Mandatory Paternity Leave

southsiderosie

This week, the New York Times magazine ran a series of articles on women, including one on the issue of family leave. I think the following quotes sum things up in a nutshell:

The life-work dilemma for women has long been that “the workplace has changed in their favor, but home hasn’t,” she says. Men, however, “have the opposite problem. More is expected of them at home, but expectations have not shifted at work.” Which explains why the percentage of fathers in dual-income households who say they suffer work-family conflict has risen to 59 percent from 35 percent since 1977....

The article goes on to note that simply offering family leave isn't enough, and that instead leave needs to be offered in a way that normalizes men taking time off from work to spend with their families. The author points to Sweden as an example:

Today the Swedes have one of the world’s most forward-thinking parental leave policies, but it took years of tweaking before men took substantial time off to care for children. Starting in 1974, couples were given six months of paid leave to divide in any way they chose. Women consistently used more of the time than men; in fact, only 4 percent of fathers took any leave at all. In 1995, however, a month of fathers-only leave was introduced, and in 2002, another month of “daddy leave” was added, bringing the total to 480 days. If men don’t take the leave before their child turns 8, they lose the days. Now about 80 percent of Swedish dads take at least some time off.

By steering men toward a particular path, Sweden redefined the nature of choice. Parental leave was transformed from a way to escape the world of work into a way to maximize the benefits available to families; from an emotional decision to a financial one; from something mothers do to something every parent does.

Given that the EU just proposed mandating 20 weeks paid maternity leave in all member states, what about paternity leave? Do folks think it should be offered? Should it be mandatory? And for those TLL readers with children, do you think your partners would have been willing to take two months off of work if they could (or would you want them to? ). Personally, I think the full article makes a strong case for mandatory paternity leave as a means of normalizing family leave for both sexes, but I'm curious about what others think.

metrovelvet

I think because this is a New York Times article it should be contextualised. NY State does not PAY for maternity leave or is it required by law. It is paid for by the employer and is considered an employee benefit. It is also not nearly as long as by European standards.

Did the NY Times mention how much the Swedes pay in taxes to subsidise all this leave?

ztoical

southsiderosie wrote: »

Given that the EU just proposed mandating 20 months maternity leave in all member states

20 months? is that a typo? Who needs nearly 2 years of maternity leave?

southsiderosie

ztoical wrote: »

20 months? is that a typo? Who needs nearly 2 years of maternity leave?

Oops...definitely a typo.

LisaLee

I think Paternity Leave needs to be extended as having a baby changes things quite a bit and it helps to have support.

However, I think there should be some method used to ensure that the new father is actually helping and not gone on a bender or gallivanting away on holidays.

I can't help but worry how many people may abuse this system to get paid time off work. Skeptical me.

southsiderosie

LisaLee wrote: »

I think Paternity Leave needs to be extended as having a baby changes things quite a bit and it helps to have support.

However, I think there should be some method used to ensure that the new father is actually helping and not gone on a bender or gallivanting away on holidays.

I can't help but worry how many people may abuse this system to get paid time off work. Skeptical me.

Maternity leave has always been a huge issue for universities, because having a baby put women at a huge disadvantage when trying to get tenure. My old university decided to give women a year of maternity leave, during which the tenure clock would stop. Then, in the spirit of progressivism, they also decided to give male faculty paternity leave for a year. Lo and behold, they discovered that the men were using this time not for family bonding or child care, but to get a leg up on publications...which would better position them for tenure. So the university bumped men down to one semester of paternity leave.

panda100

I think theres a lot of cynicism on this thread regards men and their attitude to fatherhood.
I can only speak for men I have encountered in my life, but I know the vast majority of them would relish paternity leave to spend quality time with their family. I am 100% in favour of paid paternity leave. I'd have no problem paying higher taxes for this. Its much better then the system we have now, where you pay taxes and get nothing in return.


