Abstract
This study explores inheritance experiences among people living with HIV. Although Kenyan law provides protections that guarantee rightful transfers of wealth, results from this phenomenological study indicate that poor women who have received an HIV seropositive diagnosis face exceptional barriers in the wealth transfer process. Participants paint a picture of a society straddling the line between social traditions and statutory laws, as it attempts to protect vulnerable groups in wealth transfers.
Generational wealth transfers are a cited source of family economic stability and consumption (Kohler, Kohler, Anglewicz, & Behrman, 2012; Wilhelm, 2001) and help establish equity among family members. Though intergenerational transfers are the most common—with older adults and children being the main recipients (Kohler et al., 2012; Mtika, 2003)—lateral transfers between siblings and peers also do occur (Mtika, 2003; Weinreb, 2002). Because generational wealth transfers are so closely linked to family economic stability, appreciating the patterns of wealth transfers allows us to identify groups that are disadvantaged by the system of generational wealth transfers. Within the Kenyan context, for instance, information points to the economic disenfranchisement of children and widows in the generational wealth transfer process more so after the death of a male head of household.
This current study presents participant reflections on their experiences, as they relate to inheritance in Kenya. Inheritance is defined as the passing on of one’s estate to an heir. The term generational wealth transfer which is used interchangeably with inheritance throughout this study specifically denotes the familial transfer of wealth across or within generational groups. Data are gathered through focus group discussions and explore the conceptualization of familial wealth transfers among people living with HIV (PLHIV). This population is of singular interest in the wealth transfer discussion, given the multiple points of economic vulnerability such as health-related employment barriers and discrimination. Although Kenyan law explicitly prohibits discrimination and provides protections for individuals with an HIV seropositive diagnosis and women, the informal discrimination these groups’ experiences marginalize them even further. Both male and female participants paint a picture of a society straddling the line between social traditions and statutory laws, as it attempts to ascribe meaning to and regulate generational wealth transfers. They provide rich discussions stemming from their experiences with wealth transfers as seen through the lens of an HIV diagnosis, gendered oppression, and poverty.
History of Inheritance Laws in Kenya
Historically, societies have developed mechanisms to regulate how wealth devolves from the deceased to heirs and beneficiaries. These rules that are used to adjudicate the inheritance process are commonly referred to as the laws of succession. These laws are a reflection of and are attuned to both formal and informal social institutions. One of those sources of succession law in Kenya is African customary law emanating from the more than 40 ethnic groups in the country. Even though customary law is unique to each ethnic group, several common themes run through most of these laws (Musyoka, 2006). First, is the favoring of sons, meaning that property is often divided among the male members of a household. In instances where women do receive an inheritance, their rights over the same are usually limited when compared to their male peers (Walsh, 2003). This is to say that they are unable to exercise full control over the property, including the right to dispose of it through sale or bequest. In addition, customary laws observe a seniority system, where older family members receive a larger share of the wealth. This is especially true for the older male heir who may receive a significantly larger portion than younger siblings. Oral wills are another feature of customary law. An individual may elect to leave verbal instructions on the distribution of his property. The carrying out of these wishes rests heavily on the executor of the decedent’s wishes. The reliance on customary law (which remains accessible to many Kenyans) has proven detrimental to certain vulnerable groups, including women and children. The exploitation of loosely policed customary laws by trustees and guardians charged with the care of orphaned children and other surviving family members has led to the reneging on caregiving responsibilities and misappropriation of wealth rightfully belonging to these families (Csete, 2001; Drimie, 2002; Kiai, Mwangi, & Bosire, 2002; Rose, 2006).
To correct for these inequalities, The Law of Succession Act of 1972 became the general law of the land in 1981 with regard to succession. The Law of Succession Act interfaces with other laws including customary law, family law, law of trusts, and property law and establishes a unified national platform applicable to all Kenyans. It is important to note that The Law of Succession supersedes all other laws unless otherwise specified by the Act itself (Musyoka, 2006, p. 21). A fairly progressive and gender-neutral law, it provides ample protections to a decedent’s dependents. The law protects the interests of widows and widowers by providing them with absolute rights and/or life interests of the decedent’s property. The widow/widower in turn holds this wealth in trust for the surviving children. In addition to protecting the surviving spouse and children, the law protects the interests of any other individuals who can prove their dependence on the deceased individual.
