Publications

Polygamy in Canada: Legal and Social Implications for Women and Children – A Collection of Policy Research Reports

How Have Policy Approaches to Polygamy Responded to Women's Experiences and Rights? An International, Comparative Analysis

PART I - WOMEN'S EXPERIENCES IN POLYGAMY: SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND HEALTH EXPERIENCES

The first part of this report discusses the literature that speaks to the circumstances of women living within polygamous marriages. This literature is premised on academic research emanating from various disciplines, such as law, sociology and anthropology. It is also based on reports about, and personal accounts from, women who have lived, or currently live, within communities where plural marriage is commonly practised.

Relevant sources were examined to acquire a sense of how polygamous family structures affect women's lives socially, economically and in terms of their overall health and well-being. The literature was searched, read and relied on with a view to obtaining the narratives of women in polygamy, both locally and internationally. It is maintained that these narratives must be heard by legislators and policy makers seeking to develop a response to polygamy that is consonant with core Canadian social objectives and values, particularly that of gender equality.

Although direct interviews and surveys involving women in polygamous marriages were not part of the research method for this report, such research would be extremely valuable for understanding how women experience polygamy. Thus, while the present report should serve to initiate a discussion about women in polygamy, it should not be interpreted as an exhaustive analysis, or the final word, on this topic. The discourse in this area requires further development, which would benefit immensely from additional research that incorporates direct dialogue with women in polygamy as a fundamental part of its methodology.

Women in Polygamy: Social Experiences

Authors who have written about women living within polygamous societies reveal the multi-faceted social dynamics that operate within these communities. It is impossible to reduce the literature on this topic to a general, blanket statement in regard to the social aspects of polygamous life for women: polygamy is neither entirely “good” nor is it entirely “bad” for women. The social implications of plural marriage are far more intricate than this. On some levels, the social structure of a polygamous family (namely the existence of two or more wives sharing a husband and possibly the same household) might forge a sense of support and even “sisterhood” among the wives. At the same time, polygamous women, although possibly collaborative on occasion, are likely to compete with one another in different circumstances. They might also sense the social strain of subordination vis-à-vis their husbands, given that while women must share one spouse, husbands may have several wives.

This report next discusses the most common social effects of polygamy that emerge from the writing on this issue: rivalry, collaboration and support among co-wives, insularity of polygamous families and communities, and gender inequalities that might emerge from patriarchal family structures. In addition, because of the interdependent relationship between women and their children, a substantial amount of research on women in polygamy also deals with the social and psychological impacts of polygamous life on children. This literature is therefore commented on in the final part of this discussion.

Rivalry among Co-Wives

In view of the fact that polygamy is typically characterized by the union of a single man with two or more women, competition and jealousy among co-wives is commonly observed within plural marriage communities (Al-Krenawi et al. 1997, 2001; Al-Krenawi 1998; Chambers 1997: 66; Madhavan 2002; Starr and Brilmayer 2003: 245-46; Wing 2001: 855; Al-Krenawi and Graham 1999: 502; Thompson and Erez 1994: 31; Jelen 1993: 47-48). This seems predictable, as co-wives likely have very limited private time with the lone husband they share, and thus might vie for his attention and favour. In some polygamous communities, women's self-worth is linked to the number of children they bear and, therefore, having time with their husband is also critical to their status within the family and community (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 6).

Research reveals that in certain contexts, jealousy between co-wives can escalate to intolerable levels, resulting in physical injuries sustained by women. Accounts of immigrant women in France within polygamous marriages provide a stark example. Having moved to a jurisdiction where living expenses are much higher than in their home countries, polygamous families often cannot afford multiple residences for each of a husband's wives and her children (Starr and Brilmayer 2003: 247). As a result, a polygamous family often lives together in crammed and overcrowded conditions, creating an environment that aggravates stress and conflict between co-wives. Indeed, there have been reports of women treated in Paris hospitals for physical injuries resulting from confrontations among family members, often co-wives. Other women have tried committing suicide as a result of this domestic tension (Bissuel 2002; Simons 1996).

The negative consequences of co-wife rivalry might be particularly difficult for first or “senior” wives in certain cultures. For example, Al-Krenawi et al.'s empirical research involving Palestinian plural wives revealed that senior wives within polygamous families are often less favoured by their husbands. They tend to have fewer economic resources, and receive less conjugal support and attention than junior wives. This differential treatment by husbands is attributed to the fact that Palestinian senior wives are typically married to men through arranged marriages based on exchange, while subsequent, junior wives are chosen by husbands, and their marriages are based on love matches (Al-Krenawi et al. 2001, 2002).

Yet, a different view of the dynamic between senior and junior wives is offered by other commentators. In some cultures, becoming a senior wife implies a promotion within the family hierarchy that entails respect and obedience from junior wives, particularly in the husband's absence (Ahmed 1986: 63; Thompson and Erez 1994: 30-31). Senior wives may exercise considerable authority and control over junior wives, and can be instrumental in helping husbands select an additional wife to assist with child care and domestic responsibilities. At the same time, a husband's independent choosing of a wife on the basis of “romantic love” is likely to cause strife among wives (Gage-Brandon 1992: 291).

Wing's discussion (2001) in relation to the rivalry between first and subsequent wives is also telling, in that it reveals that the status of each wife largely depends on the legal and social culture in which the marriage is situated. In her discussion of Muslim polygamous women living in England, she noted that first wives received the most favoured status. Since domestic polygamy is illegal in the United Kingdom, a subsequent wife is not considered a legal wife, and thus cannot be openly held out as a spouse in all social circles. Often, subsequent wives lived in inferior housing and saw their husbands less frequently than first wives. While women resented these circumstances, they felt that they remained “true wives” even though their marriages were not recognized under civil law (Wing 2001: 855).

This situation could arise in any country that prohibits and rejects polygamy. In these contexts, the first wife might be in a preferred position, since she alone is recognized as a spouse by law. Subsequent spouses married under religious law would be deprived of spousal recognition and spousal benefits, and might have to conceal their conjugal relationships out of fear of criminal prosecution.³

The potential for unequal treatment of co-wives by their husbands is a factor that women in polygamy would be keenly aware of, regardless of their cultural background. Among the women who participated in Dangor's survey of South African Muslim women, only a small minority looked favourably on polygamy. An even smaller proportion indicated that they would agree to enter a polygamous marriage if given the option. These opinions were frequently rationalized by feelings that polygamy creates inequality among co-wives, since the husband cannot care for and cater to the needs of more than one wife, and polygamy gives men “boundless power and authority” (Dangor 2001: 117). Similar views were expressed by women interviewed within a research study on polygamy in Mali. Women intimated that inequality was an intrinsic part of polygamy, since it inevitably led a husband to favour one wife (usually the youngest and more attractive) over the others (Madhavan 2002: 75).

