OP, this only matters if you work for the SAME company, because that's how they can save money by only giving one parent the full leave. That's the only reason, EVER, for naming a "primary parent." It's to keep the company from paying equal benefits to both.

If you don't work for his company, why would you ever say he's NOT the primary parent and set yourself up for less support and a more unequal parenting relationship from the very start? It would be an own goal to prove some dumb point about giving birth. He should take the leave and be a present dad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband's company allows 16 weeks of paid leave for the "primary caregiver" and four weeks for the "secondary caregiver." My interpretation of the policy is that I am the primary caregiver and he would be the secondary caregiver because no matter how helpful he may be it's never truly going to be equal. My husband has a few male colleagues who have taken the 4 months so he feels he should do the same.

I think the optics could be bad and I don't want it to damage his career. Has anyone had experience with this?

This sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen. Take the 4 months.

I think two associates sued Jones Day over this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Primary is the one giving birth

This is obviously not true, as lots of people adopt and still get to claim one as a primary if needed.

But in the event one person is in fact giving birth it’s suddenly obvious what words mean