Also the first quote is laughable. How has the work place changed in women's favour?? Yes more is expected of men at home and rightly so. Women still do the majority of house work in this country,men should start shouldering that responsibility a bit.

metrovelvet

panda100 wrote: »

I think theres a lot of cynicism on this thread regards men and their attitude to fatherhood.
I can only speak for men I have encountered in my life, but I know the vast majority of them would relish paternity leave to spend quality time with their family. I am 100% in favour of paid paternity leave. I'd have no problem paying higher taxes for this. Its much better then the system we have now, where you pay taxes and get nothing in return.


Also the first quote is laughable. How has the work place changed in women's favour?? Yes more is expected of men at home and rightly so. Women still do the majority of house work in this country,men should start shouldering that responsibility a bit.

Its an American article. American men are different, except for the few unga bungas that go out of their way to find Thai brides.

The way the work place has become more female friendly is that women are getting in the door, thats about it.

Its not a type - it is 20 weeks. But the IRish maternity leave was already 26 weeks I think so I dont know.

pollypocket10

A vote was passed in the EU parliament to extend the minimum maternity leave to 20 weeks with full pay. There seems to be some ambiguity as to who will have to fund this (State or Employer).

In Ireland we currently have 26 weeks with statutory pay (not full pay) so not quite sure how this would effect us. Could be positive or negative maybe shorten the leave period to make up the shortfall?

It was also passed that there should be a minimum of 2 weeks paternity leave which personally I think would be great and I know my partner would love that time to bond with the baby too.

However I do see where people are coming from, I know of plenty of absent fathers who totally abuse a system like this however you will always get people who abuse the system, whether it be job seekers benefit, lone parents allowance or whatever. I don't think the rest should be disadvantaged because of a few freeloaders.

Anywho as far as I know it has to be approved by the governments before it comes into law so who knows, might never happen

southsiderosie

The EU proposal will probably get significantly watered down before it becomes law, although I definitely think they should fight to keep the paternity leave in.

And to be fair to the men, there are women who take advantage of generous leave policies as well. Belgians offer generous paid leave, and women are entitled to their old positions when they go back to work. A Belgian woman once cheerfully explained to me how she and her friends all figured out how to individually time their babies in a way that meant they didn't go back to work for 4-5 years. The particular woman I spoke to then emigrated to Mexico. I'm sure her employer was thrilled with all of this.

In any system there will be abuses, but it's not worth throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I think family leave is critical for 21st century workers, especially since these days much of the time it is just not economically feasible for one partner to stay home.

QuiteInterestin

As a previous poster said, you have to consider the different parental leave conditions in the US compared to the EU. In the US you are entitled to 12 weeks unpaid leave with job protection, thats it! You are not entitled to any social welfare pay out and it is the employers discretion whether you will be paid by them or not during your 12 weeks. This law only applies to companies with more than 50 employees, so in reality, alot of mothers have to return to work earlier than 12 weeks as most companies would have less than 50 employees.

I lived in Sweden for a while and while they have a great parental leave set up (at least 18mths with the father having to take 2mths of this during which the mother returns to work) they also have to pay very high taxes to finance this. Also, in Sweden children cannot be placed in a creche until they are at least one year old so they have to be minded by family. Like another poster pointed out, this system was also open to abuse. Where I worked they're were alot of PhD students and there was a trend among them to have a child in about the 3rd year of their PhD (especially among the men) as this gave them the chance to get some extra writing/working time in that would not be counted in the timescale of the PhD. Not that they are alone in abusing the parental leave system, I know of a good few Irish men who have taken time of as parental leave and have instead used the time to get the silage done etc

panda100

I don't get this whole 'abusing the system' thing. I don't think paternity or maternity leave means you have to be shackled to your kid 24/7. Whats wrong with doing the silage when your on paternity leave?

Its' a pretty sad state of our world when a person's right to take some time off from work and spend time with their family is refereed to as a 'freeloader'.

southsiderosie

panda100 wrote: »

I don't get this whole 'abusing the system' thing. I don't think paternity or maternity leave means you have to be shackled to your kid 24/7. Whats wrong with doing the silage when your on paternity leave?

