexual partners has increased over time. In addition, it should be noted that childbearing often happens to people who are not in monogamous

Continuity and Change

35

relationships. For example, a study done in Baltimore amongst unmarried women with unplanned pregnancies at the time showed that women who were in monogamous relationships were more likely to use contraceptives consistently and effectively than those in multiple and concurrent partnerships. These results are consistent with what was found in a study in Malawi (Baschieri et al. 2013).

Resurgence of cultural practices During 2009 and 2010 the South African media alerted the general public to the resurgence of the practice of forced marriages for minor girls in some provinces. In such cases, the husband to be, or his family, abducts a young girl while she is busy doing household chores. The abductors sometimes connive with the parents of the girl, who in return receive financial reward for their cooperation. The girl’s family might succumb to this practice as an act of desperation, driven by harsh economic realities. As a result of this challenge in the Eastern Cape, politicians, traditional leaders and non-governmental organisations were united in condemning this practice. In addition, shelters were created to rehabilitate identified victims. On the other hand, the ceremony of testing the virginity of young girls was revived in some parts of South Africa, especially in KwaZulu-Natal. After falling into disuse for a number of decades, it suddenly resurfaced, and was defended as a way to reduce teenage pregnancy and to reduce the incidence of HIV/AIDS. While an impressive crowd of young women takes part in this ceremony, there is no empirical evidence that it has had an impact on incidences of both childbearing and HIV/AIDS. Instead, it has ignited hot debates that are related to ‘rights to culture’ and the ‘constitutional rights of a girl-child’ (Ngwane forthcoming). There is no evidence that virginity testing has resulted in a decline in teenage childbearing and, similarly, no evidence that resuscitation of the tradition of ukuthwala has resulted in an increase in marriage rates. Behind the revival of the practice of forced marriages and virginity testing in South Africa is the enduring debate between those who believe that the Constitution is inviolable, especially in its protection of individual rights, and the proponents of the ‘right to culture’. The ‘right to culture’ discourse insists on the right of each group to practice its culture, as protected by the Constitution. As Ngwane states: “The defenders of culture argue that traditional practices are inviolable and constitutionally protected; a view that appeals to people whose culture suffered the onslaught of colonialism and apartheid.”

36

Chapter Two

The Role of the AIDS Pandemic Another important factor in South Africa is the presence of childheaded and skipped generational families. High levels of unemployment and poverty and the incidence of HIV/AIDS amongst South Africans have been cited as having a devastating effect on many households in South Africa. There is emerging literature which emphasises the role of grandparents in the nurturing and the grooming of the young. In addition to the traditional role grandparents played in caring for grandchildren, the HIV/AIDS pandemic has completely overwhelmed many older persons with this responsibility. Furthermore, parents in the cities go to work during the day, leaving children in the care of their grandparents (Pinnock 1984; Western 1981). This is exacerbated by apartheid planning, which placed residential areas far from the places of work. This leaves many children and young people extremely vulnerable. It is in this context that some young people do everything in their power to escape the extreme conditions in which they find themselves, and find themselves victims of sexual exploitation. It should also be remembered that South Africa is one of the countries worst affected by the HIV/AIDS pandemic (Noumbisi and Zuberi 2001). This has resulted in changes in the population dynamics that have substantial implications for family structures. Most disadvantaged people reside in rural areas where the heads of households are likely to be women and grandmothers, and sometimes children. Furthermore, these households are likely to be dependent on social grants, if they are able to access them (Amoateng and Richter 2003). The emergence of child-headed and skipped-generation households in South Africa has had an adverse effect on the emerging generation.

Conclusion This chapter has shown that the reason why the majority of children are not growing up with their biological fathers is because many parents are not co-residing. This is, in turn, mainly due to the fact that most childbearing in South Africa happens to women and men who are neither married nor cohabiting. In South Africa, as a general rule, most of those children grow up with their biological mothers. There are other factors that play a part, which include high male mortality and mobility. Higher male mortality, especially in a society where men marry late, results in a number of children growing up without their biological fathers. The AIDS pandemic has had its impact, which might result in some children growing

Continuity and Change

37

up with neither of their parents present. Some of these children might be raised in skipped generational families and, in a few cases, in child-headed families. Another important factor is that of teenage child-bearing. In spite of the noted decline in childbearing, high teenage childbearing in a society where teenage marriages are rare is a significant contributing factor to many children growing up without their fathers, and in some instances with their grandparents.

References Amoateng, A.Y., & Richter L. (2003). The State of families in South Africa. In State of the Nation: South Africa. Daniel, J., Habib, A. & Southal, R. Cape Town: HSRC Press, 242-267. Baschieri, A., J. Cleland, S. Floyd, A. Dube, A. Msona, A. Molesworth, J. R. Glynn & N. French. 2013. “Reproductive Preferences and Contraceptive Use: A Comparison of Monogamous and Polygamous Couples in Northern Malawi. Journal of Biosocial Science, 45, 145166 doi:10.1017/S0021932012000569 Caldwell, J.C. and P. Caldwell. 1987. “The Cultural Context of High Fertility in sub-Saharan Africa.” Population and Development Review, 13(3) (Sep., 1987), 409--437. Chimere-Dan O. D. (2015) “What is happening to the family n South Africa?: Resilience and Change in the context of Social Transformation”. A paper presented at HSRC Seminar. 17 September 2015. Clark S., Bruce J. and Dude A. 2006. Protecting Young Women from HIV/AIDS: The Case against Child and Adolescent Marriage. International Family Perspectives. 32(2): 79-88 Delius, P & Glaser, C. 2005. “Sex, disease and stigma in South Africa: Historical Perspectives.” African Journal of AIDS Research 4 (1), 29-36. Delius, P & Glaser, C. 2002. “Sexual socialisation in South Africa: A Historical Perspective.” African Studies 61 (1), 27--54. Department of Social Development. 2012. White Paper on Families in South Africa. Pretoria. Republic of South Africa. Dixon-Muller. 2008. “How Young is “too young”?: Comparative Perspectives on Adolescent, sexual, marital, and Reproductive Transitions”. Studies in Family Planning. 39(4) 247-262. Durkheim, E. 1933. The Division of Labor in Society. Macmillan New York: The Free Press.

38

Chapter Two

Finer, Lawrence B., Jacqueline E. Darroch and Susheela Singh. 1999. “Sexual Partnership Patterns as a Behavioral Risk Factor for Sexually Transmitted Diseases.” Family Planning Perspectives 31 (5), 228. Gribble J and J. Haffey. 2008. Reproductive Health in Sub-Saharan Africa. Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau. Hall K and Meintjes H. 2013 Demography - children living with parents. Statistics on Children Living in South Africa. Children’s Institute: University of Cape Town [Online] Oct, [cited 2014] Available from: http://childrencount.ci.org.za/indicator.php?id=1&indicator=2 Holborn, L. and G. Eddy. 2011. The first step to healing the South African family. A research paper by the South African Institute of Race Relations sponsored by the Donaldson Trust. Hudgins, J.L, B.J. Holmes and M.E. Locke. 1990. “The impact of family structure variations among black families on the under-enumeration of black males.” Part 1: A Review of Literature. Ethnographic Exploratory Research Report #7. Preliminary Report for Joint Statistical Agreement 89-6 March 1990. Center for Survey Methods Research Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC 20233. Kapolo, M.T. 2001. “Premarital pastoral care and counselling: A Quest for an African Model.” Word & World XXI (2), Spring 2001. Council of Churches in Namibia. Windhoek, Namibia. Kayongo-Male, D and P. Onyango. 1984. The Sociology of the African Family. Longman: New York. Kaufman, C. (1997). Reproductive control in South Africa: Population Council, Policy Research Division. Khalema, N. E., C. Ndinda, L. Bhembe, M. Makiwane, M. Vawda, N. Mahapa, M. Zondo, and N. Mgcina. 2014. “Situation Analysis of Population and Development in Eight Priority Districts of KZN and EC: Analysing the Determinants of Sexual Reproductive Health and Rights.” Final Technical Report: UNFPA, SA, July 2014. King A. (1999) “Female attitudes towards marriage. An exploratory Study”. Journal of Black Studies. Vol 29, No 3 pp 416-437. Kreider, R.M. and Renee E. 2011. “Living Arrangements of Children: 2009,” Current Population Reports, P70-126, U.S. Census Bureau,Washington, DC, 2011 Letamo, G. (1993) “Modernisation and premarital Dyadic Formation in Botswana.” A paper presented at an International Union for the Scientific Study of Population held on the 24th August-1st September 1993. Liege, Belguim. Luke, N and Kurz, K.M. 2002. Cross-generational and transactional sexual relations in Sub-Saharan Africa: prevalence of behaviour and

Continuity and Change

39

implications for negotiating safer sexual practices. This paper was prepared by ICRW in collaboration with PSI as part of the AIDSMark project, which is funded by the Office of HIV/AIDS, Global Bureau, and the Office of Sustainable Development, Africa Bureau, U.S. Agency for International Development, under the terms of Award No. HRN-A-00-97-00021-00. Maharaj, P. 2006. “Reasons for Condom Use Among Young People in KwaZulu-Natal: Prevention of HIV, Pregnancy or Both?” International Family Planning Perspectives Volume 32, Number 1, March 2006. Makiwane, M. 1998. Fertility in Rural South Africa: The Case of Transkei. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Makiwane M. and Chimere-Dan O. (2010) “The people Matter”: The state of the Eastern Cape Population. A report prepared for the Eastern Cape Department of Social Development, Unpublished.Mkhwanazi, N. 2010. “Understanding teenage pregnancy in a post-apartheid South African township.” Culture, Health & Sexuality: An International Journal for Research, Intervention and Care 12 (4), 347—358. —. 2011. The Changing Patterns of Intergenerational Relations in South Africa. Human Sciences Research Council, Pretoria. South Africa. Makiwane, M. and Mokomane, Z. (2010). South Africa youths’ higherrisk sexual behaviour: An eco-developmental analysis. African Journal of AIDS Research, 9(1), pp.17-24. Mswela, M. 2009. “Cultural Practices and HIV in South Africa: A Legal Perspective.” Potchefstroom Law Journal 12 (4). Mudhovozi, P., M. Ramarumo and T. Sodi. 2012. “Adolescent Sexuality and Culture: South African Mothers’ Perspective.” African Sociological review 16 (2), 119--138. Noumbissi, A., & Zuberi, T. (2001). Household structure and aging in South Africa: A research note, Paper prepared for the Virtual Conference on African Households: An exploration of Census Data, Population Studies Center, University of Pennsylvania. Parker, W., B. Makhubele, D. Ntlabati & C. Connolly. 2007. Concurrent Sexual Partnerships Amongst Young Adults in South Africa: Challenges for HIV Prevention Communication. CADRE. Pinnock, D. (1984). The brotherhoods: Street gangs and state control in Cape Town: Philip. Posel, D. & S. Rudwick. 2013. “Changing Patterns of Marriage and Cohabitation in South Africa”. Acta Juridica 13:169--180. Posel, D., S. Rudwick & D. Casale. 2011. “Is Marriage a Dying Institution in South Africa? Exploring Changes in Marriage in the Context of