HIV and AIDS
Shifts in family structure, poverty, and high mortality rates brought on by HIV and AIDS have elevated the wealth transfer discussion. Of every four households impacted by HIV, the head of household is the infected member in three of them. Therefore, given that household heads are often the primary breadwinner, disruptions in income, changes in the roles and routines of household members, and in extreme cases child-headed households are likely to occur (Belsey, 2005).
As is common with other sexually transmitted diseases, HIV and AIDS carry a social stigma, wherein there is a connotation of sexual deviance and promiscuity (Nzioka, 2000). Stigma associated with HIV extends to encompass family members of PLHIV who also suffer discrimination. There have been documented abuses faced by widows and children through disinheritance after the death of the main breadwinner (Ekin, Lumumba, & Wamalwa, 2009; Kiai et al., 2002; Walsh, 2003). A Human Rights Watch report published in 2003 documenting women’s experiences reports incidents of HIV/AIDS-related property loss (Walsh, 2003).
Gender Inequality
A patriarchal social structure means that women are inherently more vulnerable and face many more obstacles in gaining access to family wealth. Practices such as wife inheritance (when a widow is married off to her husband’s male relatives) and property grabbing (a phenomenon by which a husband’s family divests the widow of her property) have been encountered (Csete, 2001). In instances where women do receive an inheritance, their rights over the same are usually limited when compared to the male family members.
Patriarchy as a social institution periodically morphs to accommodate superficial systemic modifications while leaving underlying oppressive structures intact (Johnson, 2007). Resulting changes, however welcome, do little to address underlying oppressive arrangements. For instance, although Kenya has adapted gender-inclusive property laws, women are still unable to fully exercise their legal rights (Kameri-Mbote, 2006). In a patriarchal system, men have the upper hand in shaping and reshaping culture to accommodate their collective purpose (Johnson, 2007). In Kenya, social rules intimate that a woman’s property rights are determined through her relationship to a male relative (Meinzen-Dick, Kameri-Mbote, & Markelova, 2007; Walsh, 2003). The death of a male householder or a souring relationship with a man in the household may result in her inability to protect her property rights (Drimie, 2002; Meinzen-Dick et al., 2007). Denying women the right to exercise full control over wealth holdings diminishes their bargaining power within the household and stymie’s any commercial undertakings outside the household (Meinzen-Dick et al., 2007).
Poverty
Individual’s living in poverty face structural barriers that impede their ability to interact with key social, political, and economic institutions (Wagle, 2002). Barriers faced include monetary impediments, information asymmetries, and high-level corruption. Engaging the legal framework created to issue property right protections can be cost prohibitive. In addition to the information asymmetries that exist, low-income individuals may be unable to secure the legal representation necessary to protect their rights. Corruption in the form of bribery has been cited in the literature as a barrier faced by some. The inability to offer bribes to individuals charged with adjudicating wealth transfer disputes is a barrier cited by some (Walsh, 2003). The inability to secure rights over household assets can result in lifelong and intergenerational poverty. Household assets—defined as an accumulation of financial resources—are critical in securing the well-being of household member’s well-being (Sherraden, 1991). Therefore, the cyclical characteristics of poverty are reinforced when individual’s access to succession intermediary institutions (courts, land assessors, and chiefs) are limited and when the resulting lack of access diminishes human capital investment.