Collaboration and Support among Co-Wives

While women married to the same man might commonly view one another with jealousy and perhaps even animosity, some women in plural marriages view their relationships with co-wives as enriching and valuable. Such was the perspective held by South African women studied by Anderson (2000), who perceived relationships with co-wives as providing critical economic support, companionship and child-care assistance. Relationships between co-wives have been found to be especially beneficial to women's economic and political power where there is a familial relationship between the co-wives (Yanca and Low 2003).

Researchers considering American polygamous communities have also observed that women benefit from the female companionship and friendship that polygamy affords, as well as the sharing of child rearing and household responsibilities (Chambers 1997: 73-74; Forbes 2003: 1542-43). While women might initially feel uncomfortable and envious when a new woman enters the household, these sentiments usually fade as the family and community works to ensure harmonious relationships among the women and the equal treatment of the wives. Women thus often encourage their husbands to marry additional wives (Chambers 1997: 73-74).

In addition to companionship and assistance with domestic responsibilities, the female network created through polygamy has also been said to afford other social benefits. Forbes noted that when there is trouble or abuse within a household, women can come together to counter this and assist one another. They can take similar action when their husband engages in any activities of which they disapprove. By expressing their dissatisfaction collectively, women have a greater chance of halting or changing the impugned behaviour (Forbes 2003: 1542-43). It must be noted, though, that other research starkly contrasts this portrayal of co-wives' relationships. Hassouneh-Philips (2001: 744-46), in her study of Suni Muslim women living in plural marriages in America, noted that domestic abuse often occurs unchecked, despite co-wives' full awareness of a husband's conduct. She suggested that this occurs either because women feel powerless in the face of conjugal violence or because they simply do not wish to intervene. Co-wives might even be the perpetrators of domestic abuse.⁴

There are thus marked inconsistencies in the literature regarding the nature of relationships among co-wives in a polygamous marriage. While some sources indicate that women in plural marriages rival one another, other research maintains that women thrive socially and economically within polygamy, primarily because of the network created with their co-wives. Is it possible to reconcile these different views?

Madhavan's study (2002) on polygamous women in Mali suggested a possible affirmative response. She noted that polygamous family structures are equally capable of giving rise to collaboration among co-wives as they are to competition, but this depends on the socio-cultural context that frames the polygamous family. Women, in fact, espouse the pattern of behaviour that best allows them to subsist within, and benefit from, their family and cultural structures. Thus, if co-wives need each other's support and assistance, they are likely to collaborate. But if such interdependence does not exist and there is little incentive for co-wives to ally with one another, competition is more likely to characterize the relationship among them.

Insularity of Polygamous Families and Communities

Given that polygamy remains criminalized in Canada, families that engage in this practice often do so clandestinely and inconspicuously. To remain shielded from public awareness and scrutiny, a polygamous family would have to minimize its contact with the “outside” world and attempt to conceal its marital and family relationships.

The insularity that we might anticipate within communities secretly practising polygamy also characterizes the only group currently practising polygamy in Canada overtly. The community of Bountiful, located near the town of Creston, British Columbia, was founded nearly 60 years ago by a fundamentalist splinter group of the Mormon Church which advocated polygamy (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 4ff). Plural marriage continues to define this community, which consists of about 1,000 members (Globe and Mail 2005).

Given its polygamous character, Bountiful has attracted political and public attention beginning in the early 1990s (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 3), especially quite recently (Globe and Mail 2005). Nevertheless, although residents practice plural marriage in plain view of the public, the media and law enforcement authorities, the community itself remains distanced from the rest of Canadian society.

The cloistered nature of Bountiful has developed through what Peters (1994) described as a culture of secrecy typical of fundamentalist Mormon communities. Residents of Bountiful conduct all aspects of their lives within their community, and thus are rarely educated or employed outside of Bountiful (Palmer and Perrin 2004; Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993). The community has also acquired an increasing ability to meet residents' health and social needs, which risks intensifying its insularity as residents will be less likely to move beyond community borders to access necessary resources and services (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 60, 105). Finally, because marriage typically occurs within the group as determined by community leaders, family structures generally form only within the strict contours of the community (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 6-7). Given that nearly all aspects of group members' lives take place within Bountiful, they remain almost exclusively within the community's social and physical borders. As one study focussed on the situation in Bountiful noted, “the lives of most members of the group are conducted completely within the group environment” (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 6).

At the same time, one must be careful about presuming that the isolation of the Bountiful community results solely from the choice of community members to distance themselves from the broader Canadian society. Indeed, the fact that the community lives a very rural and quiet lifestyle, wears traditional dress and practises polygamy as one of its core social and religious tenets would likely lead to its characterization as peculiar, different, perhaps even suspect by other Canadians. Thus, while members of Bountiful might conscientiously withdraw from mainstream society, they remain a fringe group also because their lifestyle might not be accepted or necessarily understood by most Canadians.⁵

In communities characterized by nearly complete insularity from mainstream society, two key concerns in regard to the well-being of members might be raised. The first is a fear that individuals within the group, never having been exposed to anything beyond it, will lose the perspective and ability needed to make informed, autonomous life choices. This is particularly so when individuals depend on the community for social and economic sustenance. A second concern associated with insular social groups that remain shielded from public involvement and oversight is the potential for abuse within the group.

Limited Perspective and Ability to Make Autonomous Life Choices

The Committee on Polygamous Issues, which studied the dynamics of plural marriage within Bountiful, maintains that membership within this community results in a complete deprivation of individual freedom. Adults believe, and children are taught, that their only life path is to follow the practices prescribed by their leaders.⁶ If a group member ultimately wishes to leave the community, the prospect of doing so would seem extremely daunting, if not impossible, given that life within Bountiful considerably limits contact with the “outside” mainstream society (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 11-12, 26ff; Cohen 2003). ⁷ As a result, a member seeking to leave might not access necessary social and health services due to a learned fear and distrust of the world beyond the immediate community.⁸ Moreover, these individuals might lack the information, skills and resources needed to begin life anew, outside of their communities.