40

Chapter Two

Ilobolo Payments.” Agenda: Empowering Women for Gender Equity 25 (1), 102--111. Richter, L., T. Emmet, M. Makiwane, R. du Toit, H. Brookes, C. Potgieter, M. Altman & P. Makhura. 2005. Status of the Youth Report: Produced on Commission to the Umsobomvu Youth Fund. Human Sciences Research Council. Pretoria Richter L., C. Desmond, V. Hosegood, S. Madhavan, M. Makiwane, T. Makusha, R. Morell & S. Swartz. 2012. Fathers and Other Men in the Lives of Children and Families. A paper presented at the “Towards Carnergie III: Strategies to Overcome Poverty and Inequality” Conference. UCT 3--7 September 2012. Shisana, O., Rehle, T., Simbayi L., Zuma K, Jooste S., Zungu N et al. (2014). South African National HIV Prevalence, Incidence and Behaviour Survey, 2012. Cape Town: HSRC Press. Silverstein, M. and V. L. Bengstone. 1997. “Intergenerational Solidarity and the Structure of Adult, Child and Parent Relationships in American Families.” American Journal of Sociology (103), 429--460. Siqwana-Ndulo, N. 1998. “Rural African Family Structure in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa.” Journal of Comparative Family Studies 29 (2), 407--417. Swartz, L. 2009. “Fertility Transition in South Africa and its Implications on the Four Major Population Groups. www.un.org/esa/population/publications/completingfertility accessed 29-01-2016. Takyi. B. F. 2011. Transformations in the African Family: A Note on Migration, HIV/AIDS and Family Poverty Alleviation Efforts in SubSaharan Africa (SSA). Paper prepared for the United Nations Expert Group Meeting on Assessing Family Policies, New York, 13 June 2011. World Development Report. 2007. Development and the Next Generations. Washington: World Bank. United Nations 2007 The World Youth Report 2007. www.un.org/esa/socdev/unyn/documents.wyr07-complete.pdf World Family Map. 2014. Mapping Family Change and Child Well-being Outcomes. http://worldfamilymap.org/2014/wp-content/uploads/2014/ 06/WFM-2014-Final_ForWeb.pdf. Ziehl, S.C. 2001. “Documenting Changing Family Patterns in South Africa: Are Census Data of any Value?” African Sociological Review 5 (2), 36-62

CHAPTER THREE THE LIVES AND TIMES OF CHILDREN IN CHILD-HEADED HOUSEHOLDS JACE PILLAY

“A baby on its mother's back does not know the way is long”

42

Chapter Three

Introduction Child-headed households (CHH), mainly in black communities, are increasingly becoming a characteristic of society in South Africa and various parts of Africa. Given the rising number of CHH, it is inevitable that the socialization of black children within the context of families emerges as an area of great concern. An understanding of children’s lives and their positions within African families in South Africa is a critical research need. The author attempts to fill the knowledge gap on the experiences of children from child-headed families by integrating several studies that were either conducted or supervised by him over the last decade. The intention is to present a holistic picture of the lives and times of children from CHH within their homes, schools and communities as construed through the lens of bio-ecological systems theory. The findings reveal the struggles of the children with their living conditions, the changing roles of family members, their fears of the community and their school experiences, all of which affect their psychological well-being. An interesting feature of the studies noted in this chapter is that they poignantly draw inferences on the resilient nature of some of the children from CHH. Whilst the focus of this chapter is on the lived experiences of children from CHH, the author notes that the resilience observed in some of them and manifested in their adaptations, adjustments and survival mechanisms should be considered within an African socio-cultural context.

Child-headed Households In traditional African culture, extended families are a well-established norm across the African Continent, and South Africa is no exception. The significant role of the extended family system in the lives of individuals -in terms of financial, emotional and physical security – has been well documented (Mogotlane et al. 2010). Extended families can be a reliable source of social security for vulnerable people, such as children, senior citizens, and the poor (Apt 2002). In South Africa this is a common phenomenon, especially when government does not have the means and funds to take the responsibility of caring for its vulnerable citizens. Previous studies have indicated that extended family networks are stronger and greater in rural contexts where poverty is most conspicuous (Guest 2003; Foster 2005; Madhavan and Schatz 2007). Research has shown that the last few decades have seen much strain being placed on the extended family system, putting its survival at risk (Food and Agricultural

The Lives and Times of Children in Child-Headed Households

43

Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) 2002; Foster 2005; Naidu and Harris 2005; Bigombe and Khadiagala 2010). Foster aptly captures this when he states: “Due to poverty, urbanization, migration, the development of a cash economy, westernization and labour movements, the kinship network system has been undergoing thorough restructuring and reorganization” (Foster 2000, 56).

Notwithstanding the impact of the factors mentioned above, the added impact of the increasing mortality rates amongst adults due to HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, crime, violence and road accidents further exacerbates the depletion of traditional African family systems (Monasch and Boerma 2004; Mogotlane et al. 2010). The escalating death rate of parents has resulted in the emergence of CHH as an alternative family structure in South Africa (Kapp 2000; Ramsden 2002; Garson 2003; Meier 2003; Sloth-Nielsen 2003). According to Law: “A child-headed household is one where a child or youth has taken charge of a household in terms of decision-making and is responsible for meeting the physical, social and emotional needs of those living in the household” (2009, 1).

Generally, parents or adult caregivers in CHH are permanently absent (Germann 2005) and everyone in the household is 18 years of age or younger (Bequele 2007). There are situations, however, where parents are present but they are taken care of by their children due to debilitating sicknesses, mostly precipitated by HIV/AIDS (Van Breda 2010; Human and van Rensburg 2011). Some researchers have disputed the escalating statistics on CHH, arguing that as long as the extended family systems exist, there cannot be significant numbers of CHH (Meintjies et al. 2010). According to Mturi (2012), academics and researchers are cautious about the statistics, whilst non-governmental and religious organizations are bolder in identifying CHH as a problem in society. The contestation surrounding the prevalence of CHH in South Africa is evident in the following statistics: Richter and Desmond (2008) noted 0.66 per cent of CHH in 2003, while Meintjes et al. (2010) noted 0.47 per cent in 2006; however, the General Household Survey between 2002 and 2011 showed nearly a fifth of South African children living in CHH (Statistics South Africa 2013). Other studies have identified CHH as a problem in all nine provinces in South Africa (HSRC 2002; Guest 2003; Shisanaet al. 2005; Maqoko and Dreyer 2007; Van Dijk and Van Driel 2009). Irrespective of the discrepancies in statistics on CHH in South Africa, it

44

Chapter Three

should be regarded as a problem that needs attention, This is particularly so in the light of studies which point out that the escalation of adult deaths makes it difficult for the extended family system to take on the responsibility of providing care and support for orphans (Smith and Liebenberg 2003; Chilangwa 2004; Mogotlane et al. 2010).

Theoretical Perspective The author endorses Bronfenbrenner’s (1986) bio-ecological systems theory to conceptualize the experiences of children from CHH. Studies show that parental absence is likely to personally affect children in the following ways: psychologically (Biller and Solomon 1986; Bradley and Whitesede-Mansell 1997), socially (Lasser et al. 2011), and behaviourally (Moletsane 2004a and b; Du Toit and Forlin 2009). Inevitably the absence of parents or other significant adults in the lives of children is most likely to impact on all the systems they are part of (Haralambos and Holborn 1995; Earls and Carlson 2001; Donald et al. 2002). It follows that the personal experiences of children from CHH are bound to influence, and be influenced by, their experiences of their family, home, school and community (Green 2001; Ye & Fang 2010). Research based on the lived experiences of children from CHH is presented in the rest of this chapter in a manner which describes their personal, home/family, school and community experiences. The author presents findings of his own studies and links to literature wherever possible.

Personal level Psychological experiences The lives of children from CHH are associated with negative psychological experiences. In his study, the author found that more than 95 per cent of the participants without parents or any form of adult care and supervision were unhappy, sad and angry about their circumstances (Pillay 2011). Some children expressed feelings of helplessness and hopelessness, wishing that they would die rather than endure their current life experiences. Many of the children missed having their parents and felt extremely vulnerable without them. To further compound the problem, most of them were not exposed to any form of grief therapy to help them to deal with the loss of their parents or other adult care givers. The author’s finding on the lack of grief therapy corroborates similar findings by Sloth-Nielsen (2004). The death of parents or significant care givers

The Lives and Times of Children in Child-Headed Households

45

due to HIV/AIDS often resulted in the children feeling lonely and isolated because they also had to deal with the associated stigmatization. They did not want others to know that their parents or significant care givers had died as a result of AIDS, so they avoided people, a finding that was also noted by Beddy (2011). The author found that anxiety and stress are commonly elevated in children from CHH, especially when they have to deal with the challenges of finding money, food, shelter and appropriate healthcare. Similar findings were observed in studies by other researchers (Donald and Clacherty 2005; Maqoko and Dreyer 2007). Furthermore, several researchers have noted low self-esteem amongst children who do not have parents or adult role models (Le Roux 1994; Iwanisec 1996; Gogolo 1998; Louw 1998; Fletcher et al. 1999; Desmond et al. 2003). A study on Aidsorphaned children in urban South Africa (Cluver et al. 2007) identified depression, peer relationship problems, post-traumatic stress, delinquency and conduct problems as being more prevalent amongst orphaned children.

Change of roles Changing family structures inevitably result in changing roles for family members. The author found that this is no exception for CHH where children are forced to take on adult roles and responsibilities for their immediate survival. Virtually all of these children are still in need of adult care and supervision themselves. They are denied the opportunity of being children when they assume adult roles and responsibilities which they have not been prepared for. Research has indicated that, because of patriarchal influences -- which are still very strong in African culture and tradition -- girls are more likely to be expected to assume these roles in CHH (Ewelukwa 2005; Leatham 2005; Ejoyi and Ayo-Odongo 2006; Kiguwa 2008; Visser and Moleko 2012). Girls are expected to take care of the household responsibilities, such as cooking, cleaning and caring for the younger children (Shefer et al. 2010).

Home/family Level The lives of children from CHH are mostly characterized by extreme forms of poverty. In the context of this chapter ‘vulnerable children’ refers to children whose survival, care, protection and development are compromised as a result of living in a CHH (Department of Social Development, 2005). The impact of poverty on the lives of children has been highlighted by a number of studies (Daniels 2010; Engelbrecht 2004;

46

Chapter Three

Engelbrecht et al. 2005). It has been found that vulnerable children are especially affected by the negative impact of poverty on their mental and physical well-being (Vaughn et al. 2000) as well as on their academic performance (Andrews et al. 1996; Nesengani 2005). The author found several negative emotions experienced by children from CHH who lived in dilapidated buildings, some without doors and windows, which made the children vulnerable to child predators (Pillay 2011). Among these emotions were sadness, frustration, despondency and anger. Many of the children also live in totally unhygienic conditions without proper sanitation facilities, water and electricity. This obviously impacts their health, especially through exposure to malaria and tuberculosis. Due to their poverty stricken circumstances, children from CHH do not have adequate furniture at home. Some of them do not have beds and sleep on blankets placed on the floor. Many of them do not have a table or desk at which they can complete their schoolwork, nor a place where they can study. Over-crowding is a common problem experienced in CHH. Despite the negative effects of poverty noted in the preceding discussion, it is important to point out that some studies do not automatically equate poverty with school failure (Au 1993; Buckneret al. 2003; Luthar 2003; Ungar 2004).

School level The author found that, among the learners from CHH in his study, 78 per cent had negative experiences with other children in their school who lived in better socio-economic circumstances. The learners from CHH complained that they were incessantly teased and mocked by other children, an experience which often left them emotionally vulnerable. The magnitude of these negative experiences was such that many of the children went to great lengths to keep secret the fact that they came from CHH. The role and attitudes of educators were also identified by children from CHH as crucial to their experiences at school. Pillay and Nesengani (2006) noted that many educators did not have necessary background information on children from CHH. For example, some of the children in their study pointed out that their educators did not understand their challenges, especially their struggle to complete homework, with much of their time being needed to complete household chores and get food for the day -- even if this meant begging on the streets. When they do not have money to buy electricity or candles, they have to complete their homework before dark, and most times this is not possible. At school they are

The Lives and Times of Children in Child-Headed Households

47

reprimanded for not completing their homework, their educators showing no understanding of what they had endured the night before. In addition to the lack of knowledge about the background circumstances of learners, research indicates that educators generally fail to recognise the problems experienced by children from CHH (Pillay and Nesengani 2006, Taggart and Pillay 2011). Due to the living circumstances of children from CHH it is common for them to experience barriers to learning which educators may not be trained to recognise and address as a normal part of their teaching responsibilities. According to Masitsa (2008), negative attitudes of educators result in children feeling that they are unimportant, and this demotivates them to succeed in school. Many children from CHH also noted positive attitudes and roles played by educators who tried to assist them at school. For example, in the study conducted by Pillay (2011), the learners pointed out that some educators were kind and helpful towards them, often putting in extra effort to support the learners on a daily basis. Guidance and life orientation educators were singled out as the most helpful persons in the school in this context. The author personally witnessed some educators going to great lengths to assist children from CHH. One example was that of two educators who broke down emotionally in a focus group interview when they described how they supported a female learner. This learner was infected with AIDS and eventually died. Studies have indicated that a positive attitude of educators towards learners contributes to the learners’ cognitive, behavioural and emotional empowerment (Becker and Luthar 2002). Other writers have noted that positive attitudes of educators towards vulnerable children helps to build their morale, confidence, wellbeing and satisfaction, which in turn improves their confidence in group engagement (Lethale and Pillay 2013). In another study, Taggart and Pillay (2011) found that educators consciously made an effort to support and accommodate children from CHH in their classrooms. For educators to meaningfully engage with children from CHH, however, they are in dire need of support, capacity building, improved resources and increased governmental involvement (Hayward 2002; Bennell 2005; Taggart and Pillay, 2011).