Method
Data for this study were collected in 2012 within the Greater Thika Area, a region that for several years had some of the highest HIV prevalence rates in Kenya (National AIDS and STIs Control Program, 2006). These high prevalence rates were attributed to slow behavioral change, high unemployment, and the collapse of the agriculture sector. Women and those between 20 and 49 years continue to report high HIV prevalence rates. The area which is now part of Kiambu County has approximately 645,000 residents with an estimated poverty rate of 48.4% (National Coordination Agency for Population and Development, 2005). The study applied a phenomenological approach to capture the experiences of individuals parenting and living with HIV and AIDS (Creswell, 1998). Data were collected through in-depth focus group interviews and a brief six question close-ended survey. A community contact assisted with recruitment by publicizing the study among self-convened peer support groups. The community contact had access to these groups through his or her participation with the Constituency AIDS Control Committee (CACC). CACCs are local bodies charged with the coordination of HIV and AIDS activities in the nation’s 210 administrative constituencies. Of the 47 peer PLHIV support groups in the study location, 4 groups were invited to participate. While more than four groups had expressed initial interest in the study, the principal investigator (PI) in conjunction with the community contact selected those which represented the largest tribal diversity. These four self-convened peer groups were not only willing but also able to meet outside their scheduled meeting times. Two of these groups were gender mixed, that is, having both men and women. Focus group A was an all-male group, while focus group D was an all-female group. Although focus group B comprised of members drawn from a mixed group on the day the interviews took place, only one man (the group’s chairman) was in attendance. Of the 45 respondents, 67% were female. The respondents ranged in age from 28 to 63 years (
Focus group interviews are especially advantageous as a research method, as they provide respondents with the ability to interact with each other. The environment generated by these interactions is apt to generate innovative thinking regarding the topic at hand. In this study, questions were posed in as nondirective a format as possible. In the ensuing organic discussions, the PI constantly prompted for detailed explanations on the thoughts and feelings participants had regarding succession. Questions asked in the focus groups revolved around (1) group characteristics; (2) wealth; (3) knowledge of succession laws, (4) personal experiences with inheritance, and (5) salient personal and institutional factors in succession planning.
Finally, a formal interview was conducted with the community contact for the purpose of illuminating and clarifying some of the themes emanating from the focus groups. The questions asked revolved around (1) the nature of local institutions dealing with HIV and AIDS; (2) the community contact’s affiliation with these institutions; (3) the process used to advertise the study; (4) reasons why these four groups were selected into the study.
The study was approved by Adelphi University’s institutional review board. Several steps were taken to safeguard participants including conducting interviews with already established peer support groups, where members are used to keeping each other’s confidence. In addition, language in the consent form requested participants to keep confidential information shared during the interviews.
Data Analysis
Focus group interviews were conducted in several languages (Kiswahili, English, Kikuyu, and Sheng). The PI who is fluent in all of these languages conducted all focus group interviews. An external research consultancy agency was engaged to transcribe and translate the data. The PI checked all transcriptions and translations to ensure accuracy and consistency. During the data collection process, a trained research assistant was engaged to facilitate session logistics and to take copious notes during the sessions, which were included in the study documentation.
A phenomenological data analysis approach as described by Creswell (1998) was used. Multiple coding was used to enhance completeness of the data. The PI (Coder #1) and a research assistant (Coder #2) independently coded the data and the codes were compared for consistency (Coder #1 is of the cultural group, while Coder #2 is not). Due to the length of the interviews and resource allocation, Coder #2 was requested to code only two of the four focus group interviews. Most of the coding differences observed were semantic in nature, with no meaningful differences observed in the language each coder used. However, Coder #1 was able to identify themes not identified by Coder #2. This is likely because coder #1 is of the same cultural group and is also deeply immersed in the literature with this population. These factors may have allowed his or her to identify themes that remained hidden to Coder #2. Coder #2 however did identify one additional theme which he or she titled “unity.” The themes identified were defining/redefining wealth; interaction of statutory customary institutions; group dynamics; exploitation of HIV seropositive communities; unity; barriers—sociocultural, political, and economic—to succession. This article focuses primarily on data related to the theme of “barriers to succession planning.” Data were analyzed using Nvivo software.
Results
Participants engaged in a discourse revolving around the perceptions of succession planning in their communities. These data point to individual, cultural, and institutional factors that inform succession which include inter- and intrafamilial relationships and structures, legal and economic factors, and changing social customs and values. Although groups agreed that wealth transfer planning was important, they also expressed hesitancy in engaging in this process. Of all the respondents, only two respondents indicated having a written will, although several specified having verbal instructions. However, as suggested by the respondents, the negative repercussions associated with poor succession planning is a larger social concern and not an issue faced by PLHIV and their families alone. This Results section is organized into two main parts. The first part presents the reasons why society engages in succession planning, thereby offering a platform from which to contextualize the second part of the results—barriers associated with succession planning.
