Kobla is a 45 year-old accounts clerk at the university and, at the time of the interview, Delali, his wife, aged 35, is not working outside the home. Together the couple have three children, a 9-year-old daughter, Esi, a 7-year-old son, Kofi, and a baby boy, Yao. Before Yao’s birth Delali had worked as a hairdresser and she considered her exit from the labour market as temporary. Kobla had been content to have only two children. Indeed, he was also concerned about being able to meet the financial obligations of raising three children. Kobla also knew that a third child would take an additional toll on his free time, as he would have to be involved in the day-to-day care of three, and not two, children. Before the third child was born, however, Delali, felt that their son Kofi was “lonely” and needed a sibling playmate. In any case she wanted a third child. Delali approached the subject very tactfully, advancing all manner of ‘scientific’ reasons to convince Kobla, focusing on Kofi’s loneliness. Kofi’s teacher had told her, she argued, that boredom and loneliness caused Kofi’s occasional tendency towards undisciplined behavior. This was a very strategic move as Kobla (and Delali) is very concerned that his children grow up to be well-behaved and responsible. Delali concludes, “finally he came to understand me”.
Delali had an inherent desire for a third child. Kobla felt very strongly about providing his children with a good education and was concerned that three children would stretch the couple’s ability to adequately provide this. Additionally, Kobla was concerned about the day-to-day demands having a third child would place on him, since he knew that he would be required to participate in the caregiving activities. Thus, in the traditional conceptualisation of ‘unmet need’ Kob — la’s last child was ‘unwanted’. Delali, however, was able to push to have her way because she knew that she had the option to do this in her marriage; in other words it has a lot to do with the nature of the husband/wife relationship and their beliefs about female and male roles and identities. I argue elsewhere (Adomako Ampofo 1999) that the decision to compromise in the area of reproductive decision making may have more to do with gender orientation than issues of financial convenience (i. e. structural factors). Simply put, by gender orientation I refer to the expectations relating to roles, behaviours and rights that an individual has for women and men. A male dominant orientation, which can also apply to females, generally grants men more rights and approves of a hierarchical power structure that advantages males. Such an orientation may depress what might otherwise have
Arnfred Page 130 Wednesday, March 3, 2004 2:38 PM