Academic Achievement In their study, Pillay and Nesengani (2006) found that many children from CHH experience difficulty achieving academically because of poor concentration and their inability to complete school tasks. This was largely due to the numerous household chores they have to do daily, which does

48

Chapter Three

not leave them with enough time to complete their schoolwork. Often they attend school physically and mentally exhausted, which inhibits their ability to concentrate and engage in classroom activities. Their ability to concentrate is further exacerbated by a lack of food (Mogotlane et al. 2010). For many of these children, the only meal that they have for a day is the lunch provided through the feeding scheme at their schools (Pillay 2011). This is why some of the learners become apprehensive when schools close for holidays since this means that they will starve. The academic achievement of children from CHH was also affected by the lack of basic school necessities, such as school uniforms and stationery. Children were sent home by their educators if they did not have the proper school uniform, and this was commonly the case, since many of them only had one uniform which they could not use when it was dirty. Some of them were absent from school on the days that they stayed at home to wash their uniforms. According to the learners, absenteeism, coupled with them being sent out of school, contributed to their poor academic performance (Pillay 2011). Inadvertent absenteeism was generally seen as a serious problem amongst children from CHH. This was mainly due to them taking on part-time jobs to earn money to feed their families, and sometimes there was no one else available to take care of their young siblings. As such, bunking school, and sometimes dropping out of school, became the norm for some of them (Mogotlane et al. 2010).

Community level The author found that children from CHH had both positive and negative experiences in their respective communities. The positive experiences were related to the support they received from community members in terms of the food and clothing that they needed. Many religious organisations in the community were prominent in providing food, mostly in the high schools that did not have government feeding schemes. However, the negative experiences in the community far outweighed the positive ones reported by children from CHH (Pillay 2011). These experiences were based on issues around safety, violence and crime. The children did not feel safe because they were often violated by adults in the community (Phasha 2008). Several girls reported that they were forced to extend sexual favours to men in exchange for protection from other sexual predators, as well as for the money they were given which they used to buy food for their younger siblings. Violence and crime in the community were common social problems, mostly due to poverty and substance abuse

The Lives and Times of Children in Child-Headed Households

49

(Govender and Killian, 2001). This generally resulted in children from CHH being the first easy target. In order to be safe, some of the children asked adults they knew to make themselves visible in their homes, so that other adults would not think they were living on their own. This was a common practice over weekends when substance abuse significantly escalated.

Adaptations, adjustments and survival mechanisms Despite the numerous challenges placed upon children from CHH, it is imperative to note that some of them display remarkable forms of resilience, as displayed in their ability to adapt and adjust to their life situations (Pillay 2011; Lethale and Pillay 2013). Resilience means different things to different people, but in the context of this chapter it refers to children’s competency to overcome adversity in the stressful situations they are exposed to in CHH (Atia et al. 2008; Ungar 2008). According to some theorists who work in various African contexts, the ability of children from CHH to adapt and adjust to their changing circumstances is not necessarily surprising since children caring for children is a valuable aspect of human development in African culture (Nsamenang 2009; Serpell 2011). In fact this is often viewed as an essential part of teaching children family responsibility, allowing mothers the time to take care of other important family responsibilities (Evan 2011). The resilience of children from CHH has been reported in several studies. For example, Lethale (2008) found that many participants in her study displayed strong positive aspirations for their future. The children emphasised the importance of working hard at school in order to achieve good academic results since they felt that this was the only way that they could get out of their poverty-stricken circumstances. These positive aspirations, together with the feeding schemes at schools, should be used strategically by school management teams and governing bodies to encourage children from CHH to remain in school until the completion of their schooling. In addition, an ethos of care amongst educators is most likely to support the capacity of these children to adapt, adjust and survive in spite of the odds being against them (Pillay 2011; Lethale and Pillay 2013). School counsellors and educational psychologists could be instrumental in providing counselling and support services for children from CHH, especially to address the negative psychological experiences pointed out in this chapter, as well as the children’s ability to deal with grief and bereavement resulting from the loss of their parents or care-

50

Chapter Three

givers. Since children from CHH highlighted the positive experiences they had with guidance and life orientation educators – as discussed earlier -- it would be useful to provide these educators with some basic counselling skills to further support the learners at the personal and school levels.

Conclusion: the way ahead The above discussions poignantly describe the experiences of children from CHH. While the descriptions are presented in separate and specific levels, these are by no means mutually exclusive. Conceptualised from a bio-ecological systems theoretical perspective, the child, family, school and community levels are interrelated and interdependent. Therefore, whatever children from CHH experience at a personal level is most likely to affect and influence what they experience in their families, schools and local communities, and the same would apply across levels. For example, the psychological trauma of losing a parent through HIV/AIDS is likely to have a negative impact on what happens in families. The loss of income in the family due to the death of the parent is likely to impact children’s school life since there may be no funds to pay school fees or to purchase school necessities. This, in turn, may result in children begging, stealing or resorting to deviant sexual behaviours in order to obtain money from their local communities. Consequently, a vicious cycle of events is put in motion. This makes it crucial, if any success is to be noted, for all intervention strategies directed at supporting children from CHH to adopt a multi-level focus. Last but not least, the intervention strategies should facilitate appropriate adaptations, adjustments and survival mechanisms for children from CHH. Government should strategically design and implement policies to spearhead intervention programs. Aligned to concerns about CHH raised in this chapter, several areas should be covered by policy initiatives. This includes provision of counselling services in schools and communities for learners from CHH, especially in relation to grief and trauma therapy, life skills programmes, learning support for children, aftercare and homework support, safety and security, and sexual exploitation. At a macro level, government’s first priority should be to eliminate parentless homes. It is also imperative that the various government sectors work in a well-coordinated and integrated manner to provide holistic support for CHH. Governmental intervention is needed to address the numerous inequalities in society that perpetuate the economic, social and psychological disempowerment of people in CHH. While government should be

The Lives and Times of Children in Child-Headed Households

51

instrumental in leading some of these intervention strategies, families, schools and communities should collaboratively be part of this process.

Note ‘This work is based on the research supported by the South African Research Chairs Initiative of the Department of Science and Technology and National Research Foundation of South Africa’. South African Research Chair: Education and Care in Childhood: Faculty of Education: University of Johannesburg South Africa. Grant Number: 87300

References Andrews, K., G. Vernon and M. Walton. 1996. Good Policy and Practice for Social Workers. London: Sage. Apt, N. A. 2002. “Ageing and the Changing Role of the Family and the Communities: An African Perspective.” International Social Security Review 55 (1): 39--47. Au, K. 1993. Literacy Instruction in Multicultural Settings. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Becker, B. E and S.S. Luther. 2002. “Social and Emotional Factors Affecting Achievement Outcomes Among Disadvantaged Students: Closing the Achievement Gap. Educational Psychologist 37 (4). Beddy, C. 2011. A Case Study on the Internal Resources that Contribute to the Resilience of an Adolescent Learner who heads a Child-headed Household. Unpublished Master’s thesis. University of Johannesburg. South Africa. Bennell, P. 2005. “The Impact of the AIDS Epidemic on the Schooling of Orphans and Other Directly Affected Children in Sub-Saharan Africa.” The Journal of Developmental Studies 41 (3): 467--488. Bequele, A. 2007 March. The emerging challenges of children heading households: some reflections. In Speech Delivered at the Opening Session of the 5th African Conference on Child Abuse and Neglect on HIV/AIDS and Children: The Challenges of Care for and Protection of Children in Africa. Kampala, ANPPCAN,[Online] http://www.africanchildinfo.net/documents/CHH_ASPCAN Revised. pdf (accessed on 26/01/2015). Bigombe, B. and G. M. Khadiagala. 2010. Resurgent continent?: Africa and the world: prospects for growth in Africa: learning from patterns of long-term economic change. In Prospects for Growth in Africa: Learning from Patterns of Long-term Economic Change, edited by M.

52

Chapter Three

Jerven. London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK. Biller, H. B and R. S. Solomon. 1986. Child Maltreatment and Paternal Deprivation: A Manifesto for Research, Prevention and Treatment. New York: MacGraw-Hill Inc. Bradley, R. and L. Whitesede-Mansell. 1997. “Children in Poverty.” In Handbook of Prevention and Treatment with Children and Adolescents – Intervention in the Real World Context, edited by R. T. Ammerman and M. Hersen, 59—87. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Bronfenbrenner, U. 1986. “Ecology of the Family as a Context for Human Development: Research Perspectives.” Developmental Psychology 22 (4): 723--742. Buckner, J. C., E. Mezzacappa, and W. R. Beardslee. 2003. “Characteristics of Resilient Youths Living in Poverty: The Role of Self-regulatory Processes. Development and Psychopathology 15: 139-162. Chilangwa, B. 2004. Zambia’s Orphans and Vulnerable Children. Ministry of Sport, Youth and Child Development. Zambia. Cluver, L., F. Gardner, and D. Operario. 2007. “Psychological Distress Amongst AIDS-orphaned Children in Urban South Africa.” Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 28 (8): 755--763. Daniels, B. 2010. “Developing Inclusive Policy and Practice in Diverse Contexts: A South African Experience.” School Psychology International 31 (6): 631--643. Daud, A., af Klinteberg, B., & Rydelius, P. A. (2008). Resilience and vulnerability among refugee children of traumatized and nontraumatized parents. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 2(1), 7. Department of Social Development. 2005. Policy Framework on Orphans and Other Children made Vulnerable by HIV and AIDS in South Africa. Pretoria: Department of Social Development. Desmond, C., L. Richter, M. Makiwane, and A. Amoateng. 2003. “Dissecting Our Understanding of Who is at Risk.” Children First (Special Edition): 56--58. Donald, D. and G. Clacherty. (2005). “Developmental Vulnerabilities and Strengths of Children Living in Child-headed Households: A Comparison with Children in Adult-headed Households in Equivalent Impoverished Communities.” African Journal of AIDS Research 4: 21-28 Donald, D., Lazarus, S. & Lolwana, P. (2002). Educational Psychology in Social Context. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.