Ward (2004) articulated similar concerns in her analysis of polygamy in America, within which she argued that there is no legal rationale for plural marriage to be permitted or sanctioned by the state. She challenged the notion that women who participate in polygamy actively consent to this, given the social isolation and religious indoctrination to which they have been subjected throughout their lives. Ward thus argued that women are victims of “religious coercion” that deprives them of the ability to choose to marry, enter sexual relationships once married or leave their polygamous marriages (Ward 2004: 145-47).

In this connection, the age at which women marry into polygamous unions is often discussed. It is reportedly common for teenage girls - some as young as 14 - to marry men in their 40s or 50s who have been selected by community religious leaders (Al-Krenawi and Graham 1999: 501; Palmer and Perrin 2004; Ward 2004: 149; Peters 1994: 86-87). As a result, contentions that an adolescent girl's decision to marry in this context is based on her own informed and independent consent have been rigourously challenged.

Yet the argument that women in polygamy have been coerced into their marriages has also been disputed. Forbes (2003: 1544-45) suggested that young women who marry polygmously do so willingly, in accord with their religious views and values. There is thus no violation of their rights in this connection. Moreover, women from the Bountiful community have recently come out publicly in strong support of their lifestyle, firmly maintaining that they have made enlightened and active choices in regard to marriage and family relationships and responsibilities (D'Amour 2004a,b).

The issue of choice in relation to marriage in a polygamous society is also linked quite closely to male hierarchies that commonly form in such communities, evidencing economic inequalities and injustices among men. A nearly universal feature of polygamous communities is that only the most affluent and high-ranking men take wives. In many cases, both the potential wife and her family will prefer marriage to a polygamist than marriage to an unmarried man of little means (Borgerhoff Mulder 1992; Anderson 2000: 104). But, when a woman's alternatives are between life with a prominent and affluent community member who is already married, life with an unmarried man who is unable to support his family and who might also be marginalized by his community, or life as an unmarried women in a society that regards marriage as a fundamental social institution, we might again question the extent to which she has a “choice” regarding marriage.

Potential for Abuse

The report produced by the Committee on Polygamous Issues indicated that abuse within the community of Bountiful has taken place on a widespread scale, particularly against children. Nevertheless, this has been subject to minimal public oversight and reaction. The Committee linked this directly to the insularity of the community.⁹ Allegations of sexual, physical and psychological abuse were also made in a legal complaint initiated in 2002 by a class of women from Bountiful and other communities in Canada and the United States. They claimed to have suffered this abuse as a result of the communal and polygamist lifestyle within the community (Matas 2002b). Women who have left Bountiful have also called for government action against the men practising plural marriage in that community (Matas 2002a). Although an RCMP investigation into allegations of child abuse, forcible marriage and sexual exploitation was initiated in 2004, no charges have been filed as of yet (Globe and Mail 2005).

Views of women who remain in Bountiful must also be considered in this regard. Some have recently spoken out strongly in support of their community leaders, disputing abuse allegations and claiming that women lead happy and satisfying lives within Bountiful. They maintain that they are not duped or coerced into marriage, but actively choose their lifestyles (D'Amour 2004a,b). More recently, however, a group of 15 women from Bountiful participated at a conference on sexual exploitation and child brides, maintaining that the age of sexual consent in Canada should be raised from 14 to 16 years of age (CTV 2005a,b).

There is thus some ambiguity within the views of women in Bountiful as to polygamy. On one hand, they have spoken publicly in support of their lifestyle, disputing claims of abuse and coercion. But at the same time, their statements about the legal age of consent could intimate concern or dissatisfaction in regard to certain aspects of traditional marital practices in their community. This suggests a need for an inquiry of further depth into the genuine interests and concerns of women currently living in polygamous families, particularly by seeking information directly from these women.

Alleged abuse and mistreatment of children within Bountiful have also been reported within the educational context. Children in the community have traditionally attended a local school which is state funded, but administered by group members. At the time the Committee on Polygamous Issues prepared its report, the school's board members, principal and superintendent were all members of the group. In addition, many women in Bountiful received training to become teachers in the school (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 32ff).

The Bountiful school environment has been characterized as emotionally abusive in some cases, and consistent in its provision of substandard education for children (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 35-37; Matas 2002b; Peters 1994: 63ff; Carmichael 2004; Cohen 2003). However, because the school is administered entirely at the local level, it is shielded from public oversight and scrutiny. Given that the superintendent was, at least at the time of the Committee's report, also one of the group's religious leaders, and in view of the authority wielded by such leaders, parents inclined to complain about the school environment might be dissuaded from doing so for fear of social marginalization and reprisal (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 32-33).

Spousal Relationships and Issues of Gender Equality

In virtually all societies studied in preparing this report, polygamy was “polygynous,” that is, characterized by a union of one husband and plural wives. Very few polygamous societies in the world are “polyandrous”: marked by two or more husbands sharing a single wife. Polyandry is rare since it tends to limit male reproductive success. As Levine and Silk (1997: 376) noted,“a man who marries polyandrously can expect to sire only a fraction of one woman's children.” Polyandry might nonetheless arise in circumstances that hinder men's ability to support women and their children adequately (Levine and Silk 1997: 376).

Given that the vast majority of polygamous communities worldwide consist of families headed by one husband having multiple wives, we might question what consequences this social structure has for gender equality. In particular, we might ask whether a union in which two or more women must “share” a husband who in turn enjoys plural sexual and domestic partners, is inherently discriminatory.

This question might be met with the claim that women are actually the primary beneficiaries of polygamy. Given the structure of plural marriage families, men bear the singular responsibility of providing for their multiple wives and many children; whereas women might benefit from this economic support. They might also find a constant source of social support in their co-wives (Forbes 2003: 1543). Furthermore, for some women, plural marriage might represent an important contribution to the legitimacy of their own cultural or religious understandings of family life. These marriages thus might symbolize a crucial association with traditional values, which can provide certainty and security as to a women's role within her known social and cultural order (Rude-Antoine 1991). Finally, it has been argued that although polygamy creates a family structure in which men and women might not wield equal power and authority, this alone is insufficient to consider the practice harmful to women, especially when the patriarchy embedded in more mainstream religions is considered (Chambers 1997: 82).