Its' a pretty sad state of our world when a person's right to take some time off from work and spend time with their family is refereed to as a 'freeloader'.

Or maybe it is just an indication that people in modern society do not have enough free time, and will take it where they can get it.

That said, I would have issues if my partner decided to use his paternity time to take up a new hobby that wasn't baby burping, nappy changing, or laundry folding.

metrovelvet

panda100 wrote: »

I don't get this whole 'abusing the system' thing. I don't think paternity or maternity leave means you have to be shackled to your kid 24/7. Whats wrong with doing the silage when your on paternity leave?

Its' a pretty sad state of our world when a person's right to take some time off from work and spend time with their family is refereed to as a 'freeloader'.

It pretty much does mean that for the first year. Unless your child is in a creche, but then whats the point of leave if that is the case?

ztoical

panda100 wrote: »

Its' a pretty sad state of our world when a person's right to take some time off from work and spend time with their family is refereed to as a 'freeloader'.

People are welcome to take as much time off as they like but I draw the line at having my taxes pay for people having months of paid leave. I've no issue with maternity or paternity leave per say but paid by the state maternity/paternity leave is another matter.

I honestly don't know what people need 20 weeks of leave for, any friends [3 different friends, one single mother and two in relationships] who've had kids recently were back in work 3 weeks later. One said she was going slightly mad just sitting at home with the baby all day.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Would be great if a couple could pool parental leave and then decide which takes it off.

eg every parent has 3months parental leave. But say my childs mother has a more important job or im better with the child or whatever, could there be a mechanism to allow her take one month off and I take 5months off.

The state should pay the person whilst they're off work and the employer doesn't contribute anything.

This way there'd be no reason to favour male employees over female.

Also the first quote is laughable. How has the work place changed in women's favour?? Yes more is expected of men at home and rightly so. Women still do the majority of house work in this country,men should start shouldering that responsibility a bit.

I think it would mean that nowadays females have opportunities for management and higher pay which didn't exist in the past.

In double income couples are women really still doing the majority of the housework? They should stop. Just couldn't imagine any of my ex's putting up with that.

Edit: I see from the OP the Swedes toyed with my suggestion since the 70s. Well it didn't work then but I think times have changed. As we live in a country where its normal for a woman to work and have a career I think implementing that system would really encourage men to be house-husbands and child carers, which would stop employers discriminating against women of child-bearing age.

metrovelvet

You have to consider physical recovery too. Everyones birth and everyones body is different.

southsiderosie

ztoical wrote: »

People are welcome to take as much time off as they like but I draw the line at having my taxes pay for people having months of paid leave. I've no issue with maternity or paternity leave per say but paid by the state maternity/paternity leave is another matter.

I honestly don't know what people need 20 weeks of leave for, any friends [3 different friends, one single mother and two in relationships] who've had kids recently were back in work 3 weeks later. One said she was going slightly mad just sitting at home with the baby all day.

Most women get cleared by their doctor to resume normal activities after 6 weeks, which is the base for most large companies offering maternity leave, even in the US. Sure some people will be up and about two days after childbirth, but that is just not the case for a lot of people, especially in countries where c-sections are more common.

Having more time, especially for the mother, also increases the likelihood of extended breastfeeding, something that is very hard for a lot of moms to manage when they go back to work full time. Again, this may not be an option for everyone, but honestly when there isn't some kind of mandated baseline policy, the workplace just turns into "Well SHE came back after 2 weeks, why can't YOU?" (this is also the logic behind why some have proposed a minimum benchmark for paternity leave).

To be honest, I'm getting tired of the "MY TAXES" line in general. I don't have children, but my taxes go to pay for schools. I don't drive, but my taxes go to pay for roads. I eat well and try to stay healthy, but my taxes go to pay for the medical services of people who smoke and weigh 400 pounds. Either we live in a society where we agree that there needs to be some kind of baseline protections for people in all stages of life, or just pull the plug on everything.

QuiteInterestin

panda100 wrote: »

I don't get this whole 'abusing the system' thing. I don't think paternity or maternity leave means you have to be shackled to your kid 24/7. Whats wrong with doing the silage when your on paternity leave?