Reasons for Inheritance Planning
According to these respondents, generational wealth transfers happened informally within the community. Leaving explicit instructions on how one’s wealth holdings should be divided among heirs is done with the expectation of social enforcement. As discussed within the focus groups, these instructions are often given to one’s close friends, siblings, or members of one’s nuclear family. Respondents identified and discussed several reasons for succession planning. Among the most mentioned were to prevent family conflict, to protect vulnerable individuals, and to prevent loss of property.
Several respondents from this all-female focus group thought that succession was advisable because it prevented family conflict while protecting family relationships.
To ward off conflict in the home or family
So that there is no enmity among people
And to keep people from killing one another
Hostility. When inheritance has not been shared out, people are hostile to one another. You will feel bad if someone touches any of the property that has not been shared out. However if it is shared out, all will be well because everyone uses what is rightfully theirs.
There is an indication that individuals are faced with the possibility of having their heirs disinherited by other family members, especially where heirs are too young to advocate for their interests. The aspect of intrafamilial disagreements is also underscored by the instances of hostility that are highlighted. Therefore, in instances where no clear inheritance instructions are present, squabbling over property rights becomes a reality. In addition, when individuals fail to plan in advance, heirs face a real prospect of losing track of family wealth either through disinheritance or being unable to physically track and identify family property.
Engaging in succession planning was also viewed as a means by which individuals can protect their assets by ensuring that their holdings are known and well documented. This was a sentiment expressed in two of the focus groups.
Keeping one’s dependents privy of wealth holdings therefore prevents loss of family property. As this female respondent notes this should be a consideration especially for HIV seropositive individuals with unemancipated minors as dependents,
Another impetus for succession planning was morbidity. When one feels that they are close to death, they feel obliged to make bequests to dependents. Health concerns related to an HIV seropositive diagnosis and age-related complications were a catalyst to contemplating and planning succession. Study participants explicitly identified AIDS-related complications as motivation to wealth transfers. Two respondents from the all-male group discussed the wealth transfer plans they set in motion as their health deteriorated.
I have been there myself. I was very sick some time ago. It got to a point where I thought I had only a few hours left to live. I gathered my family…So when it comes to inheritance, there is a point in life when for instance an old man feels that all is not well with his health and he gathers his family.
There was a shamba (farm) I had bought at another place and I told them (children) you will settle here, and you will settle here, as I saw that I was nearing the end. My wife had already passed away so I thought it wise to let them know before I died.
Respondents underscore the importance of engaging in succession planning. Early planning decreases the chances of disinheritance and family tensions. These respondents recognize the need to plan early to ensure control over their wealth holdings. The above-mentioned accounts illustrate the perception of wealth transfer in the society. Individuals are aware of the importance of planning out wealth transfer before death.
Barriers to Inheritance Planning
In addition to reasons cited for planning for wealth transfers within a family, respondents identified the barriers faced by various populations in engaging this process. They were able to identify ways in which vulnerabilities associated with their sociocultural and economic identities and the political environment encumber generational wealth transfers. HIV discrimination, sexism, poverty, and corruption in public institutions place this sample at a unique disadvantage in matters of wealth transfers.
Inheritance and sociocultural barriers
Stigma and discrimination associated with an HIV diagnosis and gender discrimination were identified as a barrier to smooth generational wealth transfers. Participants described examples whereby sick people were ostracized from the wealth transfer process, especially those with an HIV diagnosis. In fact, focus groups provided multiple examples of individual’s HIV status being used as an exclusionary mechanism. Subsequently, a woman from the all-female focus group explains how an HIV diagnosis could lead to disinheritance…
In the quote below, this female respondent from a mixed focus group notes that these discriminatory practices emanate from both in-laws relations and the birth family.
Again in the family that you are married into, if it is known that you are HIV positive, when your husband dies, you and your children will be sent away by the relatives. They do not consider that these children belong to them too. When he dies, they do not want to see you, they even use machetes to drive you away, they throw you out completely and stigmatize you and you have nowhere to go. When you go back to your original home, they also stigmatize you. They say you have a home already. So you live as one who has no value because you are chased away from all sides even the home where you gave birth to and brought up children. A lot of property belonging to people like us is lost in that way.
