Anonymous wrote:Some of you people are so pampered. I am older than you, had 2 children 17 months apart and my DH had no paternity leave. He took a week of vacation. If your friend’s experience was the saddest thing you ever heard, you have lived a charmed life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My friend came to me with the saddest mid-divorce reveal I’ve ever heard. When her only child was born, her DH only had 2 weeks of paternity leave. He didn’t take all of it and went back 2 days early. It was really hard on her and sometimes we still look back on those days pretty ruefully. The worst part was he worked for a Fortune 500 company that changed paternity-specific leave to parental leave that year and gave everyone with a new child 12 weeks, paid. He ended up covering leave for half his team while they still had their own tiny baby at home.

As part of some kind of mediation session during divorce, she found out that he actually had 6 weeks leave and just never took it. Which explained why when she asked him to petition to HR to be grandfathered in or get some kind of additional leave when they changed the policy, he said it was impossible.

I’ve never heard anything quite so specific and awful that wasn’t an affair. She’s asking me if she’s crazy. Am I ok in validating that this was a supremely messed up act of deception? Why would a father do that?

Really? So he didn’t take all of his leave and that’s why people are acting like this is some unforgivable betrayal worthy of divorce?

My DH took a week off after our baby was born. I took about a month, and then my mom and mother in law rotated helping until we got a nanny around 2 months. It was exhausting, but honestly pretty normal for a lot of families.

I’m all for parental leave and think it’s great companies offer more now, but people acting like anything less than 12 weeks means the father failed his family feels detached from reality. Plenty of loving, involved fathers went back to work quickly because that was the norm for decades.

Get some perspective. People before you often had maybe 3 to 4 weeks total between both parents, sometimes less, and families still turned out fine. My kids are teens now, thriving, close with us, happy, successful, one headed to an Ivy League school, and somehow they don’t have lifelong trauma because dad didn’t stay home for months.

Also, at some point more leave really doesn’t fundamentally change much. Having a baby is a massive life adjustment and reset no matter what. Whether someone is home 4 weeks, 12 weeks, or even a year, eventually real life starts and you adapt. Acting like those extra weeks are the difference between a healthy family and lifelong damage is honestly overblown.

Honestly, this almost proves the opposite point people are trying to make. There’s a concept called Parkinson’s Law: work expands to fill the time available for it. I think parental leave expectations do the same thing. If society says 4 weeks is normal, people adapt to 4 weeks. If society says 12 weeks, then suddenly 12 weeks becomes “not enough.” If society said a year, eventually people would say a year isn’t enough either. At some point you are just prolonging the adjustment/reset period and removing productivity, not fundamentally changing long term family outcomes.

If their marriage had deeper problems, fine. But turning this into some shocking act on the level of an affair or abuse feels wildly overdramatic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My friend came to me with the saddest mid-divorce reveal I’ve ever heard. When her only child was born, her DH only had 2 weeks of paternity leave. He didn’t take all of it and went back 2 days early. It was really hard on her and sometimes we still look back on those days pretty ruefully. The worst part was he worked for a Fortune 500 company that changed paternity-specific leave to parental leave that year and gave everyone with a new child 12 weeks, paid. He ended up covering leave for half his team while they still had their own tiny baby at home.

As part of some kind of mediation session during divorce, she found out that he actually had 6 weeks leave and just never took it. Which explained why when she asked him to petition to HR to be grandfathered in or get some kind of additional leave when they changed the policy, he said it was impossible.

I’ve never heard anything quite so specific and awful that wasn’t an affair. She’s asking me if she’s crazy. Am I ok in validating that this was a supremely messed up act of deception? Why would a father do that?

Really? So he didn’t take all of his leave and that’s why people are acting like this is some unforgivable betrayal worthy of divorce?

My DH took a week off after our baby was born. I took about a month, and then my mom and mother in law rotated helping until we got a nanny around 2 months. It was exhausting, but honestly pretty normal for a lot of families.