Having said all this, it has also been strenuously argued that polygamy is inherently discriminatory and inhibits gender equality (Adjetey 1995: 1357; Strassberg 1997: 1592ff; Eskridge 1996: 149; Agadjanian and Ezeh 2000; Ward 2004). As M'Salha (2001: 77) noted, legal acceptance of polygamy is enough to thwart women's equality, even if they are not actually in a polygamous marriage. Living with constant uncertainty as to whether a husband will marry again forces a woman to live under the sword of Damocles throughout her marriage.

A key argument raised by opponents of polygamy relates to its potential ability to undermine women's reproductive autonomy. Given the frequent competition among co-wives and because women's worth in polygamous societies is often linked to the number of children they have, women lose the ability to control decisions related to reproduction (Adjetey 1995: 1358; Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 8-9). Moreover, polygynous cultures are characterized by patriarchal family structures, within which women have a marginalized ability to question a husband's authority and express individual wishes, even in regard to private issues like childbearing (Agadjanian and Ezeh 2000; Kaganas and Murray 1991: 128-29).

Throughout the literature discussing polygamous spousal relationships, it is quite commonly reported that the patriarchal nature of polygamy leads not only to women's subordination, but also to their sexual, physical and emotional abuse at the hands of their husbands (Chambers 1997: 66, 73-74; Al-Krenawi and Graham 1999: 501ff; Al-Krenawi and Wiesel-Lev 2002: 158; Hassouneh-Phillips 2001: 741ff; Thompson and Erez 1994; Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 78ff). Nevertheless, it must be recalled that spousal violence also characterizes too many monogamous relationships, and thus this difficulty is not unique to plural marriage situations. Having said this, where gender inequality lies at the core of a polygamous marriage, it is arguable that there exists an increased risk of spousal violence.

It would also be a mistake to believe that all polygamous marriages are abusive. Many women living in polygamy have supported plural marriage and appear to find happiness and satisfaction within their family structures (D'Amour 2004a,b; Carmichael 2004). Certain anecdotes reveal genuine love and companionship among polygamous spouses and within their entire family unit, leaving us to question whether polygamy is intrinsically damaging to the spousal relationship (Palmer and Perrin 2004; Solomon 2003).

A final point to be considered within the rubric of polygamous spousal relationships is the link between polygamy and divorce. Whether plural marriages are more likely to lead to marital discord and subsequent dissolution is a question that has not yet been answered conclusively. There is some evidence to suggest that a husband's decision to take a subsequent younger wife will frequently cause women to suffer low self-esteem and perhaps, as a result of this, to consider divorce (Al-Krenawi et al. 2001). M'Salha's (2001: 174) discussion regarding plural marriages in Morocco maintains that polygamy risks destabilizing the household and the lives of children, and causes women to experience high levels of insecurity and uncertainty. Divorce might be the foreseeable result.¹⁰ For some women, though, divorce is not an option. Although many feel devastated when their husbands take subsequent wives, they might feel that they have no choice but to accept this situation (Al-Krenawi et al. 1997: 453; Al-Krenawi and Wiesel-Lev 2002: 161-62).¹¹

Yet, other work has set forth arguments as to why women in polygamy feel more secure about their marriages than women in monogamous unions. This research indicates that polygamous marriages are less likely to rupture (Forbes 2003: 1542-43). Although, as just noted, M'Salha identified polygamy as a serious potential threat to a marriage, he went on to note that within Islamic Moroccan communities, polygamy might benefit a wife. In particular, it allows a husband to take a new, younger wife without repudiating¹² his first. The social consequences of repudiation can be worse for women than the circumstances of living in a polygamous marriage (M'Sahla 2001: 175).

It is thus difficult to draw a distinct correlation between polygamy and marital disharmony and divorce. The intricacy of this issue is evident in a Nigerian-based study (Gage-Brandon 1992) that revealed that the probability of divorce within polygamous marriages varied considerably according to the number of wives in the union. This research found that the most stable unions were those where one man married two wives. These marriages resulted in divorce less frequently than polygamous marriages involving more than two wives. They were also less likely to lead to divorce than monogamous unions. As such, this study revealed that viewing polygamous and monogamous marriages as dichotomous could lead to erroneous generalizations about each.

Children in Polygamy and Women's Relationships with Their Children

The research that considers the experience of women in polygamy also sheds light on the circumstances of children growing up in plural marriage families. In particular, this work allows for an analysis of how the social dynamics within polygamous families might impact children and youth. However, this research that speaks to the experiences of children in polygamous families does not, unfortunately, consider girls and boys separately. Rather, the data are aggregated, revealing how children and adolescents generally fare in areas like health and academics. However, some reports have emerged to suggest that, at least in fundamentalist Mormon communities, boys and girls are treated differently. In particular, while young girls are urged to remain within their communities to become wives during their adolescence, community leaders drive out many teenaged boys, to reduce the “competition” for young wives. Indeed, it is reported that as many as 400 boys as young as 13 years of age have been banished from their communities by fundamentalist leaders in Utah and Arizona, leaving many of them homeless, substance-addicted or working as prostitutes (Tresniowski 2005).¹³

Academic Achievement and Intellectual Development

The literature includes quite an elaborate discussion as to how polygamy might affect a child's intellectual and scholastic development. Some factors will affect academic achievement regardless of whether the child is raised in a polygamous or monogamous family (Cherian 1994). But Elbedour et al.'s work on adolescents within Israeli Bedouin-Arab communities was premised on the hypothesis that polygamous family structures would engender lower levels of intelligence and scholastic achievement among youth from polygamous families (Elbedour et al. 2003a,b, 2000).

This hypothesis was based on polygamy's association with higher risks of psychological maladjustment in children, and with families having lower socio-economic status. Both of these factors impact academic achievement. Various studies confirm that children from polygamous families are at an enhanced risk of psychological and physical abuse. While not entirely conclusive, research indicates that children can be adversely affected by rivalry between co-wives, and by the fact that more children in the family may mean less time with, and attention and supervision from parents, especially their fathers (Elbedour et al. 2003a, 2000, 2003b: 229; Strassmann 1997: 693; Jelen 1993: 48-49; Simons 1996). Moreover, a polygamous family structure might diminish the economic resources available to children and adolescents, which in turn might limit their access to books and activities that would foster learning skills (Elbedour et al. 2000).