The Lives and Times of Children in Child-Headed Households

53

Du Toit, P. and C. Forlin. 2009. Cultural Transformation for Inclusion, What is Needed? A South African Perspective.” School Psychology International 30 (6): 644-666. Earls, F. and M. Carlson. 2001. “The Social Ecology of Child Health and Well-being.” Annual Review of Public Health 22: 143--166. Engelbrecht, P. 2004. “Changing Roles for Educational Psychologists within Inclusive Education in South Africa.” School Psychology International 25 (1): 20--29. Engelbrecht, P., M. Oswald, E. Swart, A. Kitching, and I. Eloff. 2005. “Parents’ Experiences of Their Rights in the Implementation of Inclusive Education in South Africa.” School Psychology International 26 (4): 459--477. Ejoyi, X. and S. Ayo-Odongo. 2006. Violence against Girls within the Home in Africa. Proceedings of the 2nd International Policy Conference on the African Child: Violence against Girls in Africa. Conducted by the Uganda Child Rights NGO Network. Uganda Evans, R. 2011. “‘We Are Managing Our Own Lives…’ Life Transitions and Care in Sibling-headed Households Affected by AIDS in Tanzania and Uganda.” AREA 43 (4): 384--396. Ewelukwa, U. 2005. “The Girl Child, African States, and International Human Rights Law – Towards a New Framework for Action.” In Engendering Human Rights – Cultural and Socio-economic Realities in Africa, edited by O. Nnaemeka and J. N, Ezeilo, 13--15. New York, USA: Palgrave MacMillan. Fletcher, A. C, L. Steinberg and E. B. Sellers. 1999. “Adolescents’ Wellbeing as a Function of Perceived Interpersonal Consistency.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 61: 599--610. Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations, 2002. Measuring impacts of HIV/AIDS on rural livelihoods and food security. Rome, Italy FAO. Foster, G. 2000. “The Capacity of the Extended Family Safety Net for Orphans in Africa.” Psychology, Health and Medicine 5 (1): 55--62. —. 2005. Bottlenecks and Drip-feeds. Channeling Resources to Communities Responding to Orphans and Vulnerable Children in Southern Africa. London, UK. Save the Children. Garson, P. 2003. Mandela Focuses on Aids Orphans. Retrieved November 18, 2009 from http//www.southafrica.info/Mandela/mandelachildren’sfund.htm. Germann, S. E. 2005. An Exploratory Study of Quality Life and Coping Strategies of Orphans Living in Child-headed Households in High

54

Chapter Three

HIV/AIDS Prevalent City of Bulawayo, Zimbabwe. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, University of South Africa. Gogolo, T. J. 1998. The School Principal and Parental Involvement According to Section 19(2) of the School’s Act 84 of 1996. Johannesburg: Rand Afrikaans University. Govender, K. and B. J. Killian. 2001. “The Psychological Effect of Chronic Violence on Children Living in South African Townships.” South African Journal of Psychology 31(2): 1--11. Green, L. (2001). Theoretical and contextual background. Promoting learner development: Preventing and working with barriers to learning, 3-16. Pretoria: J L Van Schaik. Guest, E. (2003). Children of AIDS: Africa’s Orphan Crisis. (2nd edition). Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press. Haralambos, M. and M. Holborn. 1995. Sociology of Education: Themes and Perspectives. London: Routledge. Hayward, R. 2002. “Educator Morale in South Africa in 2002.” Report on findings National Professional Teachers’ Organisation of South Africa. Pretoria: NAPTOSA Human, S. P. and G. H. van Rensburg. 2011. “Challenges in the Management of Support and Care Programmes for Child-headed Households in South Africa. Journal of Nursing Management 19 (7): 959--966. Iwanisec, D. 1996. The Emotionally Abused and Neglected Child. London: John Wiley & sons. Kapp, J. A. 2000. Children with Problems. Pretoria: J. L Van Schaik Kiguwa, P. 2008. “Feminist Critical Psychology in South Africa.” In Critical Psychology, edited by D. Hook, 278--315. Lansdowne, South Africa: UCT Press. Lasser, J., K. Fite, and A. P. Wadende. 2011. “Fatherhood in Kenyan Ethnic Communities: Implications for Child Development.” School Psychology International 32 (1): 49--57. Law, L. 2009. “Briefing Paper 209: Child-headed Households.” Southern African Catholic Bishops’ Conference, May 2009, 1--4. Cape Town: South Africa. Leatham, C. P. (2005). The Lived Experiences of Adolescent Learners from Child-headed Households in the Northern Free State. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Johannesburg, South Africa: University of Johannesburg. Le Roux, J. 1994. The Black Child in Crisis: A Socio-Educational Perspective, Vol. 2. Pretoria: J L Van Schaik.

The Lives and Times of Children in Child-Headed Households

55

Lethale, P. S. 2008. The Resilience of Adolescents from Adolescent-headed Families within the School Context. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Johannesburg, South Africa: University of Johannesburg. Lethale, P. S. and J. Pillay. 2013. “Resilience Against All Odds: A Positive Psychology Perspective of Adolescent-headed Families.” Africa Education Review 10 (3): 581--596. Louw, D. A. 1998. Human Development. Pretoria: Haum. Luthar, S. S. 2003. Resilience and Vulnerability Adaptation in the Context of Childhood Adversities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Madhavan, S. and E. J. Schatz. 2007. “Coping with Change: Household Structure and Composition in Rural South Africa.” Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 35 (69): 85--93. Maqoko, Z. and Y. Dreyer, Y. 2007. “Child-headed Households because of the Trauma Surrounding HIV/AIDS.” Hervormde Teologiese Studies (HTS)/ Theological Studies 63 (2): 717--731. Masitsa, G. M. 2008. “Tracing the Development of Poor Student Motivation and Performance in Township Secondary Schools.” Africa Education Review 5 (1): 84--108. Meier, E. 2003. “The Growth of AIDS Orphans and Policy Solutions.” Pediatric Nursing 29 (1): 75--77. Meintjes, H., K. Hall, D. H. Marera and A. Boulle. 2010. “Orphans of the AIDS Epidemic? The Extent, Nature and Circumstances of Childheaded Households in South Africa.” AIDS Care 22 (1): 40--49. Mogotlane, S. M., M. E. Chauke, G. H. van Rensburg, S. P. Human and C. M. Kganakga. 2010. “A Situational Analysis of Child-headed Households in South Africa.” Curationis 33 (3): 24--32. Moletsane, M. 2004a. Challenges Faced by Both Learners Orphaned by AIDS and their Educators in South African Schools. Pretoria: University of Pretoria. —. 2004b. “Families.” In Keys to Educational Psychology edited by I. Eloff and L. Ebersohn. Cape Town, RSA: UCT Press. Monasch, R. and J. T. Boerma. 2004. “Orphanhood and Childcare Patterns in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Analysis of National Surveys from 40 Countries.” AIDS, 18 (suppl. 3): S55--S65. Mturi, A. J. 2012. “Child-headed Households in South Africa: What We Know and What We Don’t.” Development Southern Africa 29 (3): 506--516 Naidu, V. and G. Harris. 2005. “The Impact of HIV/AIDS Morbidity and Mortality on Households – A Review of Household Studies.” South African Journal of Economics (73): 536.

56

Chapter Three

Nesengani, R. I. 2005. The Needs of Rural Parent-absent Early Adolescents. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg. Nsamenang, A. B. 2009. “A Critical Peek at Early Childhood Care and Education in Africa.” Child Health and Education 1 (1): 44--55. Phasha, T. N. 2008. “The Role of the Teacher in Helping Learners Overcome the Negative Impact of Child Sexual Abuse: A South African Perspective.” School Psychology International 29 (3): 303-327. Pillay, J. 2011. “Experiences of Learners from Child-headed Households in a Vulnerable School that Makes a Difference: Lessons for School Psychologists.” School Psychology International 33 (1): 3--21. Pillay, J. and R. I. Nesengani. 2006. “The Educational Challenges Facing Early Adolescents Who Head Families in Rural Limpopo Province.” Education as Change 10 (2): 131--147. Ramsden, N. 2002. Community Help for Children Living in an HIVworld. Durban: Children’s Rights Centre. Serpell, R. 2011. “Social Responsibility as a Dimension of Intelligence, and as an Educational Goal: Insight from Programmatic Research in an African Society.” Child Development Perspectives 5 (2): 126--133. Shefer, T., G. Stevens and L. Clowes. 2010. “Men in Africa: Masculinities, Materiality and Meaning.” Journal of Psychology in Africa 20 (4): 511--518. Shisana, O., & Simbayi, L. C. (2002). Nelson Mandela/HSRC study of HIV/AIDS: South African national HIV prevalence, behavioural risks and mass media: household survey 2002. HSRC Press. Shisana, O., Rehle, T., Simbayi, L. C., Parker, W., Zuma, K., Bhana, A. & Pillay, V. (2005). South African national HIV prevalence, HIV incidence, behavior and communication survey, 2005. Cape Town, South Africa: Human Sciences Research Council Publishers. Sloth-Nielsen, J. 2003. “Too Little, Too Late? – Provisioning for Childheaded Households.” ESR Review 3 (1): 24--25. —. 2004. Realising the Rights of Children Growing up in Child-headed Households – A Guide to Laws, Policies and Social Advocacy. Cape Town, South Africa: Creda Communications. Smith, A. G. & Liebenberg, L. (2003). “Understanding the Dynamics of Parent Involvement in Schooling within the Poverty Context.” South African Journal of Education, 23 (11): 1--5. Statistics South Africa. 2013. General Household Survey 2012. Pretoria: Statistics SA. Accessed on 24 August 2015. http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2012/12/06/a-fifth-offsa-child.

The Lives and Times of Children in Child-Headed Households

57

Taggart, N. and J. Pillay. 2011. “The Educational and Psychological Support of Educators to Include Learners from Child-headed Homes in Urban Classrooms.” South African Journal of Childhood Education 1 (2): 228--249. Ungar, M. 2004. “A Constructionist Discourse on Resilience. Multiple Contexts, Multiple Realities Among At-risk Children and Youth.” Youth & Society 3 5(3): 341--365. —. 2008. “Resilience Across Cultures.” British Journal of Social Work 38 (2): 218--235. Van Breda, A. D. 2010. “The Phenomenon and Concerns of Child-headed Households in Africa.” In Sozialarbeit des Südens, Band III: Kindheiten und Kinderrechte, edited by M. Liebel and R. Lutz, 259-280). Oldenburg: Paolo Freire Verlag. Van Dijk, D. and F. Van Driel. 2009. “Supporting Child-headed Households in South Africa: Whose Best Interests?” Journal of Southern African Studies 35 (4): 915--927. Vaughn, S., C. Bos and J. S. Schumm. 2000. Teaching Exceptional, Diverse and At-risk Students in the General Education Classroom. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Visser, M. and A. G. Moleko (Eds.). 2012. Community Psychology in South Africa (2nd Ed). Pretoria, South Africa: Van Schaik Publishers. Ye, Y. D. and B. J. Fang. 2010. “The Development of School Psychological Services in the Chinese Mainland: A Chinese Perspective.” School Psychology International 31 (5): 521--530.

CHAPTER FOUR THE IMPACT OF FAMILY STRUCTURE ON SCHOOLING OUTCOMES FOR CHILDREN IN SOUTH AFRICA PEDZISAI NDAGURWA AND NOMPUMELELO NZIMANDE

“Children are the living messages we send to a time we will not see”

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

59

Introduction In 1990, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) acknowledged that education is an essential aspect of human development (Lloyd and Blanc 1996). In 1994, the United Nations committed to this common view, joined in 1995 by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) (Lloyd and Blanc 1996). This resulted in the incorporation of education as one of the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) at the 2000 United Nations Millennium Summit in New York, United States of America (USA). The second goal of the MDGs is to make education universal for boys and girls alike by 2015 (United Nations, 2012). By 2011, South Africa had achieved the goal of universal access to primary education for both sexes aged 7 to 15 years, with adjusted net enrolment rates of 98.2 per cent for boys and 99.2 per cent for girls (Statistics South Africa 2013). The country report on MDGs by Statistics South Africa (StatsSA) (2013) using 2010 data, however, highlighted that there still remain in the education system concerns about poor learner performance, high drop-out and repetition rates. At global level, it is reported that the majority of non-schooling children are located in sub-Saharan Africa and Southern Asia, and one of the factors identified for this is inequality in societies (United Nations 2012). Access to education can be an important aspect that reflects the level of development in a country. International population conferences, for example the International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo in 1994, and others such as the 1995 World Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen, highlighted education as a crucial factor in measuring levels of development in developing countries (United Nations 2012). The MDGs, expiring in September 2015, will be replaced by seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of which the fourth goal is to ensure inclusive and quality education for all and promote life-long learning (United Nations 2015). This research is meant to add value in understanding factors that promote higher educational attainment for young persons, with particular focus on the family structures in which children live. The family performs the basic task of socialisation and is therefore the unit where human development outcomes originate. This study aims to determine and show the important role that family structures play in the schooling outcomes of children in South Africa. Charles, Davies and Harris (2008 213), stated that social change, characterised by ‘de-domestication’ of women, has been closely associated with changes in family structures with far reaching implications on child outcomes—such as educational attainment and health. In a related

