IV. Familia y complejidad
1. La familia en las constituciones latinoamericanas
A simple gender analysis undertaken by leaders of a community Youth Forum and a Women’s Forum in an ODF village in Bekwarra District (as an exercise during a FGD as part of the EQND process in Nigeria). This indicated who is most likely to speak during a mass meeting such as the triggering event. People with disabilities, pregnant women and young children were least likely to speak; whereas men, elders both male and female, were felt to be able to speak. The youth were also noted to be able to speak out but female youth a little less so. In general, whether women would speak during mass meetings varied across communities visited. The larger meetings held during the EQND scoping and diagnosis process, tended to be dominated by male voices. However, women seem very active in the CLTS process and many have taken on leadership positions on committees or as Natural Leaders.
One respondent in Togo, noted that sometimes when people with
disabilities speak they can be mocked for doing so. But in Malawi, it was said a number of times, that when people
with disabilities spoke they were often listened to more intently and they could be very influential.
GENDER ANALYSIS OF WHO IS MOST / LEAST LIKELY TO SPEAK DURING A MASS MEETING, BEKWARRA, NIGERIA ©S. HOUSE
Comment: Ensuring that people who may be dis- advantaged are invited to the mass triggering event is an area that requires specific attention across the GSF-supported programme. A range of strategies to improve the way that EQND is incorporated into pre-triggering were suggested by participants of the workshops in the six coun- tries and are integrated into the Dos and Don’ts in Annex XI.
6.5 TRIGGERING
6.5.1 The mass triggering event
The team faced some difficulties in trying to estab- lish whether people had attended the mass triggering event. In some communities, this was because the triggering had occurred several years prior to the vis- it. In Nepal, the term ‘triggering’ was used to refer to
all activities that led to people to build and use a la- trine, and not specifically the mass triggering event; and in the Terai districts, it was explained that as the mass triggering events had not proven successful they now focus more on household visits to persuade peo- ple on a house by house basis. In Ethiopia, and other
locations visited, it was not clear that the standard triggering tools were used, with more emphasis seem- ingly placed on traditional health based messages.
6.5.2 Engagement of different groups
of people in triggering
However, for the communities where the event was well remembered, between 25 to 50 percent of the people with disabilities and older people met in FGDs (depending on FGD), said that they had attend- ed the mass triggering event. Reasons given for not attending, mentioned across a number of countries, included:
•
That they did not feel worthy, were old and near to death, could not see or could not read and write.•
They were sight impaired and their children were in school so there was no-one to take them.•
They did not know about it, they were away, or another family member went.Some heard about what was discussed when fami- ly members came home or during the follow up, but not everyone heard about what had been talked about after the event.
6.5
TRIGGERING
attended the mass triggering event. In Nepal, many
working age men had migrated for work and so are no longer regularly present in the communities and in Senegal it was also said that many men were
either working or looking for work during the trig- gering event.
It was also clear from discussions with children met across countries, that most had not attended the trig- gering event. Most said they were in school at the time. However, most children met were aware of good san- itation and hygiene practices and said they had learnt about them in school.
One older woman met in a community in Nigeria was very passionate about the programme. She went to the triggering and although her family have always had latrines she really appreciates the improvement in the general environment and the health of the community members.
6.5.3 Discussion on needs of the
potentially disadvantaged during
triggering
The amount of emphasis at the mass triggering event for discussing the need to support people who might be disadvantaged is not fully clear to the consultants. It is probably being discussed / raised in some con- texts as part of the facilitation process at the mass triggering event, but it does not seem to be done, or done effectively in all. For example in discussion in
Malawi, it was only occasional partners who con-
firmed that they specifically discussed the need for support for the disadvantaged during the triggering session; and that where support has been provided it has tended to come later during follow-up after rec- ognition that some people were unable to construct their own latrine.
When considering (as discussed elsewhere in the re- port): a) the gap identified in the training for the CLTS facilitators re EQND; b) not pro-actively involving people who may be disadvantaged in the pre-trigger- ing and triggering phases; c) some gaps in the follow up phases; and d) lack of pro-active support for en- suring accessibility of latrines, this indicates that if it is being discussed during the triggering, then it isn’t being emphasized enough and hence is an area that needs to be strengthened.
6.5.4 Challenges in considering
EQND during triggering
The following box highlights examples of challeng- es identified of responding to EQND in the triggering phase as identified by the participants of the workshops
in the six countries. See Annex IX for more examples.
EXAMPLES OF CHALLENGES IN
CONSIDERING EQND DURING
TRIGGERING
• Poor turn-out of people who may be disadvantaged including those who are marginalized
• Lack of self-confidence by people who may be disadvantaged e.g. limited engagement / not speaking
• Limited facilitation skills amongst trained facilitators to address marginalized groups and to consider the point of view of disadvantaged people in decision-making
• Village protocol limits ordinary people, especially the disadvantaged, from speaking or participating • How to foster an understanding of the critical
importance of achieving social cohesion to achieve ODF
• How to manage expectations [i.e. support / subsidy]
• Guidance manual / training / training manual does not address disadvantaged / marginalized groups • Language barriers – interpretation and
communication with people who are sight, hearing or speech impaired
• Community sanctions established for non- compliance [sanctions present a number of difficulties and risks for the disadvantaged] • Not knowing how to use appropriate terminology • Political dominance by some individuals / parties • Geographical barriers / reaching all groups
particularly those living in remote or spread out communities
• How to ensure the venue is accessible to all
Comment: Ensuring that people who may be dis- advantaged are able to physically attend the mass triggering event, are pro-actively involved in this and drawing on community support mechanisms to facilitate this is an area that requires specific attention across the GSF programme. A range of strategies to improve the way that EQND is re- sponded to at this stage suggested by participants
of the workshops in the six countries are integrat- ed into the Dos and Don’ts in Annex XI.