Parental experiences and understandings of stunting in children 1-36 months in the Northern Province of Rwanda

Résumé fourni par la source

Background Childhood stunting remains a major public health problem in the Northern Province of Rwanda, where approximately 27.1% of children 1-36 months five are stunted. While many risk factors are documented, less is known about social and parenting processes in high-risk child conditions of undernutrition. We aimed to explore parental experiences and understandings of the risk of childhood stunting in the Northern Province of Rwanda. Methods We conducted a qualitative study using focus group discussions (FGDs) with 120 parents, mothers and fathers separated, of children aged 1–36 months across all five districts of Northern Province. We analysed data using a reflexive thematic analysis approach. Results Parents described interconnected household and caregiving processes perceived to influence children's nutrition and growth. Thematically, household power struggles and resource diversion, vulnerabilities during the first 1,000 days, a paradox whereby food and livestock assets did not always benefit children, and fragile substitute-care arrangements when mothers must go out for work, highlighted how intra-household allocation of resources, caregiving practices, and competing economic priorities shaped children's nutritional environments. The themes indicated that parents see intra-household resource allocation and caregiving as affecting the link between food resources and child growth. Conclusion Parents in Rwanda's Northern Province of Rwanda see childhood growth as shaped by interconnected household power relations, caregiving, and resource allocation practices in the first 1,000 days. Policies should give more decision-making power and resources to infants by promoting shared household decisions, empowering mothers, aligning livestock and market incentives with infant nutrition, and restoring reliable substitute care via public platforms.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.