…if it is known that you are HIV positive, in the family you have nothing because they say that after a few months you will die. They say that ‘this one, even if you give them property, they will die tomorrow’.
They (PLHIV) are discriminated against because people have the perception that they are dying anyway, and that it’s no use giving inheritance to someone who is dying.
Gender discrimination was another cited barrier. In all instances, the focus groups provided examples of how statutory law currently protects women’s legal rights to wealth. However, even with these advancements, reflections from every single focus group indicate that sexism remains an enduring component in social interactions. In discussing women’s experiences, respondents noted that according to customary practices, gender differences exist with regard to property rights. As such, women do not enjoy full property rights but are however accorded limited access to the same.
A male respondent from a gender-mixed focus group provided a personal example drawn from his family, wherein he presented the argument that women’s access to family wealth such as land was usually at the whim of male relatives. Even then women are not entitled to full property rights and are therefore unable to leverage these assets to secure economic stability,
Even when women marry, they still experience difficulties in accessing their rightful wealth after the death of their spouse. A male respondent from a mixed gender group provided the following example of a widow who was disinherited by her in-laws
Women have minimal input or decision-making power with regard to wealth and wealth transfer decisions. Participants provided numerous examples of inheritance practices, whereby women were not viewed nor perceived to be valid participants in the inheritance process. It is the male head of household’s prerogative to decide how and when resources are distributed within the family. As this participant describes his attempts at transferring wealth to his two wives and their respective children, he does not seem to think it necessary to engage in a consultative process with his wives. Involving the wives in the process would only be seen to exacerbate the wealth transfer decisions. In this comment, this respondent betrays an assumption that women have inferior capacity and are incapable of engaging in rational wealth management and transfer decisions that are in their family’s best interests.
I have already thought about bequeathing my people. I have two wives. Everyone one of them is settled in their own shamba (farm). I told them “you stay here so that you do not bite this one; you stay there so you don’t burn the other.” These people (women) can be violent; these people are not a joke…
LAUGHTER
Yes, they are like leopards.
So it got to a point where I saw, “this fighting! If mzee (head of household) dies, the wives will fight with their sons, these children will be fighting because of my property.”
Additionally, this quote depicts how especially precarious women in polygamous unions are. Participants identified factors such as the number of wives, number and gender of children per wife, wife order, and types of union (civil/religious/customary) as critical considerations in determining succession.
Even in instances where the decision has been made to bequeath women property, their claim can be sabotaged or interfered with. In this excerpt, women discuss situations where they are not viewed to have any legitimacy in laying a claim to an inheritance. This example illustrates that not only do women find it difficult to exert their claim but in addition there is explicit intimidation from family members during the process.
She says that women have no inheritance. Please explain.
If you are woman and are married, you will move to your husband’s home and that is where your inheritance is. Now, women these days do not get married much, so we are not recognized.
Who says that?
Female respondents (many) parents and brothers
First of all if a brother knows you are going to inherit your parents they become very violent.
He can even kill you.
If your parents both die and you are left with those brothers, you could even get killed.
This quote unfortunately indicates that laying claim to family property may be a risky endeavor for women, leading to hesitancy in exerting their rights over property. This notion of inheritance conflict that progresses to physical confrontations was mentioned at least once in all four focus groups.
Inheritance and economic barriers
Two mechanisms emerged, where economic factors serve as barriers to generational wealth transfers. The first was that these participants felt that they lacked sufficient quantities of wealth to make it worthwhile planning and carrying out wealth transfers. This respondent drawn from the all-female focus group decried the socioeconomic structures that encumber advancement on the economic ladder. As one respondent explained,
These responses highlight the relationship between substantial wealth holdings and succession planning, whereby participants argued that the latter can take place only after the former is well established. However, after further probing by the interviewer, a new line of discussion emerged. Below is an excerpt from the all-female focus group, where the women reexamine their conceptualization of wealth and extend the discussion further into succession planning. In their discussion, they begin to identify other household items that although not traditionally considered “wealth” such as clothes and household items should also be a subject of consideration in succession planning.
I remember someone saying that they don’t think about inheritance because they have nothing they can leave behind as inheritance.
I am the one who said that.
You said that? Tell us more.
I say that because people only perceive inheritance as buildings like the one we are in right now as inheritance.