60

Chapter Four

conclusion, it was observed that the well-being of children, measured by different outcomes including educational attainment, is “affected in important ways by the constellation of social relationships within which they live” (Townsend, Madhavan, Tollman, Garenne and Khan 2002). In the past, social change led to the nucleation of family systems; extended family households became less common while nuclear families became increasingly more common, and were characterised by investment in children’s education and health needs (Goode 1963). In several disciplines of the social sciences such as Population Studies, Economics and Psychology, the subject of family structure and child outcomes has received extensive theoretical and empirical investigation. There are theories that explain the association between household well-being and outcome of children. The theories include Becker’s new household economics, ecological systems, Vygotsky’s socio-historical theory, dynamic systems theory, economic resource theory, social control and economic hardship theory (Bukatko and Daehler 2011; Hill, Yeung and Duncan 2001). Many studies have established the link between children’s living arrangements and their schooling outcomes. Heiland and Liu (2006) compared children raised out of wedlock to those raised by married couples in the US, and found the former fared less well on measures of well-being, which included schooling outcomes. Related findings are reported in a recent publication by Fagan, Have and Chen (2011) based on a US sample in which the socio-economic statuses of the families were controlled. According to these findings (2011), 85 per cent of adolescents from intact biological families complete high school compared to 67 per cent of students from single-parent families, 65.4 per cent from stepfamilies and just 51.9 per cent of students who live with no parents. Moreover, children from non-intact families were found to be three times as likely to drop out of school as students from intact families. Children’s living arrangements and their impact on child outcomes have also been extensively studied in sub-Saharan Africa, including in South Africa. Bicego, Rutstein and Johnson (2003), in a study based on Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) data from seventeen sub-Saharan countries which include Zimbabwe, Kenya, Tanzania, Niger and Ghana, found higher levels of school dropout among children who have lost one or both parents. Child mobility was one of the reasons provided to explain this finding (Bicego, Rutstein and Johnson 2003). Orphaned children were found to frequently travel over long distances between the households of relatives, which disrupt these children’s schooling. Similar observations are reported in Ford and Hosegood (2005) and Ainsworth and Semali

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

61

(2003) in studies conducted in rural KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) and North Somalia respectively. Recent studies on changes in family systems in South Africa have noted the impact of Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus and Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (HIV/AIDS) and rising divorce rates. Cottrell, Merli and Nzimande (2007) state that HIV/AIDS, low marriage rates, delayed union formation and relatively high divorce rates in South Africa have resulted in different living arrangements for children, with varying consequences on child development, as many children are born and raised out of wedlock. A previous study by Lloyd and Blanc (1996), based on a sample drawn in South Africa, found that the presence of a female parent was associated with better schooling outcomes for children. A study on children’s living arrangements, using data courtesy of the Agincourt Health and Population Programme in Mpumalanga, yielded similar findings (Townsend et al. 2002). Looking at changing family systems in South Africa using the 1991 census, 1996 census and 1998 South Africa Demographic Health Survey, Merli and Palloni (2004) highlighted that, in the wake of the HIV/AIDS pandemic, an increasing number of children were living with grandparents and extended family members. Richter and Desmond (2008) confirmed this observation using data from national household surveys between 1995 and 2005, adding that child-headed households, despite being small in proportion, rose markedly during the period especially considering the absolute numbers of children being orphaned. Orphanage, the condition of being deprived of parental care, especially the loss of the mother, almost tripled during the same period (Richter and Desmond 2008). While the majority of the studies conducted in South Africa and most of the subSaharan region were largely based on provinces or aimed at different objectives, this study will be based on a national sample. It specifically focuses on the impact of family structure (living arrangements) on children’s schooling outcomes. Family structure has been found to be an important factor in the schooling outcomes of children in most countries in the world, including South Africa. The term ‘family structure’ is a social construct that can be genealogically or demographically conceptualised (Nam 2004). It is used in this research with reference to its demographic meaning as captured in censuses, community or household surveys. The demographic meaning of family structure refers to the hierarchical social organisation or arrangement that exists in a household, and defines each member’s position, functions and how they are related to other members living in the same residence as one family unit (Nam 2004). Family structure can be used interchangeably with living arrangement or household because the

62

Chapter Four

three concepts carry similar meaning in demographic studies, while the latter two have been used to refer to family structure (Cottrell, Merli and Nzimande 2007). It has been found that living arrangements of children are linked to the level of income and socioeconomic status of households, which affects the ability of a household to invest in children’s education (Lansford et al. 2001). Using data from a demographic surveillance area (DSA) in KZN, Case and Ardington (2006) found low enrolment rates and significantly fewer years of schooling completed among children without both, or one, of their parents, compared to those living with their parents. The level of income is generally lower in single-parent households than in two-parent households. This subsequently impacts on the level of expenditure on children’s socio-economic needs, such as education, health and shelter (Kibel 2010; Lloyd and Desai 1992). Studies investigating the importance of family structure in the United States of America and Canada found that children growing up in conventional two-parent households do better on measures of schooling outcomes compared to those in other family types (Gennetian 2005; Lansford et al. 2001).

Family structures The types of family structure existing at any point in time, in a particular society, are a result of contextual forces emanating from the knowledge exchange systems and cultural, religious and economic forms of production prevailing in that society. In the pre-industrial era, families were generally large and often consisted of more than two generations per household—given the agrarian-based subsistence production and communal life, theorised by French sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies in 1887 as gemeinschaft (Cahnman 1973). The emergence and growth of industry greatly altered the many aspects of the socio-economic organisation of the western world that favoured larger families. Studies based in US, Europe, Australia and Canada have identified and classified family structures into four categories: two-parent (intact) family, single-parent family, stepfamily and others (Amato 2005; Park 2007; Lansford et al. 2001). The four categories are based on the traditional definition of the family which was first adopted for the 1940 census by US Census Bureau, defining a family as “a group of two people or more related by birth, marriage or adoption and residing together” (Tillman and Nam 2008, 368). Intact families make up what is called a nuclear family structure. There are two forms of singleparent structure, one headed by a female and the other by a male (Ginther and Pollak 2004; McLanahan and Sandefur 1994; Kiernan 1992). According to Wattenberg (1986), for the baby boomers in the US

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

63

adulthood coincided with socio-economic factors that resulted in the waning of the historical resistance to rearing children outside marriage— hence the proliferation of the single-parent family structure from the 1970s. Factors such as pursuit of higher education, professional careers, rising divorce rates and the tendency for men to choose younger spouses— which meant ever restricted chances of marriage for the female baby boomers in the US—contributed to the growth of the single-parent family structure headed by a female (Wattenberg 1986). Similar factors have been highlighted in more recent studies in countries like Norway, Britain and Canada (Steele, Sigle-Rushton and Kravdal 2009; Cheadle, Amato and King 2010). In a study based on US data, Wattenberg (1986) presented statistical evidence demonstrating the phenomenal rate of change in the patterns of living arrangements between 1970 and 1982, including the increase in female-headed structures. According to Wattenberg (1986), single-parent families in the US, headed by once-married females with dependent children, grew by 105 per cent between 1970 and 1982, from 2.85 million to 5.86 million households. The same period also witnessed a 425 per cent increase in the number of families headed by never-married women, and the number of children in two-parent families fell by 21 per cent (Wattenberg, 1986). The prevalence of female-headed families has authors like Cheadle et al (2010) regard motherhood as an important aspect in studying how family structures impact on child outcomes such as schooling and health. Motherhood is defined as the kinship relationship between mother and child (Cheadle et al, 2010). Its importance emanates from the fact that many fathers are either not involved in the rearing of their children, or are only involved for short periods following divorce or the birth of a child, in the event of non-marital birth.

South African Context In South Africa’s current social context of high divorce rates, low marriage rates and history of migrant labour, the study of the impact of family structure on children’s well-being, which includes educational attainment, is an interesting academic and policy enquiry (Holborn and Eddy 2011). Besides, in the light of changing age structure and the need to harness the benefits of the bulging working age group, there is a need to understand factors that affect children’s educational development in South Africa. South Africa has proactively responded to this with the National Development Plan (NDP) 2030, which lays the goals and strategies for improving access to quality education for children from Early Childhood Development (ECD) to tertiary level, and raising employment rates by the

64

Chapter Four

year 2030. The NDP 2030 has intermediate targets for the years 2015 and 2020, and places high value on education at all age groups, including ECD, Grade R, basic education, post school (tertiary), and national research and innovation. By the year 2030, the goal is for the performance of South African learners in international standardised tests to be comparable to those from countries that are at a similar level of development as South Africa (Republic of South Africa 2015). The discovery of minerals such as gold and platinum, coupled with the colonial administrations’ oppressive laws, created a growing ‘absent father’ phenomenon. Many African males were forced to leave their families in search of paid employment, particularly in the area that is presently Gauteng, working, for example, on the mines which sprang up in the areas surrounding Johannesburg. Despite improvements in the political environment since 1994 and the spread of capitalist values across the country, the family institution has not witnessed commensurate transformation as anticipated by Goode (1963). Goode (1963) hypothesized that development is positively correlated with nucleation of family structures accompanied by an increased emphasis on children’s needs, such as education and health. The main statement of Goode’s (1963) thesis was an elaboration of the rural-urban model developed by German sociologist Tönnies in 1940. According to Goode (1963), the processes of urbanisation and industrialisation result in a weakening of extended family structures, decline in fertility, neolocal residence of couples, emancipation of women and greater participation in the labour force for women. The end result is the overwhelming predominance of the conjugal (nuclear) family as the main form of domestic organisation in a society. Such an outcome was the object of Russell’s (2002, 3) comment that “kinship relations shrink largely, but not entirely, to the compass of a man’s family of birth and family of marriage”. Support for Goode’s (1963) proposition in the context of South Africa can be found in the studies conducted by Pauw and Mayer (1973), Marwick (1978) and, albeit confined to whites only, Beittel (1992). In recent decades, however, there has been an absence of similar studies. Pauw and Mayer (1973) compared the family structures of the Duncan village residents in 1960, before they moved to Mdantsane. While in Duncan village, 58 per cent of households were extended families, but twelve years later the proportion of extended family structures had “significantly dropped” (Pauw and Mayer 1973, 208). The predominance of the nuclear family structure was most evident among the Nguni-speaking people living in a township near Johannesburg. In that location, these people were strongly influenced by modernisation, depending almost entirely on wage labour for sustenance (Marwick 1978).

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

65

Out of the total number of the Nguni households near Johannesburg, 48 per cent were nuclear families (Marwick, 1978). The observations by Marwick (1978) may have vindicated Goode’s (1963) proposition, but it can be pointed out that they were only applicable to the Nguni-speaking community in the township near Johannesburg. Given the broader socio-political context prevailing in the country at the time, the system of residence identified by Marwick (1978) may not be considered representative of the wider changes in family structures in South Africa. Beittel’s (1992) research presented a more authentic portrayal of family structure dynamics for the different population groups in the country. According to Beittel (1992), family structures for both poor and skilled whites had, from the 1930s, been similar, comprising a conjugal unit with children and a black servant. Among blacks, particularly in the countryside, Beittel (1992) noted an increasing proportion of households headed by females and the rise of multigenerational family structures, mainly due to male migration to urban centres for jobs. Beittel (1992), besides revealing the differences in family structures between blacks and whites, made insightful observations that help highlight the contradictions in social and domestic organisation among black South Africans. While black South Africans residing in urban areas tended to stay in nuclear families, this was not the case in rural areas (Beittel 1992). Important changes in the organisation of the South African economy and the social context of families arose from the onset of democracy in 1994. An investigation into the living arrangements of children, using data from StatsSA, revealed that the proportion of children living in a household with both parents present fell from 38 per cent in 2002 to 33 per cent in 2010 (Meintjes et al. 2010). Due mainly to low marriage rates, divorce and mortality, 39 per cent of children lived only with their mothers, while 3 percent lived only with their fathers (Meintjes et al. 2010). An estimated 24 per cent were found to be living in the absence of either of their parents, and in most of these instances only one of the parents was alive, but living somewhere else. The current patterns of living arrangements for children at provincial level show that in the most urbanised provinces there are higher proportions of children who live with both parents than the national average; for example Gauteng and Western Cape with 54 per cent and 50 per cent respectively (Hall et al. 2012). This may partly be due to the impact of modernisation on family structure postulated in Goode’s (1963) model. This becomes more apparent when considering that most of the children living in nuclear families belong to the 40 per cent richest quintiles as shown in Figure 4.1.

