Bishop Barham University: Response to a letter in Daily Monitor

On Thursday May 1st, Daily Monitor published a letter from a one George Mukasa titled “Pregnant girls: It is about rules.” Anthea Paelo writes in response.

Dear Mukasa,

I read your opinion on the suspended girls and would like to respond to your arguments. Your article supported Bishop Barham University College’s decision to suspend the pregnant students and your argument was based on three reasons.

  1. All rights go with responsibilities: “Would pregnancy, with all its related challenges, be the best state for the girls to be in for them to study well?”

In the discussion, you state that it was irresponsible for girls to “decide” to be pregnant while at school and claim that being pregnancy would affect their studies. While it is true that pregnancy does bring with it challenges, it is possible for the girls to study and be able to pass whilst carrying their children. The responsibility that you argue for in this case would be the duty to pass well. Failure to pass should carry with it, its own price. It is a price that the girls could bear by themselves. Does the university have to spur that failure by suspending the girls?

  1. The students should learn about discipline: “Discipline is essentially about self-control and self-control is largely about one being able to resist irrational decisions and to postpone gratification to an appropriate and convenient time.”

Herein, you continue to argue that the girls were undisciplined and should have exercised self-control. They should have been able to hold their libidos in check (for a time society and those people for whom the matter does not concern, including yourself, deem to be the right time). What parameters do you use to determine whether a decision is irrational? If a student is above the age of 18, he or she is considered an adult with the choice to make their own decisions regardless of whether they coincide with yours or not. Moreover to repeat a frequently recurring argument, if the suspension was an issue of discipline, the babies’ fathers too are guilty of this same lack of discipline and should face the same punishment.

  1. Suspension was a suitable punishment: “The culprits punished are helped to know and learn that, one, what they did was wrong and two, that irresponsible behaviour has a price to pay in real life.”

Here I still fail to understand why what they did was wrong. Does it cross any laws? Why is it irresponsible? The smug and patriarchal attitude in the sentences is especially irritating. You effuse a superiority that says you know what is best for these girls not seeming to consider that the girls might know what is best for themselves. Because they did not conform to your way of thinking, they are wrong and should be punished. It is an attitude that is patronizing and diminishes the dignity of the girls. You also suggest that the punishment serves as a deterrent. I beg to differ. What it does, is increase the sense of shame surrounding the girls. It could encourage abortions and in a country where abortions are illegal could result in unsafe procedures leading to further complications and death.

Suspending the girls was a case of policing morals in which case the most likely victims will be women. Everyone fails or falls short of the moral law but because with pregnant girls, it is more visible, they are more likely to be punished for it while other with similar moral failures go unaffected. Morals are also dynamic. To punish one person based on the other’s prejudices, especially when it does not negatively affect the latter, is not only unfair but counterproductive. Uganda needs educated women. Let them study.

Anthea is a reader and writer as well as a Masters student studying Development Economics in South Africa and a Mandela-Rhodes Scholar. She won the 2013 Writivism Short Story Prize, with her story “Picture Frames.” She is currently hanging out with her sister, being a sister. Read more of her on her blog.


6 thoughts on “Bishop Barham University: Response to a letter in Daily Monitor

  1. Hi Anthea. Articulate response up there.

    I am responding to the issue of double standards. We all know that until there’s a pregnancy or examination of the female privates, there is no way of knowing for sure that one has been sexually active. Even in the latter, results of such an examination could be misleading.

    Penalizing the women could serve as a deterrent because the woman who chooses to avoid pregnancy would ensure that she makes her boyfriend toe the line somehow. A rule is only as useful as it can be enforced, don’t you agree?

    I think too that a sense of shame is a deterrent and the knowledge that abortion is illegal in the country in question thus making available mostly dangerous options for removing an embarrassing pregnancy should ordinarily prevent women from allowing their men to do as they please with them.

    Finally, while I do not think that anyone has any right to impose their moral rules on another human being, I do believe that organizations, schools, societies and sovereign entities retain the right to demand submission to any guidelines that they choose to define themselves by or else what is the point of exclusivity in the form of such societies and organizations?


    • Please forgive the late response. It could act as a deterrent but not many women even in this day and age and confident enough to make their boyfriends toe the line as you say. Furthermore, even when women take precautions, pregnancy may still happen. Granted institutions have a right to create their own guidelines but we should continue to question guidelines that bias one gender over the other.


  2. Well articulated, Anthea. I’ll put in my two cents by saying this; the school in question has rules and regulations that must be adhered to by all who wish to study there. Pregnancy is not something they tolerate. Based on this, I do not believe the suspension came as a shock, especially not to the students in question who, it can be assumed, were aware of the school’s position on this.

    What I do have a problem with, however, is that the school does not deem it fit to discipline the fathers of the babies. And this is what we should all have a problem with. If the school has a problem with pregnancy, they should have the same standard for the ladies and gents alike.


    • Late response. Forgive me. I guess what I am questioning as a whole is whether rules such as these should still exist. Knowing that even when women take pre-cautions, accidents sometimes happen, it seems slanted to disadvantage women especially since even if we were to punish the men equally, it is easy for the men to deny fatherhood.


  3. Pingback: Response to a letter in Daily Monitor | Idle Mutterings

Add to the conversation. Tell us what you're thinking.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s