Yet, despite the social and economic factors underlying Elbedour et al.'s hypothesis that polygamy would adversely affect academic achievements among youth, the researchers actually found that an adolescent's family structure bore no significant impact on academic development (Elbedour et al. 2003a, 2000). This outcome was attributed to various factors unique to the Bedouin-Arab cultural group under study. In particular, because polygamy was not viewed as a “taboo” practice in this community, adolescents were less likely to feel “different” or ashamed about their family structure. This, in turn, promoted their learning and literacy skills (Elbedour et al. 2003a, 2000). There was also extensive interaction between children and youth from polygamous and monogamous families within the community, giving them the sense of sharing the same community as their peers, regardless of family structure (Elbedour et al. 2003a). Finally, due to the level of intermingling within the whole community, fathers were less likely to be absent from their children for extended periods, even when they had several wives and many children (Elbedour et al. 2003a). Fathers within this community often live with all of their children and multiple wives within the same home (Elbedour et al. 2000). These factors were all viewed as promoting the psychological health and self-esteem of youth from polygamous families.

At the same time, Elbedour et al.'s research on adolescents is inconsistent with another of their studies examining developmental impacts of polygamy on younger, elementary school-aged children within the same community (Elbedouret al. 2003b). This latter study found that younger children tend to experience higher levels of attention deficit and behavioural problems than children from monogamous families. The researchers posit that these younger children might be more affected by polygamous life than adolescents since they are likely to be more attached to their parents and their immediate home environments, and probably have not yet developed the necessary social networks and mental ability to cope with a stressful home environment (Elbedour et al. 2003b: 231-32).

While the results of Elbedour et al.'s work in relation to older children and adolescents might suggest that children have the ability to outgrow any harmful impacts of polygamy, the particular cultural context of their research must be kept in mind. The widespread support and acceptance of polygamy within Bedouin-Arab culture, the pervasive intermingling of youth from monogamous and polygamous families, and the shared residence of fathers with all wives and children are not traits typical of all polygamous communities. Where these factors are absent, we might expect polygamy to exert some deleterious effects on children and adolescents. Starr and Brilmayer's (2003) research on African wives of polygamous men living in France seems to support this. They noted that because mainstream French society was both unwelcoming of immigrants and disapproving of polygamy, women and their children were ostracized and isolated. In schools, children feared mockery by classmates and delinquency rates among them were reported to be relatively high (Starr and Brilmayer 2003: 246).

In a similar vein, Ward maintains that children of American polygamists suffer as a result of their physical and social isolation. Similar to the situation reported to exist in Bountiful, education in these communities - like all other aspects of life - is controlled by religious authorities. The thoughts and beliefs children encounter are controlled, allowing them only to learn polygamist beliefs, and “blinding children to the existence of life outside polygamy” (Ward 2004: 149).

Moreover, Al-Krenawi et al.'s (1997: 451-52) study in Israeli Bedouin-Arab polygamous communities found that children of senior wives suffered particularly, as they had lower school attendance, more difficulty adjusting to classroom norms, and were less likely to have functional peer and student-teacher relationships. In addition, these children often lacked proper school supplies. The academic achievements of children of senior wives was thus well below the school average.

Factors Potentially Compromising Children's Health

Some research suggests that because polygamous families usually have many children, there cannot be enough supervision and attention for all of them (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 9). It has been argued that this causes children's health and development to suffer (Ward 2004: 149-50).¹⁴

In her study of polygamous families in Mali, Strassmann (1997) found a marked increase in infant mortality rates of children in polygamous families when compared to rates for children of monogamous parents. This difference could be due to various factors. Strassmann noted in particular, the risk that children may fall victim to co-wife animosity. This became so intense in the Malian community Strassmann studied that reports existed of co-wives abusing and even poisoning each other's children.¹⁵

An alternate theory Strassmann (1997: 693-94) postulated for the differential rates of child mortality between monogamous and polygamous families is that the latter might invest less in their children, at least in the Malian context. Since polygamous fathers produce a greater number of offspring overall, each child becomes less important to his lifetime reproductive success. Moreover, polygamous families may be less inclined or able to pay for treatments for childhood illness.

The opposite position has also been advanced, although this research appears more equivocal than Strassmann's. According to Anderson (2000), polygamy might in fact benefit child survival rates given the network of co-wives that exists within a plural marriage and can facilitate care arrangements for infants and children. A similar argument is made by Forbes (2003: 1544-45), who noted that the multiplicity of wives within a polygamous household allows for increased child supervision, attention and care. However, this research merely hypothesizes that family structures within polygamy might benefit the health of infants and young children, whereas Strassmann's study showed quite a decisive connection between infant mortality and polygamy in the society she considered. Strassmann's work is strengthened by the fact that other variables, such as access to wealth and food, did not appear to impact infant mortality rates, further supporting the link drawn with polygamy in this research. Strassmann thus indicated that the results of her study “provide the strongest evidence to date for an adverse effect of polygyny on child mortality in a human population” (Strassmann 1997: 694-95).

Summary

Given that the global community of women in polygamy is so heterogeneous, it appears impossible to draw a single, essential conclusion as to how plural marriage affects their social status and well-being. While some women clearly suffer severe detrimental impacts, others publicly support their lifestyles, and feel satisfied and empowered with their family relationships. A similar ambiguity exists within the research examining children in polygamous families. In some scenarios, these children did not seem to be adversely affected by their polygamous family structure. But some research also suggests that polygamy might place children in harm's way, for example, by isolating them socially, or by subjecting them to potentially hateful relationships between co-wives. Since the social aspects of polygamous life for women and children cannot be reduced to a single, uniform description, policy responses to this topic must be responsive to the varied realities that emerge in different plural marriage situations. This is discussed further in the final section of this report.

Women in Polygamy: Economic Experiences

While researchers who have studied the consequences of polygamy for women tend to focus on the social effects of plural marriage, the literature also illuminates some economic impacts of polygamous life. In particular, it discusses the economic circumstances of women living in plural marriages, as well as the circumstances of women who leave plural marriages.