Or a car.
Or a piece of land where you have rental house that has tenants…
Or that you have many head of cattle.
…here is a case where a man has an acre piece of land…that is also his property, as are his clothes and chicken.
It would not be shocking to hear people fighting over clothes either.
A similar conversation took place within one of the mixed focus groups culminating in a similar conclusion that property no matter how meager should be given due consideration in the succession process.
The second mechanism that served as an economic barrier was the lack of resources needed to access public and formal institutions charged with adjudicating succession. The high costs associated with legal fees, accessing documents such as death certificates, and title deeds were identified as barriers to securing family wealth. Male respondents commenting on the exorbitant costs associated with retaining a lawyer.
yes, it is a lot of money
Six thousand, you have to pay six thousand (shillings) for the file and for the retention of that information…we would say it’s a lot of money because people around here do not have money. Therefore, even if it’s six thousand shillings, it is still a lot of money.
Inheritance and political barriers
In addition to the economic costs associated with accessing institutions charged with facilitating succession, respondents identified corruption in these institutions as complicating the process even further. Participants described a system that clearly disadvantages individuals when pitted against wealthier relatives better able to use their resources to navigate these institutions. Individuals were able to illustrate how the ability to issue bribes subverted the course of justice, making it difficult for low-income individuals to protect wealth after the death of a family member. The perceived ease with which these institutions can be compromised led respondents to express a mistrust of these institutions. A female respondent from a gender-mixed group described,
A respondent from an all-male focus group described how he had to intervene to assist a widow who had been unable to secure her husband’s death certificate due to the fraudulent handling of her case. The death certificate was needed to help her secure her late husband’s properties.
There is a lady I went to assist to get a death certificate at the City Mortuary. She had tried to get one for a whole year and every time she would go they would tell her that they already issued one. I found out that they had written two death certificates. I asked why they had issued two death certificates. Had this person died twice? How can you note two death certificates for one person? I told them that I was going to the CID (Criminal Investigation Department) to discuss this matter. And they said “no sir no sir.” They begged me not to and there and then I was issued a death certificate.
These quotes indicate that the pervasive corruption in public offices in the country makes it difficult for vulnerable groups to fully realize their rights as stipulated by the laws of the land.
Discussion
The changing environment in Kenya has engendered changes in the statutory and cultural rules regulating wealth transfers. Shifts in family structure, poverty, and high mortality rates brought on by HIV have brought the succession discussion to the forefront. Societies value generational wealth transfers for several reasons, including the need to acquire wealth and secure an economic future for oneself and one’s offspring and the instinctive need to maintain control over accumulated possessions and wealth even after death. This being the case, the perils of poor planning or no planning at all seem to be well understood by these respondents. Respondents identified and discussed three reasons for succession planning which included preventing family conflict, to protect vulnerable individuals, and to prevent loss of property.
Data illustrate a society straddling both customary and statutory laws with respondents exhibiting knowledge of both. Kenya is home to approximately 42 ethnic groups that are governed by different succession laws. Although the spirit of these laws is to protect the interests of society and its vulnerable members, modern day application puts certain populations at risk of disenfranchisement in generational wealth transfer modalities. The Law of Succession Act of 1972, created to provide a uniform national platform by harmonizing the customary inheritance laws, explicitly protects the interests of all Kenyans. Findings from this study however point to groups that are still susceptible to loss of property during succession.
Data provided by these respondents underscore the fact that sociocultural, economic, and political factors escalate susceptibility to disinheritance. Applying an intersectionality perspective, this study finds that women are especially vulnerable, as they sit at the confluence of three major vulnerabilities—poverty, sexism, and HIV. Intersectionality allows us to examine the matrix created by the intersection of multiple marginalized domains (Hancock, 2007; McCall, 2005). When viewed from this perspective, our understanding of how it is that groups exhibit divergent characterizations of a phenomenon due to differing social, political, and economic statuses is strengthened.