I’m all for parental leave and think it’s great companies offer more now, but people acting like anything less than 12 weeks means the father failed his family feels detached from reality. Plenty of loving, involved fathers went back to work quickly because that was the norm for decades.

Get some perspective. People before you often had maybe 3 to 4 weeks total between both parents, sometimes less, and families still turned out fine. My kids are teens now, thriving, close with us, happy, successful, one headed to an Ivy League school, and somehow they don’t have lifelong trauma because dad didn’t stay home for months.

Also, at some point more leave really doesn’t fundamentally change much. Having a baby is a massive life adjustment and reset no matter what. Whether someone is home 4 weeks, 12 weeks, or even a year, eventually real life starts and you adapt. Acting like those extra weeks are the difference between a healthy family and lifelong damage is honestly overblown.

Honestly, this almost proves the opposite point people are trying to make. There’s a concept called Parkinson’s Law: work expands to fill the time available for it. I think parental leave expectations do the same thing. If society says 4 weeks is normal, people adapt to 4 weeks. If society says 12 weeks, then suddenly 12 weeks becomes “not enough.” If society said a year, eventually people would say a year isn’t enough either. At some point you are just prolonging the adjustment/reset period and removing productivity, not fundamentally changing long term family outcomes.

If their marriage had deeper problems, fine. But turning this into some shocking act on the level of an affair or abuse feels wildly overdramatic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My friend came to me with the saddest mid-divorce reveal I’ve ever heard. When her only child was born, her DH only had 2 weeks of paternity leave. He didn’t take all of it and went back 2 days early. It was really hard on her and sometimes we still look back on those days pretty ruefully. The worst part was he worked for a Fortune 500 company that changed paternity-specific leave to parental leave that year and gave everyone with a new child 12 weeks, paid. He ended up covering leave for half his team while they still had their own tiny baby at home.

As part of some kind of mediation session during divorce, she found out that he actually had 6 weeks leave and just never took it. Which explained why when she asked him to petition to HR to be grandfathered in or get some kind of additional leave when they changed the policy, he said it was impossible.

I’ve never heard anything quite so specific and awful that wasn’t an affair. She’s asking me if she’s crazy. Am I ok in validating that this was a supremely messed up act of deception? Why would a father do that?

Really? So he didn’t take all of his leave and that’s why people are acting like this is some unforgivable betrayal worthy of divorce?

My DH took a week off after our baby was born. I took about a month, and then my mom and mother in law rotated helping until we got a nanny around 2 months. It was exhausting, but honestly pretty normal for a lot of families.

I’m all for parental leave and think it’s great companies offer more now, but people acting like anything less than 12 weeks means the father failed his family feels detached from reality. Plenty of loving, involved fathers went back to work quickly because that was the norm for decades.

Get some perspective. People before you often had maybe 3 to 4 weeks total between both parents, sometimes less, and families still turned out fine. My kids are teens now, thriving, close with us, happy, successful, one headed to an Ivy League school, and somehow they don’t have lifelong trauma because dad didn’t stay home for months.

Also, at some point more leave really doesn’t fundamentally change much. Having a baby is a massive life adjustment and reset no matter what. Whether someone is home 4 weeks, 12 weeks, or even a year, eventually real life starts and you adapt. Acting like those extra weeks are the difference between a healthy family and lifelong damage is honestly overblown.

Honestly, this almost proves the opposite point people are trying to make. There’s a concept called Parkinson’s Law: work expands to fill the time available for it. I think parental leave expectations do the same thing. If society says 4 weeks is normal, people adapt to 4 weeks. If society says 12 weeks, then suddenly 12 weeks becomes “not enough.” If society said a year, eventually people would say a year isn’t enough either. At some point you are just prolonging the adjustment/reset period and removing productivity, not fundamentally changing long term family outcomes.

If their marriage had deeper problems, fine. But turning this into some shocking act on the level of an affair or abuse feels wildly overdramatic.