66

Chapter Four

Source: Hall et al. (2012) South African Child Gauge, 2010. Figure 4.1 Children’s living arrangements in South Africa by income quintile, 2010

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

67

Figure 4.1 shows that the proportion of children living with both parents becomes higher as one moves up the income quintiles, ranging from 19.1 per cent in the poorest 20 per cent, to 73 per cent in the richest 20 per cent. This is comparable to a commensurate pattern of proportions of ‘mother only’ and ‘neither parent’ households that decline considerably as one moves up the income quintiles. It is, however, interesting that the proportion of children living with ‘father only’ is shown to slightly increase with income quintiles ranging from 2.4 per cent in the poorest 20 per cent to 4.5 per cent of the fourth quintile. In the 1990s, South Africa experienced profound socio-political and demographic changes that affected the living arrangements of families (Cottrell, Merli and Nzimande 2007). A major development was the emergence and spread of HIV/AIDS, which further complicated children’s living arrangements while increasing the incidence of orphanhood and widowhood (Cottrell, Merli and Nzimande 2007). According to Holborn and Eddy (2011, 10), HIV/AIDS mortality and morbidity among young adults “placed an added burden on children”. This carried negative implications for the children’s education, especially in the context of rising unemployment. High unemployment means less income for the adult population left to care for children orphaned by HIV/AIDS-related deaths. This further reduces families’ capacity to afford optimal investment in the children’s educational needs. In its wake, HIV/AIDS has left a new form of family structure in South Africa—the child-headed household—as well as creating what has been called the skipped generation household (Karim and Karim 2010). Given the distinct historical socioeconomic and political context of South Africa, this research departs from the western world’s taxonomy of family structures and adopts one that comprehensively captures the living arrangements prevalent in South Africa. The following taxonomy of family structures, as identified by Cottrell, Merlie and Nzimande (2007, 4), will therefore be adopted in examining the impact of family structure on children’s schooling outcomes: a. Nuclear structure, consisting of two parents and children (biological, adopted and stepchildren); b. Incomplete nuclear structure, comprising a single parent and his or her children; c. Solitary structure—one person living alone; d. Couple structure—consisting of two people living together as husband and wife or in a cohabiting relationship; e. Extended structure (three generational households);

68

Chapter Four

f. Skipped generation structure, consisting of grandparents and grandchildren; g. Complex structure, which is any of the above with one or more non-related person; and h. Other—a variety of household configurations that cannot be described by any of the above structures.

Child outcomes in South Africa There have been various policy and academic research projects carried out in South Africa focusing on outcomes for children at national, provincial and communal levels. Reporting on the health profile of children in South Africa, UNICEF (2012a) stated that thousands of children below the age of 5 years die every year, mainly from preventable causes, followed by pneumonia and acute diarrhoea. According to UNICEF (2012b), the major problem affecting young children was malnutrition, with about 25 per cent (1 in every 4) stunted, while a significant proportion show deficiency in the minerals and vitamins essential for good health. The UNICEF figures, however, reflect the average picture at a national level and do not distinguish between rural and urban children. While the constitution of South Africa accords every child equal access to health and education, the worlds into which children are born are unequal, and this translates to differences in outcomes. There are some children who grow up in rural areas, some in urban informal settlements and townships, and others in urban areas with adequate access to all basic requirements. Children from former homelands such as KwaZulu Natal and Eastern Cape, particularly the rural areas and informal settlements, have comparably limited access to health services as well as education and economic opportunities (Meintjes et al. 2010). According to UNICEF (2009), the 2005 national survey on food consumption revealed that 18.0 per cent, 9.3 per cent and 4.5 per cent of children aged 1-9 years were stunted, underweight and wasted respectively, a profile not very different to that of 1995. This can have farreaching implications on the educational outcomes of the children, especially considering that at 9 years old a child is expected to have at least completed Grade 2. Poverty has been identified as a major factor in these health outcomes for children. Its role is highlighted in a piece of research that looked at the impact of the global economic meltdown, which saw South Africa entering into recession. This happened in May in 2009, leading to the loss of almost one million jobs in that year alone (UNICEF 2009). When adult carers of children lose their jobs, it affects

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

69

the ability of families to sufficiently cater for the needs of children. This includes the provision of adequate nutrition and sufficient educational support in the form of school fees, uniforms and learning material. Orphans are the most vulnerable to poverty and face higher risks of abuse, exploitation, neglect and limited access to basic services (Meintjes et al. 2010). Violence against children, including sexual violence, abuse and neglect, are a major concern in modern South Africa. In 2008-2009 alone, 48 732 violent crimes against children were committed with 28 per cent of all sexual offences for the same period being against children (South Africa Police Service 2010). Child poverty in South Africa has a racial dimension (Mabugu et al. 2010): Africans and Coloureds are not only the most affected in terms of absolute numbers and proportions, but also according to measures of poverty depth (gap) and severity. Children in rural areas are reported to be the most affected, while there are no gender differences between boys and girls (Mabugu et al. 2010). The Child Support Grant (CSG)—a feature of social policy unique to South Africa in the context of government social support systems in Africa as a whole—has, however, undoubtedly helped cushion the poor from receding into deeper poverty during the 2009 recession. The expansion of CSG to cover more poor households, besides the aforementioned positive impact in 2009, was hugely responsible for the declining trend in child poverty observed between 2002 and 2008 (Mabugu et al. 2010). The declining trend is shown in Figure 4.2. The differences in the outcomes of poverty measures among the population groups depicted in Figure 4.2 can be explained by socioeconomic status (SES). SES differences can also be argued to be the underlying factor in the findings on child poverty by province (Mabugu et al. 2010), with the worst outcomes observed for children living in the less developed provinces and in provinces with large proportions of rural populations. The same study by Mabugu et al (2010) found that the least urbanised provinces, namely Limpopo and Eastern Cape, had respectively 16.9 per cent and 20.1 per cent shares of the total children affected by poverty, while KZN had 25.2 per cent—largely due to having a large proportion of rural population compared to other provinces. The Poverty Depth Measure was largest for children living in Eastern Cape (0.415), followed by KZN (0.413), Limpopo (0.400), North West (0.345), Northern Cape (0.333), and Mpumalanga (0.322). This is compared to Gauteng (0.186) and Western Cape (0.153), provinces which by comparison to others have small proportions of rural populations.

70

Chapter Four

Source: Mabugu et al. (2010) UNICEF South Africa and the Financial and Fiscal Commission of South Africa. Figure 4.2 Percentage of households that reported that children went hungry in the past year from 2002 to 2008, South Africa

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

71

The declining trend in child poverty at national level, as depicted in Figure 4.2, is not the only positive child outcome in post-1994 South Africa. According to UNICEF (2009), trends in school enrolment up to 2009 showed that South Africa was on course to achieving the second MDG, especially regarding access to primary education. The Department of Education (2009), cited in UNICEF (2009), reported that gross enrolment for grades 1--7 was 98 per cent in 2009 and 85 per cent for grades 8--12. The country has managed to ensure equitable access to education for girls and boys. This is evident in that, in 2009, the gender parity indices for primary and secondary education were reported as 0.98 and 1.08 respectively (UNICEF, 2009). Qualitative studies revealed, however, that the above statistics do not show the true dynamics of the experience of education, especially for girls. In a report on education in South African rural communities by Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC), Nelson Mandela Foundation (NMF) and Education Policy Consortium (EPC) (2005), humiliation, bullying, sexual abuse and violence by teachers and other students were found to be major causes of school dropout, mostly in rural areas. It is stated in the report that “…many learners drop out of school because of poor educational experiences and discouragement from their teachers” (HSRC, NMF and EPC, 2005, 61). Social Surveys Africa (2010) and Lloyd and Mensch (2008) highlight union formation as one of the main causes of school dropout, especially for girls, in South Africa. They observe that pregnancy and childbirth result in temporary withdrawal from school. Similar observations were also made by Grant & Hallman (2008) in a study based on a sample drawn from KZN, which used a multinomial logit regression technique to analyse causes of school dropout. Previous research on educational outcomes for children in South Africa observed disparities in enrolment rates, grade repetition and progression in school, as well as school dropout by age, sex, population group, province and rural-urban residence. In a 2012 report on school repetition and dropout, UNESCO found that repetition rates in South Africa for the 1999-2009 period remained around 7 per cent for primary education, but declined from around 16 per cent in 1999 to 12 per cent in 2009 for secondary education. Moreover, UNESCO (2012) reported that children from rural areas and households with low socioeconomic status were most likely to repeat grades compared to those from urban areas and households with high socioeconomic status. There were related findings from studies by Louw, Bayat and Eigelaar-Meets (2012); Social Surveys Africa (2010); and Lam, Ardington and Leibbrandt (2010); these observed higher repetition rates in the less urbanised provinces such as Limpopo,

72

Chapter Four

Mpumalanga and Eastern Cape. Schooling outcomes have also been observed to differ by sex and population group in South Africa, especially with regards to grade repetition (Branson, Lam and Zuze 2012; Republic of South Africa 2011, 2008). In a report on dropout and learner retention, Republic of South Africa (2011) stated that boys had higher repetition rates than girls. Analysing the National Incomes Dynamics Survey (NIDS) data, Branson et al (2012) found that larger proportions of African children repeated school compared to Coloured, White and Indian/Asian children. Access to quality education and school dropout are measures of schooling outcomes that have also been studied in South Africa in relation to population group. One study found that in the Western Cape, 66 per cent of children enrolled in poor schools were African despite Africans making only 30 per cent of the province’s population (Louw, Bayat and Eigelaar-Meets 2012). This highlights the impact of population group on access to quality education which, it can be argued, is mediated by SES differences. Consequently, African children become more likely to repeat grades, as observed by Crouch (2005) using the 2003 General Household Survey. Different dropout rates have been reported for primary and secondary school. Meny-Gibert (2012) used the Household Survey of 2007 to study schooling outcomes for children in South Africa and found that dropout rates at primary school level ranged from 0.5 per cent to 2.7 per cent, while at secondary level 12--13 per cent of children dropped out of school. The causes of school dropout were identified as lack of finances, leaving school in search of paid work, in some areas the lack of schools offering education up to grade 12, and union formation (MenyGibert 2012; Gustafsson 2012; Social Surveys Africa 2010). Dropout rates have also been observed to differ by sex, with boys more likely to drop out of school (compared to girls) because of drug abuse, bullying and lack of sufficient support structures at school and at home (Townsend, Flisher, Chikobvu, Lombard and King 2008). Most studies, however, identified causes of school dropout from data collected using quantitative questionnaires and may not accurately reflect the true context of school dropout. The socioeconomic life experiences of children, which may be responsible for school dropout, can be too complex to be summed up in the few categories of probable reasons for leaving school and which are provided in questionnaires. In-depth qualitative research may therefore provide insight into the reasons that lead children to leave school before completing grade 12.

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

73

Data and methods Data The analysis presented in this paper is based on weighted data on 225 538 children aged 7--17 years, enumerated in the Community Survey of 2007 (CS2007), which was conducted by StatsSA in the year 2007. The CS2007 national survey was intended to provide demographic and socioeconomic data at municipal level and was the largest survey ever to be carried out by the national statistical agency (StatsSA 2008). The survey was carried out following the cabinet decision for StatsSA to change from conducting five-year to ten-year census surveys. This meant that StatsSA did not conduct a census in 2006 (Fleisch, Shindler and Perry 2012). The deferring of the census survey created an information gap, and in order to fill it CS2007 was carried out from February to March in the year 2007 (Fleisch, Shindler and Perry 2012). The selection of households for the survey involved two-stage stratified random sampling (StatsSA 2008). According to StatsSA (2008), each municipality was considered an explicit stratum. The first stage of the sampling process comprised selecting enumeration areas (EAs) in each municipality using systematic random sampling (StatsSA, 2008). The second stage involved selection of households (or dwelling units) by trained fieldworkers using listing methodology (StatsSA 2008). The selection of participating households ensured equitable representation of dwelling units located in all four settlement types found in South Africa, namely: rural-informal (formerly tribal areas), rural-formal (commercial farms), urban informal and urban formal areas (StatsSA 2008). This method offered reasonable prospects for the generalisation of observations from the survey.

