A grandmother is a library: Support for their caregiving role is vital
In the heart of communities across South Africa, there exists a quiet, unrecognised force holding families together: Gogo. Grandmothers are the true heroes of our nation, bringing up millions of children in the face of hardship, loss and poverty, often without support and recognition.
With HIV, unemployment and other socio-economic issues having torn through the fabric of many South African households, it is frequently Gogo who steps in to care for the youngest members of the family. In fact, an estimated one in three children in South Africa is brought up by a grandparent.
These women are pillars of strength, love and resilience. They nurture children with wisdom passed down through generations, instilling values, providing meals with their limited resources and ensuring their grandchildren are safe and cared for. In many cases, they are doing this while grappling with their own health problems, financial strain and the trauma of having lost their own children.
Nowhere is their influence more evident than in the critical early years of a child's life. In early childhood development (ECD), the role of a caregiver is central. Studies show that the quality of interaction and stimulation a child receives in their first five years directly affects their cognitive, emotional and physical development. Gogos, though often lacking formal training, naturally embody the foundational principles of ECD through storytelling, song, structured routines and consistent emotional support.
There is an African proverb that honours grandmothers: 'A grandmother is a library.'
This proverb speaks to the wisdom, stories, traditions and life lessons that grandmothers carry and pass down through generations. They are living repositories of knowledge and culture.
But many of these grandmothers face immense difficulties in getting formal support systems or ECD resources. Too often, they are excluded from training opportunities and community programmes because they do not fit the typical profile of an ECD practitioner.
Recognising and empowering gogos is vital to the success of any community-based ECD strategy. Programmes that include grandmothers in training, provide access to parenting resources and connect them to early-learning centres can significantly boost early-learning outcomes for vulnerable children.
As a nation, it is time we celebrated gogos not just as caregivers, but as educators, nurturers and community builders. They should be empowered as key partners in bringing up the next generation.
Theresa Michael is the chief executive of Afrika Tikkun Bambanani, which recognises grandmothers as primary caregivers, offering them parenting resources, training and access to early learning tools.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mail & Guardian
2 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
Let's talk about death and dying
Medical school prepares our future doctors to save lives. But with death being the endpoint for all of us, shouldn't we be talking about it? Photo: Maria Luísa Queiroz/Unsplash There is an old joke about someone collapsing on an aeroplane mid-flight. The flight attendant shouts out, 'Is there a doctor onboard?' A passenger comes forward but just stands there. 'Why aren't you doing anything? He's dying!' the flight attendant cries. 'I'm a doctor of philosophy,' the passenger says dryly. 'We're all dying.' I can relate. I'm a moral philosopher, and a lot of my professional life has focused on matters relating to death. From the rightness or wrongness of abortion, to the morality of capital punishment or the ethics of using dead bodies for medical research, I've found that death, in the abstract, is an endlessly fascinating subject. But death is no longer just abstract for me. A few years ago, I lost my mother to cancer. I am currently facing a serious health probem of my own. So I've had a lot of time professionally and personally to contemplate death in the not-so-abstract. I teach in the department of medicine at the University of Cape Town, where I talk to my students about respecting patients' choices, avoiding causing harm, helping others and treating all people fairly. Developed by biomedical ethicists Tom Beauchamp and James Childress in the 1970s, these In my classes, we talk about patients' rights, including the right to refuse lifesaving treatment like blood transfusions on religious grounds, or the right to have life-sustaining treatments withdrawn, like saying no to more chemotherapy or other cancer treatments. But we don't talk about what happens after patients exercise these rights, and what it may feel like for the treating clinicians when their patients die from what seem like preventable deaths. Difficult conversations In June I attended the annual In my workshop on using the tools