Kihika's US-born twins and the question of reproductive justice

**Nakuru Governor Susan Kihika's absence for five months has sparked concerns from constituents who have demanded her return to duty.** [File, Standard]

Two events in the past month have called into question who exactly gets to access their reproductive rights, and what group of women does not. The first was the discovery, rather than the official announcement, that Nakuru Governor Susan Kihika had travelled to Texas, in the United States, to give birth to twin children. That she left her home country to have her children abroad raises questions. That she is yet to return months later is worrying, especially to residents of Nakuru County. Some have called for Kihika's impeachment over her long absence. But women leaders have opposed this and other negative sentiments, citing the legal entitlement of women to maternity leave.

The second notable event was the announcement by celebrated author and feminist icon Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie that she also had twins last year. This news came in the wake of the release of Adichie’s long awaited novel. Questions were raised on how she was able to birth both a novel and twins. In response, Adichie made it clear that it was an impossible feat, and that she was able to achieve it only because she had had a surrogate to carry her twins. The news of her use of a surrogate sparked a fierce debate on whether or not surrogacy is a just means of having children, with proponents arguing that it helps those who cannot carry their children. Opponents have argued that surrogacy, more often than not, was exploitative to poor women. In Kenya, the conversation on a surrogacy law is ongoing, fronted by Suba North MP Millie Odhiambo. It is necessary that, as a nation, we take this chance to reflect on where we lie regarding the ethics of surrogacy.

Whilst it is true that women deserve to have maternity leave, and also that they deserve to explore as many options as possible of bearing children, these conversations leave out the crucial element of who gets to access these privileges, and who does not. The conversation also presents an opportunity of reframing our thinking beyond the concept of rights into the concept of justice. What may be a right for some may ultimately unjustly disadvantage another, making it necessary for us to pursue justice which ensures that all are represented. In this case, reproductive rights should not be prioritised if reproductive justice cannot be attained by all.

Ultimately, we must remind ourselves what social activist Naomi Klein makes clear in some of her work: Sexual and reproductive health and rights are directly tied to economic rights and justice. As a result, in championing of reproductive justice, economic justice must be part of the conversation. This means that, in having a discussion on the rights of women to have children by exercising various options, we must think about women who would not have the chance to exercise these rights due to being economically locked out - poor and marginalised women. Often, these are also the women who are approached to carry the children of classed women, and although they choose to do so, their choice comes at the end of the barrel of a gun. Surrogacy becomes an option to earn desperately needed money where, if they had the financial muscle, it would not.

Indian scholar Gayatri Spivak also reminds us that often, the subaltern cannot speak, not because it does not have a voice but because it is being silenced by louder voices. In this case, the women Members of Parliament and senators have the power to hold a press conference to defend their fellow woman. Meanwhile, the average woman in Nakuru is probably fighting and failing to access health serivices, resulting in possible maternal or child mortality. Our choices do not exist in a vacuum, and neither do our rights. We must pursue justice for all if we are to exercise our rights conscientiously.

Ms Gitahi is an international lawyer