As a human rights lawyer who has spent over a decade advocating for gender and reproductive justice, I never imagined that a global feminist organization would discriminate against me because of my pregnancy — a high-risk one, complicated by lupus. My supervisor frequently made sarcastic remarks about my pregnancy symptoms and cravings, particularly when I pushed back or took a stance she disagreed with. Despite receiving repeated assurances of contract renewal, consistent positive feedback on my performance, and confirmation that funding had been secured for the year, I was effectively denied the opportunity to access maternity leave.
In addition, the organization refused to grant me reasonable travel accommodations, despite having an existing travel policy that allowed such adjustments. This was in full knowledge that long-haul flights posed a significant risk to my health by triggering lupus flare-ups during pregnancy.
I eventually left my job due to the ongoing negative experience and continued exploitation by my direct supervisor. While some may argue that I was not forced to leave, this constitutes constructive dismissal. This is a situation where an employee resigns because the employer’s conduct has made continued employment intolerable. It is legally recognized and treated as unfair dismissal.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
I never believed I was special or immune to discrimination, but I did think that, given my knowledge, experience, and the values this sector claims to uphold, I would at least be treated fairly. If this could happen to me, someone deeply embedded in the human rights and feminist space, imagine what happens to women outside the sector, with less access to information, support, or visibility. It is no wonder that an estimated 830 million women lack adequate maternity protection, including access to paid leave and income security during childbirth. Worth noting is that disaggregated data is largely unavailable due to widespread underreporting, driven by fear of retaliation, blacklisting, and the high costs associated with pursuing legal action.
Discrimination against women in the workplace, including based on pregnancy, constitutes gender-based economic violence. It is not only unlawful and unethical, but especially troubling when perpetuated by organizations that profess to uphold feminist values and champion human rights.
Thef Bill of Rights under the Constitution of Kenya outlaws discrimination on any ground including pregnancy. Additionally, the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) affirms reproductive health rights and stipulates protections against discrimination on pregnancy including termination. This is further buttressed by the Maputo Protocol, Africa’s comprehensive legal instrument on women’s rights which Kenya ratified in 2010.
The legal framework on discrimination based on pregnancy status in employment is clearly articulated in the Employment Act and reinforced by key international instruments, including the ILO Convention No. 111 on Discrimination (Employment and Occupation), ILO Convention No. 183 on Maternity Protection, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), which calls for special protection for mothers before and after childbirth. Yet despite these protections, widespread discrimination persists, including and alarmingly so within rights-based organizations themselves.
As feminists, we cannot champion progressive laws, pressure governments for their full implementation, and call out external injustices, while failing to uphold those same principles within our own structures. It is deeply hypocritical to demand accountability from the state while internally perpetuating harmful practices.
Feminist organizations must confront and correct selective application of workplace policies, inadequate support for staff with chronic illnesses or disabilities, and silence on critical issues like equitable parental leave for both parents, irrespective of sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation. Additionally, on accommodations for assisted reproduction, adoption, loss of pregnancy, menstruation and menopause among others, which are often left to the discretion of Human Resources and/or senior staff, without clear, equitable policies, resulting in inconsistency and exclusion.
When feminist organizations betray their own values, they do more than damage their credibility; they weaken the movement’s moral foundation and allow harmful behaviours to go unchecked. These contradictions erode the very gains we fight so hard to protect and expand. Before we look outward, we must first look inward.
In 2024, the United Nations reported that should current trends sustain, it will take almost 300 years to attain gender equality. These trends include the sustained backlash from the anti-gender / anti-rights movement against gender and reproductive rights, among others. While we rightly speak out against the global anti-rights movement threatening gender equality and reproductive health gains, we must also confront the harm that exists within our own spaces. Failing to do so risks becoming the very opposition we resist.
Stephanie Musho is a human rights lawyer and a Senior New Voices Fellow at the Aspen Institute.
