Fertility and the Workplace: Can Employers Help? Should They?

The first PET (Progress Educational Trust) event of 2026 explored what employers can and should do for employees who are receiving fertility treatment, or who are dealing with infertility.

Sarah Norcross, director of PET, began by reminding the audience of an earlier PET event with a similar focus entitled 'Fertility-Friendly Workplaces? Attitudes to Assisted Conception and Employment' (see BioNews 1183, 1184 and 1270). Just as that event followed on from Nickie Aiken MP's Fertility Treatment (Employment Rights) Bill and her associated Fertility Workplace Pledge (see BioNews 1166), so this event followed on from Alice Macdonald MP's Fertility Treatment (Right to Time Off) Bill and her associated Fertility Support Pledge (see BioNews 1314).

The first speaker was Becky Kearns, chief executive of Fertility Matters at Work, who discussed findings from a report published by that organisation last year (see BioNews 1296). The report explored the experiences of more than 1000 employees who have undergone fertility treatment, almost all of whom said that they experienced treatment as a major life event that affected their mental wellbeing. Most used their sick leave to attend fertility appointments, and many hid the fact that they were having treatment from their employers. Among those who did disclose that they were having treatment, 87 percent did not feel as though their line managers had relevant training or support.

The second speaker was Seema Duggal, coordinator of the Fertility in the Workplace initiative at Fertility Network UK, who began by explaining her own experience of undergoing fertility treatment while working. She shared research which showed that 75 percent of fertility patients said treatment had affected their day-to-day work, while 18 percent of patients ended up either reducing their hours or resigning from work, highlighting the impact of fertility treatment on job security and career progression. Duggal went on to describe ways that the Fertility in the Workplace programme provides support and education to employers, as well as helping companies to write and highlight their fertility policies.

Next, Dr Krystal Wilkinson, from Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU), gave the audience a whistlestop tour of her research and her report Complex Fertility Journeys and Employment. She described the 'reproductive work' involved in trying to conceive, undergoing fertility treatment, managing pregnancy loss, or coming to terms with involuntary childlessness. Echoing Kearns and Duggal, she argued that a lack of appropriate organisational policies can have adverse consequences for wellbeing, productivity and equality.

Dr Wilkinson also provided an overview of one of her related journal articles, which explores how fertility treatment policies can either reinforce or challenge prevailing social inequalities, and how unequal experiences might contribute to occupational stratification or result in career penalties. She noted that there is a need for further research into the predicament of more disadvantaged workers, and made the case for supportive approaches that prioritise compassion over narrow cost/benefit calculations.

Dr Wilkinson's colleague Dr Michael Carroll – a Reader in Reproductive Science at MMU, and coauthor of both the the 'Complex Fertility Journeys and Employment' report and the journal article – spoke next. He discussed some of the practical uses of their research, to educate trainee clinical scientists and create more supportive workplaces.

One of the ways they do this is with fictionalised vignettes known as 'ethnodramas' – derived from research data, and viewable here and here – to offer a window into patients' working lives. Dr Carroll also discussed how workplace risk assessments could take fertility treatment into account, extending forms of risk assessment that already exist around pregnancies, allowing for temporary adjustments and reducing reliance on disclosure.

The fifth speaker was Sandy Christiansen – a clinical embryologist and also a Europe, Middle East and Africa consultant at Carrot Fertility, which sponsored the event. She described ways that employers could provide support and increase access to care, highlighting the importance of education in helping patients to navigate the treatment journey, and arguing that this can transform the experience of fertility treatment. Christiansen made the case for an 'ecosystem of support' encompassing patients, employers and healthcare providers.

The panel concluded with a presentation from Natalie Sutherland, a trustee at PET and a partner at the International Family Law Group. Her presentation focused on the role of fertility officer (a position that she holds at her own workplace), and the need to implement fertility policies that could help address some of the issues raised by the previous speakers. She also discussed the need for policies supporting employees who experience miscarriages prior to 24 weeks, as such employees are not currently entitled by law to time off. A recent amendment to the Employment Rights Act, expected to come into force this year or next year, goes a long way toward redressing this.

The presentations were followed by a question-and-answer session. Issues raised by attendees included the importance of increasing awareness through social media, the question of whose reproductive journeys are (and are not) favoured in workplaces, and the difficulty of of negotiating matters such as disclosure and stigma.

Overall, it appeared that awareness of fertility issues at work is slowly increasing, and that employers and policymakers alike are increasingly willing to acknowledge the impact of fertility treatment on people's working lives. However, consistent and meaningful change is still in short supply. Too many employees are still left to navigate fertility treatment, and its associated difficulties, with little protection or understanding from their workplace.

---

PET is grateful to Carrot Fertility for supporting this event.