Its' a pretty sad state of our world when a person's right to take some time off from work and spend time with their family is refereed to as a 'freeloader'.

If they are spending the time with their family, thats grand, thats what its intended for! Its when some people take time off under the pretence of spending it with their family and use it for other work purposes, such as farming, which after all provides an income. You also have to consider that parental leave would not be covered in many workplaces, and so you are putting your work colleagues under additional strain. I'm referring to parental leave in this comment, not maternity/paternity leave.

metrovelvet

southsiderosie wrote: »

Most women get cleared by their doctor to resume normal activities after 6 weeks, which is the base for most large companies offering maternity leave, even in the US. Sure some people will be up and about two days after childbirth, but that is just not the case for a lot of people, especially in countries where c-sections are more common.

Having more time, especially for the mother, also increases the likelihood of extended breastfeeding, something that is very hard for a lot of moms to manage when they go back to work full time. Again, this may not be an option for everyone, but honestly when there isn't some kind of mandated baseline policy, the workplace just turns into "Well SHE came back after 2 weeks, why can't YOU?" (this is also the logic behind why some have proposed a minimum benchmark for paternity leave).

To be honest, I'm getting tired of the "MY TAXES" line in general. I don't have children, but my taxes go to pay for schools. I don't drive, but my taxes go to pay for roads. I eat well and try to stay healthy, but my taxes go to pay for the medical services of people who smoke and weigh 400 pounds. Either we live in a society where we agree that there needs to be some kind of baseline protections for people in all stages of life, or just pull the plug on everything.

I would also add that due to sleep exhaustion I would have been fired. And this continued way after 6 weeks. I would have fired me. SHort term memory shot, and borderline hallucinating, nearly discovered my Native American name.

ztoical

southsiderosie wrote: »

To be honest, I'm getting tired of the "MY TAXES" line in general. I don't have children, but my taxes go to pay for schools. I don't drive, but my taxes go to pay for roads. I eat well and try to stay healthy, but my taxes go to pay for the medical services of people who smoke and weigh 400 pounds. Either we live in a society where we agree that there needs to be some kind of baseline protections for people in all stages of life, or just pull the plug on everything.

Schools that educate people that work in service that you benifit from and you may not use the roads but services that you use do use them. You pay taxes for health care cus you might fall over and break a leg tomorrow and need care. I accept and do like how our society works and that people are looked after, might not always work and people take advantage but it's better then nothing. I never said there shouldn't be state paid maternity leave but people have the choice to have kids and yes they should be allowed to take time off leading up to and just after having a child but exactly how much time should be paid for by the state I have issue with. 8 to 12 weeks paid and however much you want unpaid or if your work pays more fantastic. If some has a difficult birth/recovery then that's a medical issue.

I think there should be equal paternity and maternity leave but if your taking it it should be for the reasons stated. If I take time off work claiming to be sick then turns out I'm not sick thats fraud so if mothers and fathers are taking time off to focus on a new baby then that's what it should be if they are going to be getting money from the state.

Bottle_of_Smoke

southsiderosie wrote: »

Having more time, especially for the mother, also increases the likelihood of extended breastfeeding, something that is very hard for a lot of moms to manage when they go back to work full time. Again, this may not be an option for everyone, but honestly when there isn't some kind of mandated baseline policy, the workplace just turns into "Well SHE came back after 2 weeks, why can't YOU?" (this is also the logic behind why some have proposed a minimum benchmark for paternity leave).

If people are that inhumane you've upset me:( - would it not just be something that's considered different for everyone? Actually you're probably right....

The breast feeding thing. I think that's something that could be educated away. With breast pumps and refridgeration its very easy to provide breastmilk for babies even if unable to be around the baby for extended periods

pickarooney

QuiteInterestin wrote: »

If they are spending the time with their family, thats grand, thats what its intended for! Its when some people take time off under the pretence of spending it with their family and use it for other work purposes, such as farming, which after all provides an income. You also have to consider that parental leave would not be covered in many workplaces, and so you are putting your work colleagues under additional strain. I'm referring to parental leave in this comment, not maternity/paternity leave.

