The age-old practice of bride price payment was the focus of a passionate discussion on Luv In The Morning, where host David Akuetteh and his female panellist debated whether the tradition still holds cultural significance or has turned into a financial burden.
Akuetteh opened the discussion by questioning the relevance of bride price in modern society, suggesting that the increasing demands attached to the practice could make it seem like women were being “sold” rather than honoured. “Has it become a financial burden, or is it still a sign of respect?” he asked.
In response, the panellist acknowledged that while bride price remains an important cultural tradition, its interpretation has evolved. “In the past, it was about ensuring the bride had what she needed to settle into her new home. But now, some families request excessive amounts, which can make it look like a business transaction.”
She defended the practice, arguing that it is a form of appreciation for the parents’ efforts in raising a daughter.
“Parents invest in their children’s education, well-being, and upbringing. When a man comes to ask for a woman’s hand, it’s only fair that he acknowledges that investment in some way.”
Akuetteh, however, challenged this perspective, questioning whether such financial demands were not turning marriage into a commercial exchange.
“If it’s about respect, why do families expect large sums of money? Should a groom be made to pay for everything the parents have done for their daughter?”
The panelist disagreed with the idea that bride price was a sale, insisting that it remains a symbol of commitment. “It’s not about selling a daughter; it’s about showing gratitude and proving that the man values the woman he wants to marry.
“If the family asks for something reasonable, it shouldn’t be seen as a burden.”
Akuetteh pushed further, highlighting the modern reality where grooms struggle to meet high demands. “Times are hard. If a man is forced to spend so much before marriage, how does that affect the couple’s financial future?”
The conversation ended with both sides standing firm—one arguing that the practice has been stretched beyond its original intent, while the other maintained that it remains a meaningful tradition, though sometimes misinterpreted.