of philosophy to resolve ethical dilemmas, I used an example of a child with terminal cancer to illustrate a point, and during the break, one of the workshop participants, a I wanted to rage and cry at the injustice of the situation, but she seemed calm and at peace. These different reactions suggested to me that there is a critical need to transform the way we relate to death — and we can start by having conversations about it. We can start with our medical students who are focused on their future jobs of 'saving lives'. Of course, I'm not suggesting we shouldn't train our healthcare practitioners to focus on saving lives. But I do think — given that we are all going to die — that we shouldn't avoid the subject as many of us do. We could do so much better to prepare our students ethically, emotionally and practically for one of the critical things they will have to deal with in their professions. If we talk about death with our students, and how it feels to see someone die, perhaps they will be better equipped to help support those who are dying and those who are grieving. Talking about death is challenging. It touches all of us in different ways, whether in our personal experience or professionally. We may have competing views about it, informed by our experience, our religion, our culture. But 'difficult' is not a reason not to have the conversation. Here's the thing: not only do we not talk enough about death with our students, but we also don't talk about dying. I recently read palliative paediatrician Alastair McAlpine's wonderful 'No lecture had prepared me for this. No one had counselled me on how to comfort someone who was dying. Or what to say to someone who was in such pain and distress. I had studied the pharmacological approach to pain management, but not how to deal with loneliness, fear and sadness. Nor how to manage my own feelings around a patient who was slipping away. I didn't know what to do or say. In the face of death, words felt impotent and inadequate.' Patient mortality, professional failure For many philosophers, the task is to analyse and understand death. For me, the task is also to make space for it: in our classrooms, our hospitals, and our hearts. In our classrooms, we need to go beyond asking students what kind of doctors they want to be and ask them to think about what kind of doctors they want to be when their patients are dying. We need to have conversations about how to transition from offering care that cures to care that comforts patients with irreversible conditions such as terminal cancer or end-stage organ failure. When we teach students to be empathetic to their patients' and families' situations, we also need to caution them about becoming overwhelmed and not taking on their patients' suffering as if it were their own. If we don't teach them how to manage their own mental health, we risk them suffering from depression, burnout or compassion fatigue. We need to teach them to learn from experience without being consumed by it. In our clinics and hospitals, we need to challenge the idea that patient mortality equates to professional failure. We can reframe morbidity and mortality meetings, which allow clinicians to review patient care and treatment, as opportunities for learning rather than for shaming. We can encourage our colleagues to view each other — and themselves — as companions who support patients in the full human experience rather than as warriors fighting inevitable biological processes. Chocolates and jokes Upon receiving my recent diagnosis, my first thoughts and words were 'I don't want to die'. I realise now that what I meant was, I don't want to die now. Or soon. But having to consider that I will die at some point has helped me think about how I'd like to live with whatever time I have left — and hopefully it's a lot. It's also helped me talk to others about how I'd like to die and what I'd like after my death. (For example, I don't want the word 'feisty' on my tombstone, however appropriate a description of me it might be.) Talking about death has reduced the anxiety I had about death, and given me some assurance that when the time comes, I can trust others to know that I will have dignity in dying. That if I cannot care for myself, or speak about what I want, they will be able to do so for me, authentically — and hopefully with a dash of dark humour. I'm not religious, so I asked for chocolates and jokes rather than thoughts and prayers. I believe that how we care for ourselves and for others is fundamental to who and what we are. How we live with the dying can say a great deal about who we are, and how we die can say a great deal about how we've lived. Heidi Matisonn is a senior lecturer in bioethics in the EthicsLab at UCT's Neuroscience Institute and department of medicine. This story was produced by the . Sign up for the .