Methods Bivariate and multivariate regression techniques were employed to achieve the research objectives. Bivariate analysis made it possible to form a picture of school enrolment, grade repetition and general school progression among children by selected variables. Sample distribution was also described using bivariate analysis. Regression methods were employed to determine statistical significance and explain the nature of relationships between measures of schooling outcomes and the independent variables. Using regression techniques has attendant advantages, such as allowing for additional variables to be introduced to

Chapter Four

74

the model in order to establish if the relationship of interest is genuine or spurious (Gordon 2012). Two regression models, logistic and ordinary least squares (OLS), were explored and chosen because of their suitability to analyse dichotomous and continuous outcome variables respectively. Logistic regression was used to analyse enrolment status and grade repetition, while OLS was applied to highest grade completed. Grade progression was derived from data on grade repetition and highest grade completed, and was analysed using the bivariate technique. The analysis of data first looked at school enrolment, moved to grade repetition and school progression, and ended with examination of highest grade completed. Under grade repetition and school enrolment, the analysis also examined the relationship between age and grade for the whole sample and by population group. This contributed to understanding variability in terms of school progression among learners.

 Logistic regression models Binary logistic – also called binary logit—regression analysis was performed in the form of log of odds, whereby the odds were a function of probability of enrolment in relation to family structure and other independent variables. The model was binary logistic because the dependent variable was coded 1 to denote enrolment in school, and 0 to represent not enrolled. Letting X represents the independent variable and confounding factors (family structure, sex, population group, socioeconomic status, type of school, age, and province) the logistic model can be presented as follows: ݈‫݃݋‬

గ೔ ଵିగ೔

ൌ ݈‫ܱ݃݋‬௜ ൌ ߙ ൅ ߚଵ ሺܺଵ ሻ ൅ ߚଶ ሺܺଶ ሻ ൅ ߚଷ ሺܺଷ ሻ ൅ ߚସ ሺܺସ ሻ

[1]

Where ͳ െ ߨ௜ represented the conditional probability of being out of school; ߨ௜ was the conditional probability of being in school; and ܱ௜ was the conditional odds of being in school. Antilogs were applied to equation 1 to obtain odds of school enrolment so that the model became as follows: గ ଵିగ

ൌ ݁ ఈାఉ ൌ ݁ ఈ ൫݁ ఉ ൯X

[2]

Where the two constants were multiplied by each other and raised to the power x, this implied that an additional explanatory variable added on to the regression equation had a multiplicative effect on the odds of school enrolment. Five nested logistic models were explored for the whole study

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

75

sample, for boys only, for girls only and for a sample of children living in incomplete nuclear structures. The first model tested the impact of age and sex on the odds of school enrolment. The second model controlled for population group on top of age and sex. Family structure was added in the third model. The fourth model added province of residence while the fifth model added SES.

 OLS regression A generalised linear modelling technique, OLS regression is a useful model for analysing single response variables coded at interval scale (Moutinho and Hutcheson 2011). The advantage of the OLS model is that it can be applied with appropriately coded multiple categories of explanatory variables, and this is why it was used in this research. OLS regression was employed to analyse the pattern in highest education completed by children across the different family structures. The form of the model as applied in the analysis is as follows: Y = Į + ȕ1X1 + ȕ2X2 + ȕ3X3 +…ȕnXn

[3]

Where Y is the dependent variable (highest education completed), Į represents level of Y controlling for all explanatory variables, ȕ is average change in Y in response to adding a specific explanatory variable, and X1…n denotes independent variables including the controlling factors. The impact of the interaction of explanatory factors on the highest grade completed was examined using nested OLS models.

Definition of variables Dependent variables To examine schooling outcomes, three dependent variables were used. These were school enrolment, grade repetition and school progression, and highest grade completed.

School enrolment The first dependent variable for measuring schooling outcomes for children involved establishing if the child was presently enrolled in school at the time of CS2007 data collection. Enrolment status was established using the following question:

76

Chapter Four

Does (the person) presently attend an educational institution? For a person to be considered as attending an educational institution, they had to be involved in full time or part time studies, whether in person, as a distance learner or through home schooling (StatsSA 2008). An absence of any of the different types of schooling meant that the person was not attending an educational institution and was thus not enrolled in school. The CS2007 gives data on school attendance as a dummy response, either enrolled or not.

Grade repetition and school progression The second dependent variable used to examine schooling outcomes involved determining grade repetition, which is linked to school progression. These measures of dependent variable were derived from data on highest grade completed and age. Grade repetition refers to attending the same level (grade) of schooling for two or more consecutive academic years. The CS2007 does not have a measure of grade repetition and this was implied by calculating age and grade completed for each child using South African norms. For example, in South Africa 9-year-olds are expected to have completed grade 2; thus any 9-year-old child whose highest completed grade was reported to be less than grade 2 was considered a repeater. In Figures 4.3 and 4.4, the relationship between age and grade enrolment is shown. Some of the children regarded as repeaters may have enrolled for grade 1 at the age of 8 years or older, and may not have repeated a grade. These children, however, were treated as repeaters because both grade repetition and late enrolment lead to the same outcome, which is that of children falling behind their peers in grade completion in school. Moreover, the CS2007 does not provide data which allows for the distinction between late enrolment and grade repetition to be made. The same can be said for children who are categorised as never repeating a grade. Other children may have enrolled for grade 1 a year early and repeated once, but were considered non-repeaters because they would not have fallen behind their peers of the same age cohort in grade completion. School progression measures how fast children pass through grades until they finish matric. Children who never repeat a grade are said to have normal school progression, while those who repeat have slow school progression. Determining school progression would ideally require longitudinal data of a cohort. However, it is possible to derive a measure of school progression using cross-sectional data using data on grade

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

77

repetition. This is based on the assumption that, holding constant the socioeconomic context of children, a cross-sectional, random and nationally representative sample sufficiently provides an indication of the schooling experiences that a child will go through in the twelve years needed to complete matric. School progression was measured using the relationship between age and grade completed for each independent variable.

Highest grade completed The third measure of schooling outcomes was based on a question regarding highest level of education an individual had completed at the time CS2007 was conducted. StatsSA (2008) asked each individual regardless of enrolment status: What is the highest level of education that (the person) has completed? Data on highest level of education ranged from no schooling to higher degree (masters and doctorate) and did not include qualifications for which a person was currently studying. This meant that, for example, the highest level of education completed by children doing grade 7 in the year 2007 was grade 6.

Independent variables The main independent variable was family structure. Other explanatory variables, which in this study are classified as confounding factors, were: age, sex, population group, province, type of educational institution and SES.

Family structure Family structure is a categorical variable. It is a social construct that can be conceptualised genealogically and demographically, but in this research was used in demographic terms. Family structure was operationalised using relationship to household head. Consequently, the term ‘household’ is used interchangeably in this research with ‘family structure’, although it is acknowledged that the two concepts may have different meanings in contexts other than that of this study. When determining the type of family structure that individuals enumerated in CS2007 belonged to, responses to the following question were used:

78

Chapter Four

What is (the person’s) relationship to the head or acting head of the household? Eight different types of family structure were identified, and were classified as: solitary, couple, nuclear, incomplete nuclear, extended, skipped, complex and other. Solitary structure: A solitary household is one that has only one person living alone. Couple household: Couple household comprise two individuals, the household head and his or her spouse with no children or other person living with them. Nuclear structure: Nuclear households have two parents (head and spouse) living with their biological children, stepchildren and adopted children. Stepchildren and adopted children were included to suit the context of living arrangements in South Africa, which is different from that of the western world. Incomplete nuclear: The incomplete nuclear type is made up of a single parent living with her or his biological children. This type of family structure is also referred to as a single-parent household, and can be maleheaded or female headed. Extended structure: The extended family structure was identified as having a household head with a spouse living with biological children and at least one grandchild. Skipped generation: The skipped family structure was defined as one comprising a household head with a spouse living with grandchildren. Complex: Any household that included an unrelated person was put under the complex structure classification.

Confounding factors Age Age can be defined as the length of time expressed in days, weeks, months or years that a person has lived since birth. This research operationalised age as the number of completed years at a child’s last birthday using the CS2007 question: ‘What is (the person)’s age in completed years?’ A child born in November 1997, for example, was 9 years old at the time of collecting data for CS2007, and not 10 years. For analysis of the

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

79

schooling outcomes, age was used as a categorical variable which, under normal circumstances, would be linked with grades in which a child is expected to be enrolled (as illustrated in Table 4.1). The relationship in Table 4.1 means that children aged 8 years should be enrolled in grade 2, and their expected highest grade completed is grade 1. Table 4.1 Anticipated relationship between age and grade Age Grade

7 1

8 2

9 3

10 4

11 5

12 6

13 7

14 8

15 9

16 10

17 11

Sex Sex defines biological differences between males and females. It is a binary variable, arbitrarily coded 1 for males and 2 for females in response to the question: ‘Is (the person) male or female?’ StatsSA collected information on sex as part of the biographic profile of every individual enumerated in the CS2007. This study used sex as an explanatory variable to investigate differences between boys and girls in the odds of being enrolled, and the highest grade completed. Males made up 50.02 per cent of the study sample while females constituted 49.98 per cent.

Population group With definitions based on physical characteristics distinct to a group of people, population group in South Africa is divided into four categories: African, Coloured, Indian/Asian and White. The CS2007 asked of every enumerated individual: ‘How would (the person) describe himself/herself in terms of population group? The question was asked even when the population group of a person seemed obvious (StatsSA 2008). Population group was included in regression analysis to determine the impact of family structure on schooling outcomes net of population group. Moreover, poverty levels in South Africa still have a racial dimension given the enduring legacy of

80

Chapter Four

apartheid (Mabugu et al. 2010), and are manifest in socioeconomic outcomes—including education – hence the need to control for population group.

Type of educational institution The CS2007 collected information on the type of educational institution attended by individuals who were studying. The type of educational institution referred to attendance at a public or private institution, coded one and two respectively. The question was asked: ‘Is the institution (the person) attends public (government) or independent (private)?’ When the type of educational institution was not known to the respondent, the response was coded three to indicate ‘Do not know’, and such cases were dropped for regression analysis. Of the 210 196 enrolled in school, 202 661 were in public schools while 7 535 were in private schools. The type of educational institution was included in data analysis, given the differences in quality of education between public and independent schools. Resource constraints in public schools may adversely affect progression in school, thereby affecting highest grade completed relative to age; hence the need to control for type of educational institution. Type of educational institution was included in OLS regression when analysing highest grade completed, because the target sample was only children enrolled in school.

Province South Africa has nine provinces: Western Cape, Eastern Cape, Northern Cape, Free State, KZN, North West, Gauteng, Mpumalanga and Limpopo. The provinces have different levels of urbanisation, for example, Gauteng and Western Cape are more urbanised than Limpopo and Eastern Cape. Children from more urbanised provinces have better access to education facilities and conducive environments for learning than children from less urbanised provinces (Meintjes et al. 2010). Therefore, controlling for province enabled data analysis to isolate the impact of family structure untainted by province-related factors.

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

81

SES Holland, Breitbart and Jacobson, define SES as a concept that describes “the placement of persons, families, households and census tract or other aggregates with respect to the capacity to create or consume goods that are valued in our society” (2009, 47). In this study, SES was operationalised as a composite of household variables believed to define a household’s investment capacity, which reflects its social class in the context of CS2007. Households were classified into four categories of SES namely: low, medium low, medium high and high. SES was computed using principal component analysis (PCA). The household variables used to determine SES are described in the section on PCA below. Data analysis included controlling for SES because wealth differences among households affect child outcomes (Hall et al. 2012).