The Economic Circumstances of Women in Polygamy

It is difficult to predict the economic impacts that might arise from polygamous family life. On one hand, we might assume that because polygamy requires one husband to provide for a plurality of wives and a potentially large number of children, resources within the family would be relatively scarce for each family member. Moreover, if wives in a plural marriage are more likely to be restricted to working in the unpaid domestic sphere, they would have limited sources of independent income. Finally, even if these women were to seek gainful employment, their earning potential might be limited if they were married and had children at a very young age, and this precluded the ability to pursue their education beyond that point.

On the other hand, we might also expect some women in polygamy to thrive economically. For example, we might assume that for a man to marry several wives, he would have to be financially able to afford to support each of them. Thus, if married to a wealthy husband, a wife might lead a life of relative affluence, even if her husband's income was shared with other women. Additionally, a polygamous family structure might foster, rather than prevent, women from pursuing educational and employment opportunities. The fact that other wives might be available to support a woman by assisting with child care and domestic responsibilities could theoretically allow her to take on potentially remunerative tasks. Finally, we might expect women married polygamously to benefit from the fact that they live with, or close to, other female family members with whom they could collaborate in their labour, thereby allowing them all to be more productive.

The literature on this issue, when viewed as a whole, indicates that neither hypothesis is entirely accurate or incorrect. A substantial amount of research suggests that polygamy deprives women of economic resources, and of the ability to earn income independently of their husband. For example, a study of polygamous marriages in Ghana indicated that wives in plural marriages were more economically marginalized than their monogamous counterparts. Polygamous wives were also less likely to be working for themselves, since they most often worked for a family member, usually their husband. Researchers found that a significantly higher percentage of women (84 percent versus 63 percent) earned cash for their work in areas with a higher prevalence of monogamy, than in regions primarily characterized by polygamy. Women in higher polygamous regions were also less likely to receive formal schooling and higher education. The authors of this study maintain that the factors limiting women's potential to gain economic independence also diminished their ability to exercise social and reproductive autonomy (Agadjanian and Ezeh: 2000).

While it has been reported that women in polygamy generally perceive greater levels of economic hardship (Al-Krenawi 2001: 191-92), some work suggests that first or senior wives to a polygamous marriage are at a particular disadvantage (Al-Krenawi et al. 2001; Al-Krenawi and Wiesel-Lev 2002). Al-Krenawi et al.'s study, based on interviews with 187 women in plural marriages living in the Gaza Strip, is particularly telling in this regard. Given the pervasive poverty and turbulent political and economic conditions that exist within this area, most of the women who participated in Al-Krenawi et al.'s study had experienced social and economic hardship (Al-Krenawi et al. 2001).

However, senior wives experienced significantly greater economic problems than did junior wives. Researchers found that none of the senior wives interviewed worked outside the home, whereas 40 percent of junior wives did. Senior wives also generally had less formal education, and a greater number of children. Finally, for some senior wives, the transition from monogamy to polygamy resulted in fewer economic resources for them and their children. As such, the economic potential of these women was perceived to be seriously hindered by their polygamous family structure (Al-Krenawi et al. 2001).

Differences between the economic circumstances of senior and junior wives observed in Al-Krenawi et al.'s work might be explained by the fact that in most Arab cultures where polygamy is practised, first marriages are often prearranged between families, whereas second and subsequent unions are more likely to be associated with love between the couple, and an active choice to marry. As a result, second and subsequent wives often bear favoured status with respect to economic resources, social support and attention from their husbands (Al-Krenawi et al. 2001, 1997: 451; Jelen 1993: 47-48).

Although not differentiating between first and subsequent wives, research related to the polygamous community of Bountiful, British Columbia, indicates that women bear a very limited ability to acquire economic resources. The relationships among community members and between group leaders and members seem to render it difficult for any resident of Bountiful - male or female - to acquire economic independence. The situation is, however, admittedly more difficult for women (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993).

According to the Committee on Polygamous Issues, most of the property within Bountiful is in fact owned by a trust called the United Effort Plan (UEP). This trust was started by a group affiliated with Bountiful in the United States. Members of Bountiful have traditionally been encouraged to deed their property to the UEP, such that they became tenants in their homes leasing their property from the trust. Legal ownership of the property is thus reported to be in the hands of community leaders (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 7-8, 59; Peters 1994: 57ff; 72-73).

The UEP trust is reported to own considerable amounts of property in Bountiful. Although group members built homes and structures on this property at their own expense, these buildings were in fact owned by the UEP, and members resided in them at the discretion of the trust. If a member left the community or was ousted from the group, that individual stood to lose any property that she or he built or paid for without any financial compensation (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 59).

Regarding employment, the Committee on Polygamous Issues reported that members of Bountiful were typically employed locally by group leaders. Wages were kept low and the hours were long. Members were required to give at least 10 percent of their wages back to the group, but often more was given such that workers kept only enough for their own basic sustenance. Women often did not work or receive much financial assistance from their husbands. They were frequently required to support their children on government family allowances (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 59).

As a result of all these conditions, the Committee on Polygamous issues described Bountiful community members as living very frugally. Mothers and their children were often found to live in a single bedroom. It was also not uncommon for an extended family of several wives and all their children to live in one house (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 59). As discussed above, these circumstances are similar to those observed among immigrant women living polygamously in France (Starr and Brilmayer 2003; Bissuel 2002).

Finally, it should be noted that certain reports allege that women living in polygamous unions are at risk of economic exploitation by their husbands. In jurisdictions where their polygamous marriages are not recognized by the state, plural wives may file welfare claims as single mothers in need of child support. However, some reports suggest that husbands have usurped these funds, or funds women otherwise earned, to support themselves and their polygamous lifestyles (Ward 2004: 148-49). In particular, men in France were reported to use their wives' income to fund return visits to their respective countries of origin to marry additional wives (Bissuel 2002; Jelen 1993: 46; Simons 1996).

While the foregoing discussion would indicate that polygamy engenders negative consequences for women in diverse polygamous societies, there is also some research to suggest that this is not universally true of all plural marriages. Polygamy might actually be advantageous for women, given that polygamous husbands in certain societies are obliged to be financially able to sustain multiple families.¹⁶

Additionally, the pool of labour created within larger domestic units reduces the need for wage labourers, thus keeping more of a husband's wealth within the family to maintain a higher standard of living. Co-wives might also co-operate in trade and economic transactions, thereby reducing costs and potentially providing income for the benefit of the family unit as a whole (Al-Krenawi 1998: 69; Anderson 2000). As such, polygamous households might ultimately have more economic resources, and greater means of production for sustenance, than their monogamous counterparts (Lardoux and Van de Walle 2003: 821).