Anonymous wrote:My friend came to me with the saddest mid-divorce reveal I’ve ever heard. When her only child was born, her DH only had 2 weeks of paternity leave. He didn’t take all of it and went back 2 days early. It was really hard on her and sometimes we still look back on those days pretty ruefully. The worst part was he worked for a Fortune 500 company that changed paternity-specific leave to parental leave that year and gave everyone with a new child 12 weeks, paid. He ended up covering leave for half his team while they still had their own tiny baby at home.

As part of some kind of mediation session during divorce, she found out that he actually had 6 weeks leave and just never took it. Which explained why when she asked him to petition to HR to be grandfathered in or get some kind of additional leave when they changed the policy, he said it was impossible.

I’ve never heard anything quite so specific and awful that wasn’t an affair. She’s asking me if she’s crazy. Am I ok in validating that this was a supremely messed up act of deception? Why would a father do that?

Anonymous wrote:Just my 2 cents but from personal experience paternity leave is most men’s nightmare.
Most men would much prefer to get out of the house daily and be anywhere but home.

They do not want to be subjected to a colicky screaming infant, a tired grumpy wife and a ton of dishes and laundry piled up.

They like their peace, quiet and kidfree time.

Anonymous wrote:Just my 2 cents but from personal experience paternity leave is most men’s nightmare.
Most men would much prefer to get out of the house daily and be anywhere but home.

They do not want to be subjected to a colicky screaming infant, a tired grumpy wife and a ton of dishes and laundry piled up.

They like their peace, quiet and kidfree time.

Anonymous wrote:Just my 2 cents but from personal experience paternity leave is most men’s nightmare.
Most men would much prefer to get out of the house daily and be anywhere but home.

They do not want to be subjected to a colicky screaming infant, a tired grumpy wife and a ton of dishes and laundry piled up.

They like their peace, quiet and kidfree time.

Anonymous wrote:Men would prefer to be out of the house, away from the responsibilities of caring for an infant in most cases.

Just being around other adults vs. a screaming newborn is a luxury.

So these men will lie and say they need to return to work when they actually are not required to.


+1
Of course not ALL men are like this > but many are…….

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if a job offers it, often men cannot take it or they will be penalized. My husband took a few days. He got little leave. It sucked.

Did he lie to you about it?

No, he did not lie but most people cannot take off six weeks without risking their job. He lied as she wouldn’t listen.

Women take off more than six weeks ALL THE TIME.

Do you think that helps or hurts their career?

It only hurts women because men don’t take comparable leave when they have children…

But it doesn't stop with maternity leave. Lots of women want to get off the fast track and onto the mommy track and have more time with their kids. It limits the career but that's the choice they want to make.

And lots of women don’t want to do that but end up mommy-tracked due to stereotypes, and lots of men feel confined by stereotypes that they’re the secondary caregiver. In an equitable world, many men and women would be interested in shifting work priorities and would be given the option to do so. Instead, after kids, men make more money and women make less money even after controlling for education levels and career breaks.

You know women who got involuntarily mommy tracked? I don't know any.

Yes, I’ve litigated class actions on this…

Are you OP? Pretty strange OP hasn't come back.

No? I just know a lot about pregnancy discrimination and parental leave.

So then you would know why one parent might not want to take their leave if it can be weaponized against them at work.

As I explained, the penalty is largely derived from it being viewed as a “women” problem as opposed to an “everyone” problem. Hence why I’m a huge advocate for paternity leave. And yeah, I think it’s shitty for men who view paternity leave “as optional” to perpetuate the penalty on women by not taking their full, legally protected parental leave.

While there’s a long history of “mommy tracking” there is no phenomenon of “daddy tracking” whatsoever. Women still bear the disproportionate risk.

When men birth the babies it will be an "everyone" problem.

Parenting is a men’s issue. Also, if this were about giving birth, moms who don’t give birth would get less leave or would be expected to do less childcare. Yet…

You're still carrying on as if any of this matters in a custody dispute.

Are you familiar with the “best interests of the child” standard?

Are you? It means the child deserves a relationship with both parents. It's not a reward for the parent who filled out the camp application in a tit for tat game.

Well good luck convincing the judge you couldn’t do 50% while married but deserve 50% post-divorce.