In a move that has reignited public interest in one of Kenya’s most controversial celebrity co-parenting stories, preacher and media personality Victor Kanyari has hinted at a major shift in his family dynamics. Using the Swahili word “Nitawalea” (I will raise them), Kanyari suggested he may be moving to take full custody of his children from his ex-wife, former Tahidi High actress Sandra Dacha, popularly known as Tash.
This public hint, dropped during a recent sermon, opens a new chapter in their long, turbulent journey of separation, public spats, and co-parenting struggles. What does this mean for the children caught in the middle, and what legal and emotional battles lie ahead?
1. The Backstory: Kanyari & Tash’s Rocky Relationship Timeline
2015: The couple married in a lavish ceremony.
2017: Tash gave birth to their first child.
2018–2019: Public signs of strain, social media subtweets, and reported separations.
2020: Confirmed separation amid allegations and counter-allegations.
2021–2024: Co-parenting in the public eye, with occasional tense exchanges online.
Key Issue: Custody has reportedly been shared informally, with Tash as the primary caregiver.
2. Kanyari’s “Nitawalea” Statement – Context & Analysis
Where & When:
During a sermon at his church, Salvation Healing Ministry.
Kanyari was speaking about responsibility, fatherhood, and spiritual duty.
Direct Quote (Translated):
“There comes a time when a father must stand up and say enough. These are my children. I brought them into this world with a purpose. Nitawalea. I will raise them in the ways of God and ensure their future is secure.”
What It Implies:
A possible legal move for full or primary custody.
Criticism of current upbringing under Tash’s care.
Positioning himself as the more fit, spiritually grounded parent.
3. Tash’s Likely Position & Previous Stances
Tash has been the public face of the children’s daily life, often sharing moments on social media.
She has previously emphasized stability, normalcy, and privacy for the kids.
In past interviews, she hinted at struggles with consistent co-parenting support.
Her potential response: Likely to challenge any custody shift, citing consistent caregiving and emotional bonding.
4. Legal Framework: Child Custody in Kenya
Guiding Principles (Children’s Act):
Best interests of the child are paramount.
Courts consider:
Parental financial and emotional capability.
Child’s existing bonds and routines.
Stability and moral guidance.
Parent’s past conduct (could be scrutinized given both parties’ public histories).
Potential Hurdles for Kanyari:
His controversial public image (past scandals).
Child’s adjustment—disrupting current living arrangement.
Proof of consistent involvement in their daily lives.
Potential Hurdles for Tash:
Financial dependency arguments.
Public lifestyle scrutiny.
5. Public Reaction: Divided Opinions
Supporting Kanyari:
Church followers: Believe he can provide spiritual foundation.
Some fans: Argue a father’s right to raise his children.
Quote from supporter: “Every child needs a father’s discipline and guidance.”
Supporting Tash:
Feminist voices: Question timing—using custody as power move?
Co-parenting advocates: Stress stability over sudden changes.
Quote from critic: “Children are not trophies to be won in public battles.”
Neutral Observers:
Urge private resolution for the children’s sake.
Question public hinting before legal steps.
6. The Children in the Middle: Psychological Impact
Ages: Estimated between 4–7 years old—highly impressionable.
Risks:
Anxiety from public parental conflict.
Loyalty binds—feeling torn between parents.
Disruption of school, friendships, routine.
Needs: Privacy, reassurance, child-focused resolution.
7. What’s Next? Possible Scenarios
Legal Filing: Kanyari formally petitions for custody.
Mediation: Private family mediation to avoid court.
Status Quo: Public hint without follow-through—leverage for negotiation?
Public War: Escalation on social media and media exchanges.
Most Likely: Lengthy, emotionally draining legal process if pursued.
8. Lessons for Co-Parenting in the Public Eye
Privacy is protection: Limit child-related discussions publicly.
Child-first language: Frame actions around children’s needs, not parental rights.
Professional guidance: Use mediators, not social media, for disputes.
Unified front: Even when apart, present agreement on basic child-rearing values.
Conclusion: A Call for Wisdom, Not Warfare
Victor Kanyari’s “Nitawalea” hint is more than a headline—it’s a potential turning point for two young lives. In high-conflict separations, children often become pawns in battles of ego, legacy, or revenge.
The true measure of parental love isn’t in who “wins” custody, but in who prioritizes the child’s peace, stability, and emotional well-being. As Kenyan courts often remind us: “Children are not property.”
May this situation be resolved with wisdom, grace, and the children’s silent voices at the center.
Your Take:
Should custody battles be kept entirely private? What matters most in determining a child’s best interest?