In view of the foregoing, it seems that while some literature suggests that polygamy can be economically beneficial for women, it more often leads to deleterious economic effects for them. Studies illuminating women's negative economic experiences are based on analyses of specific features within polygamous families and communities that actively detract from women's access to resources. They indicate that women in polygamous families have experienced economic hardship on account of their family structure. In contrast, research suggesting that women stand to gain from polygamy bases this position primarily on speculation. That is, this research posits that the dynamics and relationships within polygamous families might allow women to benefit economically. These studies do not, however, affirm that women do in fact benefit economically. As such, a global assessment of this research suggests that the ability of a plural wife to acquire the resources necessary to sustain herself and her children, or to acquire financial independence, can become seriously impaired. This, in turn, limits her ability to survive should she decide to leave her polygamous marriage.

The Economic Circumstances of Women Who Leave Polygamy

Some commentators have discussed the economic difficulties women may face in the event that they seek to leave a polygamous marriage. This is hardly surprising given the literature that exists on the financial disadvantage that marriage and divorce can inflict on women, even in the context of monogamy.¹⁷ The question that arises here is whether women leaving polygamous unions face specific economic challenges.

Accounts of women who have left the polygamous community of Bountiful suggest an affirmative answer, for two particular reasons. First, as discussed above, women who have lived in this community throughout their lives have likely had very limited contact with institutions and individuals beyond their group. Should they seek to leave Bountiful, they might be seriously hampered by a distrust and fear of the outside community, and by an inability to navigate it to seek and access resources to help them settle and become established after relocating (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 26-28; 78ff; Cohen 2003).

Second, as noted, women who live as plural wives in Bountiful have few or no economic resources. If they leave, they might not have the skills necessary to earn an income outside their community. They will also have an extremely difficult time obtaining spousal and child support from their husband. With respect to spousal support, there is no clear obligation on a husband's part, since, given the polygamous nature of these marriages, the spousal status of all but first wives in registered unions is far from determinate.

Moreover, although a husband might have a legal obligation to pay child support (since the law requires parents to support their children regardless of marital status), his actual ability to do so will be limited. As described above, even if a man works within Bountiful, his income and assets might be largely committed to the UEP trust and community leaders. In addition, because these men might have concurrent obligations to other wives and children, the quantum of support they would be required to pay could be very limited. For most women then, the thought of going through the trouble and expense of bringing a legal suit to claim support would not be very tempting (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 27-28).

In some situations, plural wives might leave a polygamous marriage due to external forces, rather than by their own choice. Where women move from jurisdictions that recognize polygamy to jurisdictions that prohibit this practice, they might have no choice but to live as though unmarried to their spouses. In France, for example, legislation known as the Pasqua law was enacted in 1993 to eradicate polygamy among immigrants to the country (Bissuel 2002). Pursuant to this law (which is discussed in further detail in Part II of this report), a polygamous man seeking residence in France was permitted to live with just one of his co-wives. He was required to divorce his other wives, who were also required to leave his household. This policy applied prospectively and retroactively, to polygamous families that had already immigrated to France. If a husband failed to comply with the law, he and all his wives faced possible deportation, as well as the loss of their working and residence papers and welfare benefits (Starr and Brilmayer 2003: 247). If, however, a polygamous man had children with French citizenship, he could not be deported, but could be deprived of necessary papers to work in the country. As a result, he and his family could end up living in abject poverty (Bissuel 2002; Starr and Brilmayer 2003: 247ff).

The French Pasqua law came at tremendous expense to women married polygamously, and to their children. The forced de-cohabitation of polygamous husbands and all but one wife left many women with no choice but to leave the household with few financial resources. In Paris, where housing is scarce and costly, their searches for a new place to live were often fruitless, and they thus often ended up living as squatters in abandoned buildings (Bissuel 2002; Starr and Brilmayer 2003: 247-48). Some women have also been returned to their countries of origin (Starr and Brilmayer 2003: 248).

Summary

While some research indicates that plural marriage allows women to enjoy greater economic security, most of the writing on this topic reveals that polygamous life is more likely to impair a woman's economic status and prevent her from obtaining the resources necessary to acquire financial independence. Women who leave, or who are forced out of, polygamous marriages might also face disastrous economic consequences, since many have so few resources during the marriage. They might also encounter severe difficulty accessing social and economic resources outside of their community. Additionally, since their status as “spouses” is precarious where polygamy is not recognized, they will have limited ability to seek spousal support or other matrimonial relief.

Women in Polygamy: Health Experiences

A final issue that merits attention is the extent to which plural marriage affects women's health and overall well-being. Most of the discussion that arises in relation to this topic has dealt with the psychological and reproductive health of plural wives, and it generally suggests that the health effects polygamy may bring to bear on the lives of women can be quite deleterious.

Psychological Health

The psychological influences that polygamous life might exert on women have been considered by several researchers. According to Al-Krenawi (2001, 1998: 69) polygamous wives more commonly face family stress and mental health issues than monogamous women. The risk of psychiatric illness is particularly acute for first or senior wives in a plural marriage. In their study of polygamous wives living in Gaza City, Al-Krenawi et al. (2001) noted that senior wives expressed great psychological distress and a sense of mourning or loss when their husbands took second or subsequent wives. More specifically, they experienced feelings of failure and low self-esteem, feelings that were often reinforced by family and community perceptions. Senior wives also experienced other mental health difficulties, such as anxiety and depression, more frequently than junior wives. This research confirms results from an earlier study that examined the experiences of senior wives (Al-Krenawi et al. 1999).

This sense of devastation and loss experienced by a woman when her husband takes a subsequent wife is not restricted to the Palestinian context considered by Al-Krenawi et al; it has been reported by women living in other socio-cultural settings as well (Al-Krenawi and Graham: 1999; Hassouneh-Phillips 2001: 740).¹⁸ A husband's marriage to a subsequent wife is often perceived as traumatic and unsettling by preceding wives and their children (M'Salha 2001: 174). This development results in a major change in the family structure and a likely decline in the financial resources and attention that a man can provide his wives and children (Hassouneh-Phillips 2001: 740).

