IIT Kharagpur wants students to run to mommy. ‘Campus Mothers' is regression not innovation

The Print

11-07-2025

From India, Atmiyata is a community-based mental health initiative that has shown evidence-based success in Maharashtra and Gujarat. Similar community mental health models in Japan and other countries have also shown encouraging rates of success. However, in their decades-long global history, community mental health support has never been the exclusive domain or responsibility of women.
The urgent need to expand mental health support on college campuses and create multiple avenues of care and intervention is not under debate here. What merits scathing scrutiny is the blatant gender stereotyping disguised as an innovative initiative. The core idea of community-based healthcare initiatives like 'Campus Mothers' is not new. One of the earliest examples is Assertive Community Treatment (ACT), developed in the US in the 1970s, which includes Peer Support Specialists to provide mental health support.
At a time when gender equity discussions are taking centre stage, IIT Kharagpur's reductive framing of women through the 'Campus Mothers' initiative as default caregivers is tragically regressive. Reinforcing outdated gender norms under the guise of support, it sidelines efforts for gender parity and ultimately does a disservice to all genders.
Reducing women to mommy roles
Framing caregiving as inherently feminine erases the contributions of others and reinforces regressive gender norms that hinder gender equitable participation in both caregiving and mental health advocacy. By soliciting the active participation of women as 'Campus Mothers', the initiative is likely to exclude other genders, especially men from this important mental health initiative, undermining the very equity that such programmes should strive to promote.
'Many of these women have experienced motherhood themselves—some have grown up children who may now be living abroad or otherwise independent. Having gone through motherhood, they understand the unique challenges children face,' said the director of IIT Kharagpur, Suman Chakraborty. We find this quote especially problematic.
The notion that experiencing motherhood inherently grants women a magical capacity for empathy is both reductive and exclusionary. By that logic, men—having never experienced motherhood—are naturally disqualified from being empathetic. But empathy is not biologically bestowed through motherhood; it is cultivated through a range of life experiences, self-awareness, and emotional engagement. The best counsellors and therapists, or psychiatrists are not defined by their gender or parental status.
A nurturing environment requires participation from all genders. Since 'Campus Mothers' involves training, why not train all genders? This initiative deliberately propagates the surrogate maternal figure, reinforcing the 'run-to-mommy-when-hurt' stereotype.
Equally troubling is the assumption that older women, having completed their primary caregiving roles, now need something to 'fill their time'. And 'Campus Mothers' is supposed to be a productive way to keep them occupied. This framing is deeply patriarchal and condescending, reducing women's identities to domestic roles and positioning them as permanent caregivers for other people's children once their own have left home.
Also read: Bengaluru is leading India's mental health revolution. VCs say it's the next big field
Weaponising bias
Audaciously enough, the 'Campus Mothers' initiative has also been called a leadership opportunity for women. 'By involving women as key emotional anchors on campus, the initiative also promotes women's participation and leadership in the academic community,' reads an article on The Bridge Chronicle. What kind of leadership opportunity is envisaged for women who participate in this programme? Do they get visibility for leadership roles traditionally held by men in the administrative hierarchy? Or do they get awards elevating them as 'Super Moms'? The whitewashing of participation in this initiative as a leadership opportunity for women is indeed a master stroke in hollow propaganda. As a faculty colleague seethingly stated, 'Why take measures to mitigate bias when you can weaponise it as an innovative initiative? Why reach for progress when we can swaddle ourselves in the predictable hum of inequality?'
There will always be those who think that launching an initiative with the moniker 'Campus Mothers', specifically targeting women volunteers, is not gender biased. It is imperative to recognise this as insidious bias, and an especially dangerous one, as the initiative is couched as friendly, well-meaning, and innovative. Gender stereotypes have no place in the modern professional environment—least of all at a place of learning. As a premier research institute in India, IIT Kharagpur should be vigilant of the gendered message that it is sending to an impressionable student community.
As important as it is to call out bias, it is also important to suggest gender parity approaches. Perhaps institutes could offer implicit bias training for all their members? When policies and initiatives are discussed, such training will help committee members identify bias at nascent stages and nip it in the bud. As for 'Campus Mothers', we hope IIT Kharagpur sets a shining example for the rest of India by rethinking and relaunching this important initiative for student well-being in a gender inclusive manner.
The views expressed in the article above are of the PowerBio group members, a collective of women scientists from India.
Sreelaja Nair is a developmental biologist working on understanding how vertebrate embryos develop. Suhita Nadkarni is a computational neurobiologist working on synaptic plasticity in health and disease.
(Edited by Ratan Priya)