You've mentioned this a couple of times, so I just have to ask - who are these people who have full time jobs and who farm silage in their spare time?

metrovelvet

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

If people are that inhumane you've upset me:( - would it not just be something that's considered different for everyone? Actually you're probably right....

The breast feeding thing. I think that's something that could be educated away. With breast pumps and refridgeration its very easy to provide breastmilk for babies even if unable to be around the baby for extended periods

I didnt breastfeed. I couldnt. I pumped for six weeks and I can tell you it is NOT FUN.

Breastfeeding is not just about the milk but about a whole other dynamic of closeness and hormone release for both mother and child which helps with healing and bonding as well as co immunity.

southsiderosie

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

If people are that inhumane you've upset me:( - would it not just be something that's considered different for everyone? Actually you're probably right....

The breast feeding thing. I think that's something that could be educated away. With breast pumps and refridgeration its very easy to provide breastmilk for babies even if unable to be around the baby for extended periods

After two years at a labor and employment law firm (employer side) and two years with a labor union, I have seen the worst of the worst of employer behavior. And thinking that men should be back the day after their partners give birth, and women should be back two to four weeks later is far from the worst that I have seen, sadly.

As for the breast feeding, the big issues for the women I worked with were 1) where to pump, and 2) when to pump. Theoretically it wouldn't be so bad if you could close your office door and take conference calls while pumping, but that's not how most people work. And sitting in a toilet stall isn't the greatest environment either.

Bottle_of_Smoke

metrovelvet wrote: »

I didnt breastfeed. I couldnt. I pumped for six weeks and I can tell you it is NOT FUN.

Breastfeeding is not just about the milk but about a whole other dynamic of closeness and hormone release for both mother and child which helps with healing and bonding as well as co immunity.

The co-immunity would still pass from mother to child through pumped milk.

The closeness I think could be mimicked by a father feeding the child with a bottle. Though you can actually get fake boobs for doing it too.

Are you arguing against women going back to work at all before the recommended time for weaning, as without pumps the child would then have to be formula fed.. or just making the point about breast-feeding?

metrovelvet

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

The co-immunity would still pass from mother to child through pumped milk.

The closeness I think could be mimicked by a father feeding the child with a bottle. Though you can actually get fake boobs for doing it too.

Are you arguing against women going back to work at all before the recommended time for weaning, as without pumps the child would then have to be formula fed.. or just making the point about breast-feeding?

No because the suckling itsself releases oxtytocin. Also its not like you can pump on demand all the time either. And between breast and silicone im sure the child is wired to prefer breast. And yes it can make a difference as to how well the baby latches, etc. The co immunity also passes on through the contact, and so does temperature regulation. I dont know what kind of studies they have done on pumped and stored breastmilk so that I don't know about.

I ended up formula feeding because even with the six weeks of heart wrenching and painful pumping nothing came. And sometimes you need the time to get it going. It failed for me but not for everyone.

I know the recommended time is six months for breast feeding, and Im not really recommending anything, or arguing for women not going back to work but early on the baby needs his or her mother's body. S/he may not die but s/he will be a lot better off with access to his or her mothers body.

QuiteInterestin

pickarooney wrote: »

You've mentioned this a couple of times, so I just have to ask - who are these people who have full time jobs and who farm silage in their spare time?

Only mentioned silage once and farmwork once, someone quoted me. I'm just using it as an example as farming is an area where the workload varies from one season to another so the farmer will often have another occupation to makes ends meet. Yet there will still be times of the year were it requires full time attention and I have seen some people use their parental leave for this reason. But like I said before, I'm referring to the parental leave that parents can take up until there child is (?) eight (not sure of the criteria), not the paternity/maternity leave that parents take when the child is born.

