If you have a combined income of 700k why wouldn't you just take a longer leave? My DH and I had hhi of around 400k and we had enough saved up and also we bought a modest house so I stayed home for 16 months. I worked for about a year and then DD was born and I haven't gone back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Expecting my first. Employer maternity leave is 8 weeks, plus 8 weeks "paid short term disability" (is this typically fully paid? our policy does not indicate what this means). I can tack on 3ish weeks of PTO and beyond that any additional time off would be unpaid. Is there a real difference between going back at ~4 months vs., say, 6? We have a financial cushion but not unlimited funds and the more time I am going to take off, the less money we will have for things like a night nanny. FWIW DH and I make the same amount so loss of my income would be a significant hit on cash flow.

Drop the night nanny and just formula feed. Time with your baby is more important than breastmilk. Also FF babies sleep better. You’ll be able to switch off with your husband and NO PUMPING.

First baby I breastfed. Second I did not and it was a world of difference.

This is such a personal decision and you probably won’t know if breastfeeding is easy or hard for you until you’re in it.

OP, could you use the 16 weeks paid leave and then space out the 3 weeks of PTO to transition back on a part time basis for a few weeks before going back full time? I did something like this with each of my kids and really liked it. For me, it made transitioning the baby to daycare and going back to work easier for it to be 2-3 days a week at first.

DC #1 - returned at 5 months. Her daycare was in my building. I planned to ramp up that first week and work partial days, but the first day I went to get her she was so happy I worked a few more hours. Same the second day. I would go down and nurse her during the day, so that was a nice balance. (though I was also happy to get my life / lunch breaks back when I weaned.)

We moved so DD #1 switched to a daycare near DH’s office. When DD #2 was born we wanted them at the same daycare. A spot became available at 3 months and, for reasons I’m unclear on, they wouldn’t let us pay more than a month without sending her to daycare / using the spot. So we had to start her at 4 months. It wasn’t what I’d hoped, but was fine. I have a hard time with the really infant phase, so would have preferred another month with her, but that was a matter of preference. I was healthy and fine. My first was born early, had some challenges early on, and I had some ptsd challenges so four months would have been much harder with her.

This has been on my mind. My company only gives 3 months and I will be asking for 4.5 months. My spouse will get 4 months.

I still have 20 more weeks to go but the thought of having to leave DC is a hard one.

Don’t prioritize your vulnerable newborn because it might be “frowned upon?” PP do you even hear yourself? Newsflash: those same people who do that, will frown upon you when daycare calls because Larla has RSV/hand foot and mouth/a fever/roseola, who are pissed you have to take time off because Larla is sick, who will judge you for taking time off for Larla’s doctor’s appointments and concerts and teacher conferences, etc. if you work for a place like that, you need a new employer that understands you’re a human being and not a goddamn machine.

PP I think you are giving OP bad advice. First of all, every birth is different. Just because you breezed through two deliveries doesn’t guarantee you anything. Anyone can have a hard birth, a hard baby, or a hard recovery. Anyone.

Second, why do you GAF about what some stupid secretary thinks about your leave, or someone going over there allotted leave. There is no such thing. People are entitled—legally—to a certain amount of leave based on federal and state law. Whether or not this is paid is entirely dependent on company policy, state law, and individual circumstances.

Your post to me just smacks of being out of tough. Most people having their first child in this area do not have a HHI of 700K, and many women will be putting their child in daycare and not keeping them in the peacefulness of a home environment with a 1:1 ratio. As a mom who put her 16 week old in daycare, I can assure you that it’s awful, and the illnesses are horrific, and not being around your baby for 10 plus hours a day while they are cared for by a rotating staff of caregivers with your child getting basically 1/6th of someone’s attention is a pretty rotten experience.

It’s fine that it matters to you to “read the room” about your leave but as someone who did that the first time, it just makes you look insecure. Who cares if you take 16 weeks or 20 or 24? For most jobs, where we could be let go in a heartbeat, sacrificing previous and irreplaceable time with our newborns and taking advantage of legal benefits and protections people have fought for for centuries is a no brainer. Who gives a toss what Karen in accounting thinks about how long you took on maternity leave? No matter what you do, you can NEVER get the time back, but you WILL be working for probably 30-40
More years. Your career is long, infancy is gone in the blink of an eye. PP you are just perpetuating a cycle of women not taking the time they actually need to recover and heal from birth and care for their child because of your insecurity and privilege.