Some women might also perceive polygamy as bearing the potential to strip them of their autonomy. This point has been discussed earlier; however, it warrants emphasis again here. If a woman feels compelled both to enter a polygamous marriage and to engage in sexual relations once married (Ward 2004: 145-46; Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 8ff; Cohen 2003), this clearly will affect her sense of dignity and self-worth. It might also detract from her self-awareness and personal identity (Committee on Polygamous Issues 1993: 49-50).

Yet, it must be noted that some women seem to enjoy a high standard of psychological and emotional health, because of the lifestyle polygamy affords (Forbes 2003; Chambers 1997). In particular, women may benefit from the potential for collaboration and friendship among co-wives, as discussed above (Chambers 1997: 66-67, 73-74; Forbes 2003: 1542-43; Madhavan 2002). It has also been argued that polygamy might benefit women psychologically since it diminishes the possibility of divorce by offering dissatisfied husbands the opportunity to remarry without having to divorce the first wife. Arguably, this serves the interests of women in cultures where divorce might cause greater social humiliation and isolation for women than would life in a polygamous marriage (M'Salha 2001: 175, 177).

Reproductive and Sexual Health

Polygamous life may also affect women's reproductive and sexual health. Lardoux and Van de Walle's (2003) study of polygamy in Senegal focussed on women's fertility rates in different marital arrangements. Their research indicated that women in plural marriages generally have lower fertility rates than women within monogamy. It found that each time a polygamous husband took a new wife, his prior wives all experienced decreased fertility. In addition, the highest ranking wife (usually the newest wife) was most likely to have a child first, given that she was probably most favoured by the husband. Comparable results were obtained in a study on the relationship between polygamy and fertility in Ghana (Bhatia 1985), as well as in an anthropological study in Mali (Strassmann 1997: 688).

Some research, however, suggests that polygamy, and the number of wives a husband has, do not necessarily affect women's fertility. Ahmed (1986) maintained that other variables, such as a woman's age, education, religion, and rank as a wife, bear a more significant impact on her fertility level.Research in Ghana and South Africa also concluded that polygamy came at no real cost to women's fertility rates (Sichona 1993: 480; Anderson 2000: 104).

In her review of anthropological studies on the cost of polygamy to women in Africa, Borgerhoff Mulder (1992: 48) also found that the data in relation to fertility and polygamy told “an equally variable and inconsistent story.” Indeed, the sole conclusion that could be positively drawn was that polygyny does not come at the same cost to women vis-à-vis reproduction. Nevertheless, Borgerhoff Mulder cautioned against an unqualified comparison of research data on this topic, given that these data emanate from studies of variable methodological quality. A better understanding of the relationship that might exist between polygynous marriages and fertility thus seems to depend on a more thorough evaluation and critique of the research methods that have been employed to consider this topic to date.

Aside from fertility issues, women in polygamous relationships may also be at an increased risk of exposure to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and other sexually transmitted diseases. This is indicated by research conducted in Nigeria (Adejuyigbe et al.2004: 279-81; Ajuwon et al. 1993-94: 410ff)¹⁹ and Angola (CEDAW Angola 2004). A study undertaken within a polygamous community in rural Gambia also indicated that women in polygamous marriages are three times more likely to be affected by the Herpes simplex virus 2 (HSV2) (Halton et al. 2003). HSV2 is associated with increased HIV infectiousness, and with a heightened susceptibility to HIV infection (Halton et al. 2003: 98).

Several media reports also indicate that polygamy has contributed to the spread of HIV and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) among women, especially in African countries. These reports have considered the link between sexually transmitted illnesses and polygamy in Nigeria (White 2004), Swaziland (Dixon 2005), Zambia (Laurance 2004),²⁰ South Africa (Laurance 2004) and sub-Saharan Africa generally (Eilperin 2003). These reports listed polygamy as a factor to target and eliminate to assist in reducing the spread of sexually transmitted disease in these countries.

Having said this, greater study is needed before it can be confidently asserted that polygamy contributes to the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted illnesses, and if it does, to explain why this is so. In particular, more work needs to be done to determine how sexually transmitted diseases might be spread outside of individual polygamous families to other members of a society (e.g., through consorting with prostitutes, by wives having to resort to prostitution as a result of destitution, as a result of rape or through perinatal transmission).

Summary

Based on the available literature, it would seem that polygamy could bear quite negatively on the health of women. While some women might benefit from polygamous life, most research indicates that women suffer psychologically when their husbands take subsequent wives, when there is intense rivalry between co-wives and if they perceive polygamy as depriving them of individual freedom and autonomy.

Recent studies have also suggested a link between polygamy and women's reproductive health. Research as to the impact of polygamy on fertility is still inconclusive. Moreover, although it seems that plural marriage might increase women's exposure to sexually transmitted disease, further research on this topic is needed. Studies have concentrated on Sub-Saharan Africa, which seems logical in view of the high rate of HIV infection in this area of the world. But given that polygamy in all cultures involves the sexual sharing by several women of one man, a broader inquiry into the potential reproductive health ramifications of this practice is warranted.

Women in Polygamy: Conclusions

In view of the foregoing discussion regarding the social, economic and health experiences of polygamy, it is difficult to draw a single, clear conclusion as to whether life in a polygamous marriage is harmful to women. Whether women suffer or benefit from plural marriage actually seems to be the improper query through which to investigate the consequences of polygamy for women, since it is far too general. It implies that women in polygamy share uniform realities, regardless of the communities and cultures in which they live, and regardless of the particular relationships formed within their families. This is in fact not at all the case: an array of factors might give rise to substantial diversity within the experiences of women in polygamy worldwide. As noted by Elbedour et al. (2002: 262): “[V]ariations exist on the effect of polygamy on the lives of mothers. These variations occur as a function of the number of unions in the family, how the culture values polygamy, the wife order, and whether polygamy is imposed on the senior wife or initiated by her.”

Thus, while some women encounter bitter animosity and rivalry with co-wives, others might enjoy genuine friendship and support from this network of women. While some women might face abject poverty as a plural wife, others might garner economic security and stability. Finally, while some women in polygamy might face a heightened risk of exposure to sexually transmitted disease, others might never have to deal with this concern. In view of this, policy responses to polygamy must be sensitive to the diverse realities that women in polygamy encounter. Of course, caution must be taken in embarking on a culturally sensitive approach to this topic to ensure that such respect for cultural diversity does not compromise equality rights and interests, which should lie at the heart of this analysis.