In relation to maternity/paternity leave, I agree with the Swedish system which requires for the father to spend at least 2 mths at home with the child (while the mother returns to work). While it may be open to some misuse (like I said previously I saw some use it as a chance to get some extra work in on there PhD), most used it as a chance to spend the day taking care of their child while their partner returned to work and before their child entered full time child care (usually at ~18mths) when both parents returned to work.

pollypocket10

QuiteInterestin wrote: »

Only mentioned silage once and farmwork once, someone quoted me. I'm just using it as an example as farming is an area where the workload varies from one season to another so the farmer will often have another occupation to makes ends meet. Yet there will still be times of the year were it requires full time attention and I have seen some people use their parental leave for this reason. But like I said before, I'm referring to the parental leave that parents can take up until there child is (?) eight (not sure of the criteria), not the paternity/maternity leave that parents take when the child is born.

In relation to maternity/paternity leave, I agree with the Swedish system which requires for the father to spend at least 2 mths at home with the child (while the mother returns to work). While it may be open to some misuse (like I said previously I saw some use it as a chance to get some extra work in on there PhD), most used it as a chance to spend the day taking care of their child while their partner returned to work and before their child entered full time child care (usually at ~18mths) when both parents returned to work.

I think it's important to note that the Swedish system is entirely different to ours. There is actually 16 months paid maternity leave, 2 months of which is to be taken by the father either consecutively or simultaneously with the mothers leave.

They are well equipped for this and pay dearly in taxes but get quite a lot in return. They are not really a capitalist society and focus is very much on spreading the wealth. The whole society and system would have to change here for it to work. TBH I don't see it ever happening, Ireland is proud of it's entrepreneurial spirit which isn't really a feature of this type of society.

panda100 wrote: »

I don't get this whole 'abusing the system' thing. I don't think paternity or maternity leave means you have to be shackled to your kid 24/7. Whats wrong with doing the silage when your on paternity leave?

Its' a pretty sad state of our world when a person's right to take some time off from work and spend time with their family is refereed to as a 'freeloader'.

Because paternity leave is either at the expense of the state or your employer. Why should they have to fund your time off to look after the farm? Sure everyone would like extra paid time off but the line has to be drawn somewhere. There are times when it is seen as important or cannot be avoided which is why we get paid annual leave or can claim some benefit while ill. Maternity/Paternity leave is seen as time that is important for bonding with and caring for a new life/

If you want some time off to pursue other ventures then do it at your own expense, otherwise you are free loading and abusing the system.

A bit OT but I also might add, one of the reasons we are all going to take a hit in the next budget is because in addition to all the people with legitimate claims and needs there are far too many people abusing the system!

Gandhi

I took my first paternity leave about two years ago. I took eight weeks off, and then worked two days a week for a further four weeks before going back to work full time. I am about to start my second paternity leave in a few weeks. I live in the States so it is all unpaid (by either government or employer), which I am fine with. Textbook example of the American way - do whatever you want, but you are picking up the tab yourself.

The rule here is that a dad can take a max of twelve weeks which has to be taken in a single block within 12 months of the birth (or adoption) of the child. I do not think there is any stipulation as to whether it is concurrent with the mother's maternity leave. For both our kids I started/will start my leave literally the day my wife went/will go back to work.

My impression is that most guys here do not take paternity leave because they do not know such a thing exists, and those that do just don't take it because no-one else does. Several guys made fun of me the first time when we were in a group, but then would be asking how I went about setting it up when we were talking one on one.

As for guys going on benders or making silage while on paternity leave, I don't know how that is remotely possible with a six-month-old baby in tow. I am guessing it would be pretty rare.

pollypocket10

Gandhi wrote: »

As for guys going on benders or making silage while on paternity leave, I don't know how that is remotely possible with a six-month-old baby in tow. I am guessing it would be pretty rare.

You'd be very surprised about how little interest SOME fathers can take... the baby just wouldn't be in tow, sad but unfortunately it happens

It's great that you have the option, although I'm sure the fact that you aren't entitled to any income would mean that a lot of fathers can't avail. What state are you in out of interest? I was surprised to find out recently that some states don't get any maternity leave (only the time they get certified off by docotr for recovery), let alone paternity leave :O