Background: Child marriage and early unions (CMEU) affect around 640 million girls worldwide. Global health narratives often frame CMEU as gender-based violence—family-driven and inherently harmful—linked to risky pregnancies, school dropout, and domestic violence. However, these discourses frequently overlook how adolescents assess their circumstances and exercise agency, particularly among forcibly displaced populations. This study, co-produced with stateless Rohingya refugee and asylum-seeking adolescents, examines how they use elopement to navigate adversity within a context of precarious legal status and restricted access to education and livelihoods in Malaysia.
Methods: This qualitative study aimed to investigate the drivers, trajectories, and outcomes of elopement among Rohingya boys and girls (10–19 years) in Malaysia. Collaborating with refugee-led organizations and 13 Rohingya youth advisors, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with 32 participants. Fifty-eight accounts of elopement, child marriage, and dating were compiled and analyzed thematically.
Results: Common reasons adolescents elope include: (I) pursuit of love against contested social norms; and (II) responses to adversity (e.g., poverty, family restrictions, forced marriage, or intimate partner violence from a first spouse). Elopement unfolded in three stages: (I) secret partnership formation, often facilitated by online interactions in early adolescence; (II) rapid progression to elopement; and (III) post-elopement outcomes, with many unions dissolving due to severe financial hardship, marital strain, abuse, and family estrangement—leaving adolescents viewing elopement as a “mistake”.
Conclusions: This study broadens understandings of CMEU by highlighting the significant but structurally constrained role of adolescent agency. Rohingya adolescents use elopement to seek autonomy, love, safety, and relief from financial hardship, yet such choices often heighten vulnerability and introduce new protection risks. Findings suggest that interventions should build on adolescents’ strong preference for education. Policies expanding refugees’ right to stay, work, and study could reduce pressures to enter premature and precarious unions by creating viable alternatives.
