Maternity leave in the US - what do you think is reasonable?

[Anonymous]

We Americans don't value parenting as high as working. We're all conditioned to think this way so anything else sounds so luxurious. I have friends who are expats abroad in Europe and Asia and all have had babies there where they have very generous maternity leaves compared to U.S.

It's true some of us are lucky - I got 4 months paid, and took another 2 months unpaid, with both kids but that's because we could afford to do so. It's sad to read the comments by other moms who don't think they deserve any better whether its from their employers or the govt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the government or the employer should be responsible for providing ANY paid leave, honestly. People choose to have children, that should not have any effect on their employer and their need to run their business.

IMO allowing the parent to use whatever sick leave/vacation time is reasonable. Anything else (even unpaid) is beyond generous.

right - people choose to have children. however, since vast majority of people makes the same decision (namely, to have children) then everyone benefits from the policy at some point. the only people this hurts are people who choose not to have children, and this is just as well. having children is a contribution to the future of the society as well, so i don't mind if childless (a small number anyway) get a small penalty there.

Let me guess, you have children so you "don't mind" ? 42% of Gen X women are childless.

yes, i have children and this is probably the reason i don't mind. so what? since when is it a sin to be self-interested?

and more than a half of those childless women will, when everything is said and done, be mothers. i am gen Y and i am not done yet.

Ha! This almost made me spit out my water. Don't know whether to laugh or cry.

[Anonymous]

I had 6 months. Half was paid (via accrued leave and STD insurance) and half unpaid. I thought it was the perfect amount of time. By 6 months breastfeeding was a breeze and the baby was sleeping longer stretches at night. Transition to daycare was super easy as well. I personally would LOVE if we somehow got 6 months paid (I mean heck as long as I am asking for that we might as well go a year!). But at the bare minimum I think FMLA should cover 6 months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We Americans don't value parenting as high as working. We're all conditioned to think this way so anything else sounds so luxurious. I have friends who are expats abroad in Europe and Asia and all have had babies there where they have very generous maternity leaves compared to U.S.

It's true some of us are lucky - I got 4 months paid, and took another 2 months unpaid, with both kids but that's because we could afford to do so. It's sad to read the comments by other moms who don't think they deserve any better whether its from their employers or the govt.

i don't think it's that - employers are fine with women resigning to make space for new childless workers. rather, we as a society want women to choose either children or a career. a lot of women who chose children support the system that forces other women to either become housewives like themselves or else spend little time with their children so that housewives can feel better about themselves. so it is really a self-interested position, though it's couched n terms of the concern for the interests of employers - none of whom these women had any contact with for a long time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the government or the employer should be responsible for providing ANY paid leave, honestly. People choose to have children, that should not have any effect on their employer and their need to run their business.

IMO allowing the parent to use whatever sick leave/vacation time is reasonable. Anything else (even unpaid) is beyond generous.

Do you have kids? I get 2 wks vacation and 1 wk sick. I should leave my baby at 3 wks old?

I have 4 kids.

Whether you leave your baby at 3 weeks is a decision you need to make for yourself. If you have 3 weeks, and your partner has 3 weeks, you could theoretically wait until the baby is 6 weeks before putting her in daycare. Or you could save enough money to last you to take whatever time off YOU feel is reasonable. Why should your employer be on the hook?

most daycare centers won't even take a baby at 6 weeks old. and my husband had no paternity leave. i'm a total pro-working mom WOHM and i think your theory is absurd. to clarify - you're saying 12-16 weeks unpaid leave should be allowed? just not paid?

[Anonymous]

I'm surprised that no one has yet mentioned that the U.S. is one of only 4 counties in the world that does not have a national policy of paid maternity leave. We're in good company with Swaziland, Liberia, and Papua New Guinea. Go U.S.A.!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the government or the employer should be responsible for providing ANY paid leave, honestly. People choose to have children, that should not have any effect on their employer and their need to run their business.

IMO allowing the parent to use whatever sick leave/vacation time is reasonable. Anything else (even unpaid) is beyond generous.

Do you have kids? I get 2 wks vacation and 1 wk sick. I should leave my baby at 3 wks old?

I have 4 kids.

Whether you leave your baby at 3 weeks is a decision you need to make for yourself. If you have 3 weeks, and your partner has 3 weeks, you could theoretically wait until the baby is 6 weeks before putting her in daycare. Or you could save enough money to last you to take whatever time off YOU feel is reasonable. Why should your employer be on the hook?

most daycare centers won't even take a baby at 6 weeks old. and my husband had no paternity leave. i'm a total pro-working mom WOHM and i think your theory is absurd. to clarify - you're saying 12-16 weeks unpaid leave should be allowed? just not paid?

But that's not your employer's problem. Figure it our or don't have children! /sarc

[Anonymous]

I have a child and got three months paid leave, which I was very grateful for. Our office has continued this policy for subsequent parents (male and female). However, we have had four employees in our small office have babies this year, and while I was happy that each parent got that benefit, I can tell you that it is a real strain on those left behind to do the work. Any more leave would be unsustainable, not to mention horrible for office morale. The money isn't the issue -- who is going to do the work while we hold those jobs open for the new parent?

I don't want to bother to go look it up right now, but I have seen data that suggests that very generous maternity benefits harm the career prospects of women professionals. To which I say, "duh.". If you have a choice between a man and a woman, and there's a good chance the woman could disappear for a year at a time (or longer, if she gets pregnant again before the first year is up), which one would you hire. Good luck proving discrimination.

As for those who say "hire a temp," these jobs involve a very specialized skill set, and are not "temp" type jobs, even if we had the money to hire temps, which we don't.

I agree that, at a minimum, people who support more benefits must have no management experience, or work in a business where the workers are fungible.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand ehy nobody thinks families should take responsibility for SAVING money in advance for their parental leave, the same way you save money to pay for daycare, braces, camp, or any of the other things you CHOOSE to do. Im not bring snarky, i seriously would love an answer from the ones who feel their employer or government should pay.

[Anonymous]

Move somewhere where you like the benefits better than here. And a big pat on the back for being a parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand ehy nobody thinks families should take responsibility for SAVING money in advance for their parental leave, the same way you save money to pay for daycare, braces, camp, or any of the other things you CHOOSE to do. Im not bring snarky, i seriously would love an answer from the ones who feel their employer or government should pay.

because it's not about money - even if you have money to take a leave (i do, for example) you still hurt your career by taking the said leave. unless everyone else takes a leave, too. it's similar to why we work 5 rather than 7 days a week. why are employers forced to pay for our weekends?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Move somewhere where you like the benefits better than here. And a big pat on the back for being a parent.

this is an excellent advice that i will be following with a gusto. yes, i can have it all, bitch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand ehy nobody thinks families should take responsibility for SAVING money in advance for their parental leave, the same way you save money to pay for daycare, braces, camp, or any of the other things you CHOOSE to do. Im not bring snarky, i seriously would love an answer from the ones who feel their employer or government should pay.

Some babies are not planned, despite using birth control. Surely you know that.

[Anonymous]

Here is a diagram comparing the U.S. with other nations on paid maternity leave.

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Maternity-leave-chart-final.png

[Anonymous]

U.S. working woman/new mother to employer, "Baby, what baby?"