Individuals with an HIV diagnosis face evident obstructions in their attempts to exercise their rights over family wealth. Stigma and misconceptions associated with the virus seem to endorse the disenfranchisement of PLHIV in the succession debate. According to these respondents, women, and more so those who lose a spouse to HIV, are especially vulnerable to property loss. Equality is an issue clearly spelled out in Kenyan statutory law, but the traditional customary viewpoint is yet to catch up with statutory laws. The sociocultural status of Kenyan women can be observed by the way that respondents approached the gender issue. For instance, respondents from an all-male focus group depicted women as incapable of engaging in rational wealth transfer discussions. In instances where men acknowledged providing their female relatives with access to assets, these transfers were with the explicit understanding that they had limited rights to those holdings, meaning that women are not allowed rights of transfer, sale, collateral, and so on. This sentiment is however not echoed by the female respondents. Their discussion acknowledged the centrality of a well-thought out succession plan in protecting their rights and those of their dependents. In addition, they demanded recognition as equals with male family members. It is interesting to note that whereas some male respondents expressed sentiments aligned to the women’s perspective, others clearly embraced the oppressive nature of social laws.
Economic barriers were viewed as points of vulnerability. Of special significance are the conclusions reached by two of the focus groups revolving around the need to reconceptualize “wealth” to include less capital-intensive items such as household goods. Given that these items can be leveraged to provide some financial security, participants felt that they too should be accorded due consideration in the succession process. This conclusion is significant, given the relative ease with which women are able to acquire and control these items as compared to the more capital-intensive fixed assets such as land and buildings.
Implications
As discrimination has been outlawed in several pieces of Kenyan legislation programmatic interventions, targeted at protecting the interests of vulnerable groups should be the natural progression. Women, low-income individuals, and PLHIV are at the intersection of disenfranchised social groupings in issues of generational wealth transfers. Participants in this study demonstrate that women are clearly aware of their rights but are prevented from exercising them due to social and economic factors. Educating and empowering entire communities to protect women’s rights and access to wealth as a pathway to family economic stabilization should be given serious consideration. Community practitioners should engage both genders, especially tapping into male allies many of whom hold key social positions. A good campaign would have to underscore the importance of succession planning while addressing the cultural taboos associated women’s rights and those surrounding death and dying and HIV.
Social workers engaged in economic development programs with low-income PLHIV peer support groups—many of which are female led and operated—are well placed to initiate the succession planning discussion. Encouraging program participants to engage in succession planning even as they work to accumulate assets through these programs could help protect their dependents. It would be beneficial to consider engaging in discussions around redefining wealth to include items most accessible to women, in addition to how these items’ utility may be further leveraged to enhance economic stability.
Finally, legal assistance programs that eliminate the barriers to the legal system and other institutions could be a novel way to engage communities in the inheritance planning process. In as much as respondents exhibited a working knowledge of the law, they were quick to note that legal redress was stymied by the colossal costs associated with the legal system. Putting in place the legal structure to guarantee low-income Kenyans access to the legal system was one suggestion put forth by participants.
Limitations
The limited sample in this study allows us to present a partial perspective of this complex matrix. The sample does not include an HIV negative sample and individuals who self-identify as high income. In addition, although efforts were made to include as many tribal groupings as possible, only four (Kamba, Kikuyu, Luo, and Luhya) were available for the interviews. These limitations leave room for further exploration of how these omitted groups conceptualize the phenomenon of generational wealth transfers. Although focus groups offer strong qualitative methodology, they however suffer from several disadvantages including the inability of individuals to freely and openly discuss sensitive topics such as wealth, death, and future planning. Finally, although the PI was reflexive throughout the research process, her personal characteristics (female and Kenyan) most likely introduced bias in the data gathering, analysis, and reporting phases. More so during the gathering and analysis phases, the PI had to be consciously aware of what her perception, experience, and interpretation of the phenomenon in question was and how these manifested in the research process.
Conclusion
The information presented in this study alludes to the fact that certain groups in the community are susceptible to wealth misappropriation after the death of the main breadwinner/head of household. Participants in this study face different levels of discrimination, including discrimination based on serostatus, poverty, and gender with women in this instance being particularly disadvantaged. Addressing this problem will require the elimination of barriers to accessing legal protections, demanding the gender-neutral application of customary law, continued destigmatization of HIV and AIDS, and all in all open social discussion on all issues wealth and wealth transfers.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study received funding from the Adelphi University Faculty Development Grant Program.
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.