Masculinité, Famille et Foi: Post Endline Qualitative Study

"This research confirms that social and behavior norms change is nuanced, especially relating to socio-cultural beliefs and practices. The use of mixed methods research is important to fully capture dynamics of complex social norms and gender transformative programming."

Masculinité, Famille et Foi (MFF) is an implementation-research project that addresses a broad range of social norms, at scale, to improve violence prevention, gender equality, family planning (FP), and reproductive health (RH) in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The MFF approach, detailed at Related Summaries, below, posits that engaging religious leaders and faith communities to promote positive masculinities and gender equality can enable conditions where social and gender norms may shift to support new, healthy behaviours. This report details the findings of the 2021 post-programme qualitative study, which aimed to explore whether and how the MFF theory of change reflects the actual pathways through which young couples uptake voluntary FP and prevent intimate partner violence (IPV). Undertaken to shed light on the quantitative endline study (also at Related Summaries, below), the study is a result of a partnership between Tearfund, the Église de Christ au Congo, and the Institute for Reproductive Health (IRH) as part of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)-funded Passages Project.

Participants included men and women early in their marital relationship and were recruited from two MFF intervention sites and two comparison sites in Kinshasa. Eighty-nine in-depth interviews (IDIs) using participatory methods were conducted from May-June 2021 to explore two themes: (i) FP and (ii) relationship dynamics/IPV. In addition, two focus group discussions (FGDs) were held in July 2021 with key stakeholders in the MFF intervention (faith leaders and gender champions) to discuss and triangulate findings. Participants in the FGDs included stakeholders from both intervention and comparison congregations. The final study sample included 89 participants (intervention n=57, comparison n=32).

For both FP and relationship dynamics/IPV interviews, no notable differences in responses or emergent themes were observed between those participating or not in MFF, by congregation size, or by gender. In the few cases where differences were observed, these differences are clarified in the report.

• With regard to FP, the study sheds light on: fertility preference, factors, and people influencing fertility preference; influential people on FP information and use; people with whom participants shared information on FP; and participant responses to statements on FP norms. Sample findings: Godparents and pastors were some of the most influential people on both FP and relationships, though pastors were said to take a less direct role in FP. (For example, while congregants said they generally trusted pastors' advice on FP was no exception, at least half of all respondents from both intervention and comparison congregations in the qualitative study said they had never heard their pastor talk about FP.) Friends also had an important influence on FP knowledge and use. Parents were influential on couples' relationships but not on FP. Generally, young people received knowledge and advice that was consistent with MFF messaging. In turn, young people passed this information onto others, namely their friends.
• With regard to relationship dynamics/IPV, the study sheds light on people influencing relationship with partners, influential people on relationship with partners, people respondents influence regarding relationships, observed changes in couple conflict over time, and perceptions of community beliefs regarding intimate partner and gender-based violence (GBV). Many of the findings were similar to those related to FP. Notably, no relationship dynamics respondents affirmed any of the five statements related to the acceptability and prevalence of IPV in their community (that is, they did not say "yes" to the statement, "Faith leaders in my parish think it is appropriate for a man to use violence against his wife.") Some respondents did say that violent relationships exist in the community but that these types of relationships were not the norm or did not exist within their own church community. A number of respondents also explicitly mentioned that their faith leaders and church community condemn IPV.

All respondents from intervention congregations were asked a subset of questions specific to MFF. Most MFF participants processed, or interpreted, MFF messages as they were intended by the intervention design. Generally, young men and women also positively internalised MFF messages, meaning they felt that the MFF FP and relationship information and advice were relevant and acceptable - even those that pushed against cultural norms such as fertility or gender power dynamics.

The study found that MFF played a significant role in changing many participants' knowledge, perceptions, and behaviours related to FP and spousal relationships. For example, young men and women reported better communication in their couple, improved conflict resolution (including using dialogue), more respectful language towards and from their spouse, and a change in how they managed anger during conflict. A number of respondents reported that, after participating in MFF, they took a more collaborative and inclusive approach to household planning and decision making generally, and financial planning specifically. Some young men and women also said they felt more informed about available FP services in their community.

Tangible belief and behaviour change was more nuanced. A number of young people said they adopted FP behaviours such as birth spacing, limiting their number of births, and contraceptive use. Hormonal contraception was not, however, universally accepted. Preferences for non-hormonal contraceptive methods were often influenced by a fear of side effects. FP remained a relatively taboo topic within faith communities, and respondents were unsure of their religious community's perceptions or support of FP methods.

Furthermore, though physical violence was universally perceived as unacceptable, and respondents were confident that few people in their faith communities endorsed violence in relationships, some respondents interpreted MFF messages in ways that might limit or be detrimental to women's empowerment. Some specific examples included their affirmation of men's unquestioned status as head of the household, women's obligations to remain submissive in marriage, and a husband's right to make contraceptive decisions for the couple.

The report offers several implications for future research and programming, including, for example:

• Intervention curricula, intended audiences, and messaging should reflect the important and unique reference groups for FP and relationships identified by young people. Increasing the direct involvement of actors who were considered influential in MFF activities could increase the wider diffusion and impact of messaging.
• Integrating more facilitated participant dialogue on theoretical conceptualisations and practical manifestations of gender equality throughout the MFF programme cycle could help facilitators tailor gender messaging in response to participant beliefs and particular socio-economic dynamics, help refine outcome measures, and define programme "success" to reflect what is feasible and desired in context. This approach could give participants a sense of local ownership over and heightened investment in the MFF process itself. The intervention could also be more responsive to local context and, therefore, easier to replicate in different geographic and socio-cultural spaces.
• MFF could play a stronger role in recognising and discussing the ongoing prevalence of IPV, destigmatising experiences of violence, and offering safe spaces for survivors to access assistance and services.
• Addressing taboos around discussing and adopting contraceptive use could inspire young people to go to more informed individuals, such as pastors and other faith leaders, trained in RH and FP or health workers. Pastors in particular could be encouraged to take a more active and public role in normalising and promoting FP, including specific contraceptive methods. Continuing focused efforts to increase young people's knowledge of RH and FP directly could also have an impact on accurate knowledge shared within social and friend groups.
• A deeper dive into the curricula and messaging of existing church- and community-based programming, especially the sources of information accessed by people who influence young people, could help ensure that consistent FP and gender equality messaging is diffused across parallel interventions.

Editor's note: In addition to the Related Summaries, below, you may be interested in the Masculinite, Famille, et Foi End of Project Report.