PCA for computation of SES The importance of SES has been acknowledged in many studies including those focusing on child outcomes. This is because the underlying SES is more reflective of a household’s investment capacity and ability to impact on its members’ individual outcomes than a household’s reported income. There are different techniques for determining SES, but the method considered most suitable for this study was PCA. This subsection provides an overview of PCA and how it was applied for the purposes of this study. According to Dunteman, PCA “is a statistical technique that linearly transforms an original set of variables into a substantially smaller set of uncorrelated variables that represents most of the information in the original data set” (1989, 7). The aim of PCA is to reduce the dimensionality of the original data set while retaining its variation as much as possible (Dunteman 1989; Jollife 2002). PCA was chosen for its ability to transform a large number of variables into a smaller representative number that is easy to understand and work with. Although evidence of the technique’s description and application is found in Pearson (1909) and Cauchy (1829), cited in Diaconis and Efron (1983), it is asserted that “its modern instantiation was formalised by Hotelling (1933) who coined the term principal component” (Abdi and Williams 2010, 2). According to Nzimande, the retention of the variation in the components is achieved through PCA’s ability to assign weights to the original variables (2007). Computation of PCA involves generating new variables called principal components (PCs), whereby the first component accounts for the largest

Chapter Four

82

possible variance in the original variables. This is followed by generating the second PC, third, fourth, and so on, in a ‘hierarchical’ fashion until the last PC; on the precept that each succeeding component accounts for maximal residual variance and is orthogonal to the one preceding it (Jollife 2002; Filmer and Pritchett 2001). There are three steps that can be distinguished in PCA. The first step entails running PCA on a table of explanatory variables. The second step involves selecting components on which ordinary least squares is run. The third step is about computing parameters for the selected components of the model. Algebraically, the first principal component, denoted y1, is a linear composite of all original variables (x1, x2…, xk) and is computed as: y1 = a11 x1j + a12 x2j + …. + a1k xk = ¦a1n xni

[4]

where x1j is variable i for household j and are linear coefficients (factor loadings) for component n and variable i. According to Filmer and Pritchett (2001), cited in Nzimande (2007), PCA extracts linear coefficients from n components and generates scoring factors which are weights applied to the variables normalised by their means and standard deviations. Similar algebras are employed for the other principal components; for example, the second component is computed as: y2 = a21 x1i + a22 x2j + …. + a2k xk = ¦a2n xni

[5]

The variables used for PCA are: type of dwelling, access to water, toilet facility, energy for cooking, refuse removal, and household goods— specifically fridge, television and internet access. Table 4.2 shows factor scoring for PCA for the selected household variables. Table 4.2 Factor scoring from PCA for selected household variables, CS2007 South Africa Variable

Has brick dwelling Has piped water Has flush toilet Has electricity Has refuse removed by municipality

Factor loadings (FL) 0.6532

Factor scores (FS) 0.17835

0.5989 0.8016 0.7933 -0.7730

0.16352 0.21889 0.21661 -0.21032

Mean

0.68824

Standard deviation (SD) 0.46321

SES Index (FS/SD) 0.38503

0.84057 0.50358 0.60377 1.45730

0.36608 0.49999 0.48911 0.49817

0.44668 0.43779 0.44286 -0.42218

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children Has fridge Has television Has internet

-0.7213 -0.6945 -0.0958

-0.19696 -0.18962 -0.02616

1.35475 1.33521 1.99721

0.47844 0.47206 0.60911

83

-0.41167 -0.40168 -0.04295

(i) Type of dwelling CS2007 collected information on the type of main dwelling of every household according to the materials used to construct the dwelling (such as bricks, traditional materials), and name of dwelling (for example, flat, workers’ hostel, informal dwelling). Classification of dwelling type for PCA was done according to materials used to construct the main dwelling of a household. Dwelling types made of bricks or concrete were regarded as good, while those made of other materials were classified as bad. House or brick structure on a separate stand or yard, flat in block of flats, town or semi-detached house (simplex, duplex or triplex), and room or flat-let not in backyard but on a shared property, were classified as good. Dwelling types that were considered bad are traditional dwelling or hut structure made of traditional material, informal dwelling or shack in backyard, informal dwelling or shack not in backyard—for example squatter settlements, caravan or tent, workers’ hostel and private ship or boat. CS2007 collected information on type of dwelling by asking: ‘Which of the following types describe the main dwelling unit that this household occupy?’ The variable was included in PCA because type of dwelling has been found to be an important predictor of socioeconomic status in South Africa (Bayat, Louw and Rena 2014).

 (ii) Access to water Information on access to water was collected using the question: ‘In which way does this household obtain water for domestic use?’ For PCA, access to water was classified as piped water and other. Piped water refers to water obtained from pipe inside the dwelling, outside the dwelling but in the yard, and from an access point outside the yard. Sources of water classified as ‘other’ are dam or pool, borehole, spring, river or stream, water vendor, rain water tank and other sources. Water source was included because previous research, for example Dungumaro (2007), observed a relationship between source of water and socioeconomic status, and Klasen (2000) found water source to be an important predictor of socioeconomic status.

84

Chapter Four

(iii) Toilet facility Toilet facility was included in PCA: whether a household had flush toilet either connected to sewerage system or to a septic tank. Households without a flush toilet had dry toilet facility, pit toilet with or without ventilation, chemical toilet, bucket system or none. Data on toilet facility was obtained using the question: ‘Which is the main type of toilet facility available for use in this household?’ The type of toilet used by a household has been found to be related to socioeconomic status; for example, Armstrong, Bongisa and Krige (2008) observed the relationship in a study of poverty in South Africa.

 (iv) Source of energy CS2007 collected data on the source of energy for cooking, heating and lighting as three separate variables. Only source of energy for cooking, however, was considered for PCA, because cooking is the main purpose of energy consumption in most households. Moreover, in a study of energy for sustainable development in South Africa, Sugrue (cited in Balmer 2007) found that cooking energy is related to socioeconomic status, stating that 25 per cent of average poor households’ expenditure is on energy for cooking compared to two per cent for households with high socioeconomic status. Energy source was classified into ‘electricity’ and ‘other’ for PCA, with the latter representing gas, paraffin, wood, coal, animal dung, solar and other forms not specifically identified in CS2007. The question asked was: ‘What type of energy or fuel does this household mainly use for cooking?’ (v) Refuse removal Refuse removal concerns how rubbish from a household is mainly disposed of. Each household in the CS2007 was asked: ‘How is the refuse or rubbish from this household mainly disposed of?’ Refuse removal was divided into either by ‘local authority’ or ‘other’ for PCA. The ‘other’ forms of refuse removal represented communal refuse dump, no rubbish disposal, and other forms.

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

85

(vi) Household goods: fridge, television and internet facilities CS2007 collected data about ownership of eight household goods, three of which were included in PCA. These are fridge, television and internet facilities. The survey asked: ‘Does the household own any of the following?’ Fridge and television were retained because of high factor loadings when PCA was initially run for all household variables. Internet facilities however, had low factor loading but was retained because internet access has important implications on schooling outcomes.

Results Characteristics of the study population Table 4.3 Background characteristics of the study population and sample. Explanatory variable

Population size (N=11 094 503)

Sample size (N=225 538)

Percentage distribution

Household variables Family structure Nuclear Couple Incomplete nuclear Solitary Extended Skipped generation Complex Other

2 897 884 505 909 1 390141 518 113 3 205 202 698 954 280 691 1 597 608

61 211 92 37 417 564 68 857 22 215 4 060 31 147

27.14 0.04 16.59 0.25 30.53 9.85 1.80 13.81

Single-parent households Female-headed Male-headed

1 612 675 232 702

33 232 3 611

90.20 9.80

86

Chapter Four

Socio-economic status (SES) Low Medium low Medium high High

2 381 128 2 367 942 2 325 088 3 915 071

57 778 52 509 45 164 67 802

25.88 23.52 20.23 30.37

Biographic variables Sex Male Female

5 258 794 5 835 709

112 566 112 972

49.91 50.09

Population group African Coloured Indian/Asian White

8 804 598 947 471 278 472 1 062 853

189 565 18 426 4 263 13 307

84.05 8.17 1.89 5.9

Age 7 years 8 years 9 years 10 years 11 years 12 years 13 years 14 years 15 years 16 years 17 years

955 237 907 530 939 704 1 005 162 999 615 1 027 351 1 017 366 1 035 117 1 050 649 1 087 261 1 069 510

19 419 18 449 19 103 20 434 20 321 20 885 20682 21 043 21 358 22 103 21 742

8.61 8.18 8.47 9.06 9.01 9.26 9.17 9.33 9.47 9.80 9.64

Geographic variable Province Gauteng Eastern Cape Northern Cape Free State KwaZulu Natal North West Western Cape Mpumalanga Limpopo

2 476 293 1 496 648 237 422 632 387 2 309876 741 113 1 176 017 864 262 1 160 485

38 793 35 680 4 736 12 066 51 671 14 254 19 802 19 216 29 320

17.20 15.82 2.10 5.35 22.91 6.32 8.78 8.52 13.00

The Impact of Family Structure on Schooling Outcomes for Children

87

Bivariate analysis: School enrolment Table 4.4 presents summary statistics on enrolment percentages for the study sample, and each type of covariate with commensurate odds of school enrolment, from independent logistic regression models. Percentages indicate enrolment levels in a category. Row percentages are presented instead of column because of the highly uneven distribution of children across categories of some of the explanatory variables. Table 4.4 shows that of the 33 232 children in female-headed single-parent structures, 95.05 per cent were enrolled in school while the corresponding level for those in male-headed structures was 92.08 per cent. There were similar levels of enrolment for boys and girls. With respect to population group, highest enrolment rates were observed among White and African children while Coloureds had lowest enrolment rate. Data showed that enrolment peaked from age 10 to age 12 and was lowest among 16 and 17 year olds, reflecting the existence of school drop-out. Among the provinces, enrolment rates ranged from 91.09 per cent in Western Cape to 95.93 per cent in Limpopo as shown in Table 4.4. Table 4. 4 Enrolment percentages and independent logistic regression models on odds of school enrolment Explanatory variable Household variables Single-parent Female-headed Male-headed

(N=36 843 33 232 3 611

95.05 92.08

(base) 0.60**

0.042

Socio-economic status Low Medium low Medium high High

(N=223 25 58 369 53 047 45 626 68 496

92.82 94.09 93.43 94.29

(base) 1.23** 1.10** 1.28**

0.031 0.029 0.032

Biographic variables Sex Male Female

(N=225 53 112 566 112 972

93.67 93.65

(base) 0.996

0.018

N and

Percenta

Odds of

Standa

88

Chapter Four

Population group African Coloured Indian/Asian White

(N=225 538) 189 565 18 426 4 263 13 307

Age All school-age 7 years 8 years 9 years 10 years 11 years 12 years 13 years 14 years 15 years 16 years 17 years Geographic variable Province Gauteng Eastern Cape Northern Cape Free State KwaZulu Natal North West Western Cape Mpumalanga Limpopo

(N=225 538

94.00 89.73 92.75 94.53

(base) 0.56** 0.81** 1.10

19 419 18 449 19 103 20 434 20 321 20 885 20 682 21 043 21 358 22 103 21 742

93.66 94.82 95.64 95.86 96.30 96.22 96.01 95.68 95.04 93.35 89.76 82.87

0.854** (base) 1.20** 1.27** 1.42** 1.39** 1.32** 1.21** 1.04 0.76** 0.48** 0.26**

0.061 0.070 0.074 0.072 0.067 0.061 0.051 0.034 0.020 0.010

(N=225 538 38 798 35 680 4 736 12 066 51 671 14 254 19 802 19 216 29 320

93.27 93.22 91.54 95.40 93.25 92.91 91.09 95.48 95.93

(base) 0.99 0.78** 1.50** 1.00 0.94 0.74** 1.52** 1.70**

0.031 0.036 0.076 0.029 0.039 0.026 0.067 0.066

0.015 0.055 0.056 0.003

** Significant at p