Part 1- Alleviating Period poverty: Menstrual Hygiene Management (MHM)

 

In last week’s blogs post, I examined period poverty and how the lack of safe water and the gender inequality perpetuate this, leading to a variety of physical, mental and societal impacts on girls. Therefore, I will now look at the different forms of MHM that has been put in place, in order to reduce these impacts. MHM is known as having the right materials to improve comfort and dignity whilst a female is on her period (Sommer and Sahin 2013).

 MHM is multifaceted problem and thus requires a variety of solutions (Wilson et al 2014)- so I will be exploring this over 2 blog posts.

 The image below highlights how a combination of hardware and software solutions can sufficiently improve MHM.

source

Hardware solutions

Local business initiatives have been set up to provide women with a combination of reusable and disposable sanitary products (Wilson et al 2014). Two examples include the Afripads and the Makapads.

Afripads:source

Makapads:source

 

Afripads are winged liners that are made from high-tech polyester fabric which allows them to be super absorbent and quick to dry (Mauran 2018). They have a longevity of 6-8 hours, and can be used for up to a year which enables it to be approximately 11 times cheaper than normal pads (Wilson et al 2014). In contrast, Makapads are biodegradable, disposable, environmentally friendly pads, which are made of papyrus and paper waste (Sommer et al 2016). Likewise, they also have a capacity of between 8-10 hours, and do not contain any chemical or additives (Empowering People Network n/d). The positive aspects about both sanitary interventions are that these initiatives employ local women to produce these affordable products (SSwanyana and Bitanhirwe 2017) which has the advantage of providing jobs and contributing to the economy, alongside providing suitable MHM for females. Having access to these sanitary resources reduces school absenteeism and increases one’s dignity since girls can better handle their menses (Wilson et al 2014).

However, for Afripads, whilst it is reusable, are not beneficial for those who don’t have safe and sustainable access to clean water, since they are unable to wash and re-use. This was the case for schoolgirls in peri-urban Zimbabwe, which was further worsened since they didn’t even have the private facilities to wash their pads (Wilson et al 2014).  In addition from Socorgie’s et al (2015) study of women and their MHM in Durban, South Africa, it was acknowledged that women tend to be inexperienced with washable products thus don’t have the most hygienic practices, thus undermining the safe value of reusable sanitary products. Likewise, Makapads, whilst they are biodegradable, there is still an issue of them filling up too quickly before they’re disposed of. In fact, it was reported that in Malawi, one school had an open pit of used pads which needed to be removed by dogs (Wilson et al 2014). Alongside this, International actors like the UNHCR aim to provide emergency intervention with ‘Dignity Kits’, containing some underwear and reusable pads, but their values is undermined since they can cost up to US$30 thus are not accessible for the most vulnerable women and girls (End Water Poverty n/d).

There are indeed issues that come with these hardware interventions. Hardware interventions like these only address the problem of providing the sanitary materials and water access perhaps (Action aid n/d). However, in my opinion, if significant change surrounding period poverty to take place, education will be very important in breaking this taboo surrounding menstruation, I shall examine this in the next post, alongside other software solutions.