The South African
20 hours ago
- The South African
Cervical and Cervical Cancer in Focus: A Cross-Continental Fight Led by Movement Health Foundation
In the Lambayeque region of northern Peru, stories of delay and loss echo quietly through generations. They are not captured in photographs or archived in official records, but live in the memories of families who have waited too long for care that never came soon enough. In distant towns and rural communities, the journey to a clinic can take hours, and even then, the tools needed for screening are often out of reach. In South Africa, across the ocean but bound by the same fate, women in Limpopo and KwaZulu-Natal wait—not for doctors, but for answers. The nearest hospital is 60 kilometres away. Transport costs nearly a third of their monthly income. And so, they wait—not just for diagnoses, but for the right to be heard. In these places, cancer is not simply a medical condition. It is the result of geography, of poverty, of a history written without their names. More often than not, it is an inheritance. The fight against it—especially breast and cervical cancer—demands more than science. It demands justice. The cost of delay is not just time. It's lives. Globally, breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among women. Cervical cancer is the most preventable. And yet, they continue to take the lives of women in low- and middle-income countries at staggering rates. In South Africa, cervical cancer is responsible for more cancer-related deaths among women than any other type. In Peru, more than 4,000 women were diagnosed with the disease last year—many of them poor, and a disproportionate number Indigenous or Afroperuvian. Too many were diagnosed late, reflecting persistent gaps in early screening and access to timely care. To delay care is to decide who is worthy of survival. In both countries, early screening remains rare, while advanced-stage diagnoses are the norm. In Peru, screening levels for cervical cancer plummeted by 76% during the pandemic. In South Africa, 75% of cervical cancer cases are detected only after the disease has progressed beyond early intervention. And in the townships and rural provinces, where HIV prevalence is high and stigma travels faster than treatment, those odds worsen by the day. The Movement Health Foundation operates outside the spotlight. Instead, it works through local institutions, public clinics, and digital infrastructure, where change is measured not in headlines but in wait times shortened and referrals completed. With the Clinton Global Initiative as its commitment partner, the Foundation is now leading cancer interventions in Peru and South Africa that are designed not just to treat, but to reimagine the system itself. In South Africa, a Progressive Web App developed with Nelson Mandela University is helping women navigate cervical cancer screening—from understanding symptoms, to locating clinics, to preparing for appointments in their home language. The app includes voice input, offline features, and maps for rural areas. In Peru, the model is different, but the need is the same. A workflow coordination tool—originally piloted for maternal health in Cusco—is being adapted to help local clinics track screenings and patient referrals for breast and cervical cancer. The new program, under development in Lambayeque and Arequipa, targets 170,000 women and is built to scale to additional regions by 2026. The legacy of inequality cannot be fixed by apps alone. The question is whether these digital tools are surface patches or the beginning of deeper structural reform. Under new executive director Bogi Eliasen, the Foundation is positioning itself as a bridge between the technological and the political. 'We are not interested in pilots that fade,' Eliasen has said. 'We are building infrastructure that learns, adapts, and becomes public.' It's a bold vision in an industry littered with failed interventions and pilots that collapsed under the weight of poor implementation or vanished when donor funding dried up. But the Movement Health Foundation insists that local partnership, government integration, and community buy-in are non-negotiable. The work in Peru, for example, is embedded within national health policy timelines and budget cycles. In South Africa, the Foundation's collaboration with local institutions is explicit, not adjacent. This is how institutions gain roots—not through speed, but through alignment. The numbers should make us uncomfortable. In 2021, South Africa recorded 356.86 DALYs per 100,000 women for breast cancer—a steep increase from 196.28 in 1990. DALYs measure years of life lost not just from death, but from living with disease. These are years spent in waiting rooms, in silence, in systems that never called your name. Peru fares no better. In rural areas, Indigenous and Afroperuvian women often learn about cancer from other patients, not their doctors. The clinics are centralised, the health literacy campaigns are underfunded, and the result is predictable: women show up too late, and leave too soon. We are not talking about rare conditions. We are talking about preventable diseases with known interventions. The delay is not technical. It is the result of fragile policies and outdated processes, systems that have failed to evolve with the needs of those they serve. A woman in rural South Africa still needs to travel hours to reach care. A woman in northern Peru still needs three separate visits to complete a screening, colposcopy, and treatment. If she misses one, the clock resets. This is not a coincidence. It is a reflection of design—of systems built to be good enough for some, but not for all. And yet, that design is not immutable. It can be rewritten. The Movement Health Foundation is trying to write a different script. One where prevention is not a privilege, where follow-up is not optional, and where a diagnosis is not the beginning of the end. If global health is to mean anything, it must begin with the least protected. Not just in rhetoric, but in protocol. Not just in fundraising, but in follow-through. And so the question remains, not for them, but for us: what does it say about our global priorities when a woman needs to survive a system before she can survive a disease? 'This is not about awareness,' Bogi Eliasen has said. 'This is about consequence.' He's right. The numbers are not just statistics. They are verdicts. And verdicts, if left unchallenged, become legacies. Let's not allow that. By: Lena Whitmere
IOL News
20 hours ago
- IOL News
South Africa's HIV Response: Hope, Tools, and Resolve
South Africa has the world's largest HIV treatment programme, with over 5.5 million people receiving antiretrovirals (ARVs). Yet we still see more than 100 000 new HIV infections each year. That is unacceptable — and preventable. Image: Tumi Pakkies/ Independent Newspapers Earlier this month, more than 3,600 scientists, activists, policymakers, and journalists gathered in Kigali, Rwanda, for the 13th International AIDS Society (IAS) Conference on HIV Science. It was the first time this major global event took place in an African city outside South Africa, marking a powerful recognition of the continent's critical role in the global HIV response. The conference came on the heels of deeply concerning news: in January, the US government announced sharp cuts to funding for the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a move that cast a long shadow over the global fight against HIV, particularly in Africa. The numbers are staggering: of the 40.8 million people living with HIV globally, over 26 million (65%) are in Africa. And more than half of all new infections in 2024 occurred on the continent. A Call to Stay the Course Despite fears about reduced funding, the mood in Kigali was one of resolve. Delegates affirmed their commitment to ending HIV, recognising the extraordinary progress made in Eastern and Southern Africa. Many echoed a common sentiment: "We cannot stop now. We must fight to the end", emphasising the need for sustained commitment and effort to achieve an AIDS-free future. That optimism was reinforced by encouraging developments. The pharmaceutical company Gilead announced that Lenacapavir, a new HIV prevention drug administered via two injections a year, has shown high efficacy in clinical trials. If made widely accessible, this could be a game-changer— especially for those who struggle with daily pill regimens. Further hope came when the US Congress ultimately approved continued PEPFAR funding, although uncertainties remain around the duration and scope of future support. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading What This Means for South Africa South Africa has the world's largest HIV treatment programme, with over 5.5 million people receiving antiretrovirals (ARVs). Yet we still see more than 100 000 new HIV infections each year. That is unacceptable — and preventable. To address this, the government launched the '1.1 Million Campaign' in February to close the gap between those who know their HIV status and those who are virally suppressed. But for this initiative to succeed, we need national mobilisation. Every political leader, community organiser, religious institution, and employer must actively support the campaign. Unfortunately, media coverage has been limited, and public awareness remains low. Doing More with Less With reductions in funding from the Global Fund and PEPFAR, and despite increased domestic investment, every rand in our HIV response must count. Managers and community activists in the health and social development sectors must track data rigorously: Who is being tested? Who is on treatment? Who is virally suppressed? Who is using Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) — and who should be, but isn't? We must also stand firm against stigma. There is no justification for discrimination against people living with HIV or those using preventive treatments like PrEP. They are taking responsible steps to protect themselves and others. They should be commended and supported, not shamed. The Tools Are in Our Hands We now have powerful tools to fight HIV. HIV self-test kits are available free at public clinics and affordable at private pharmacies. Oral PrEP— a once-a-day pill to prevent HIV — is also free at government health facilities. And injectable PrEP, which could significantly improve adherence, is expected to be available next year. Condoms remain a highly effective prevention method. Let's not forget—they also prevent sexually transmitted infections like syphilis and gonorrhoea and help avoid unplanned pregnancies. They are free at all public clinics. Let's also remember the link between HIV and tuberculosis (TB). People with HIV are more susceptible to TB. If you have symptoms or have been in contact with someone with TB, get tested. Early detection saves lives. Health Is Everyone's Business Building a healthier South Africa is not just about medicine—it is about national prosperity. A healthy population is more productive, more resilient, and more able to seize economic opportunity. Each of us has a role to play in protecting our health and the health of our communities. Let's work together to end HIV. The finish line is in sight—but only if we don't stop now. Prof Yogan Pillay is the Director for HIV and TB delivery at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He was previously the Country Director of the Clinton Health Access Initiative in South Africa and senior director for universal health coverage. He has worked in various capacities at the National Department of Health. In 2021, the University of Cape Town awarded him an honorary doctorate, and in the same year, he was appointed extraordinary professor in the Division of Health Systems and Public Health, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University. Foster Mohale is the National Department of Health Spokesperson
