Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel bad for the baby.

The baby has a loving, involved, healthy mother. Nothing to feel bad about, put your empathy to use in places where it will actually matter.

This is a time for mom and baby to bond. She is not poor. She can afford to stay home. It's sad she would prefer to go to work. She will never get this time back.

Stepping back a bit, this situation gives me pause because we've set up a culture where there is this feeling that this time of life: pregnancy, giving birth, new parents, new baby, is just another thing on the to-do list.

In a case by case basis, sure, I'm happy for this coach who is able to get make the choice to get back to work for a bit during a peak time in her career. Great for those who can, but why, as a culture, don't we value this time?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I could have probably done this.

It's a 5 hour commitment, and who knows, someone might bring her baby to her in a car to breastfeed halfway through. Or she can pump privately.

Not ideal, certainly not my preference, but it is doable if you had an uncomplicated birth, have someone to watch the baby, get picked up in a car to go and whisked away when it's over, and can use special entrances and exits, etc...

Her husband works at the same place she does and the baby is at work. They set up one of their offices as a nursery.

Nobody’s “bringing the baby in a car”.

Yep--her husband is a classic university trailing spouse if you look at their job history. Not uncommon for trailing spouses to be able to bring the kid to work and have extended leave so the other spouse can shine. Also, once the child is older, big universities have high-quality preschools on campus, and their child might go there for preschool.

We wouldn't even talk, let along have a thread, about a man in her situation.

Her husband is a trailing spouse who likely negotiated for a lot of leave because she came back so soon--he also works for the University athletics department, but he has a lower-visibility (and lower-paying job) than she does. At her last two head coaching jobs, he also had lower-ranking jobs in the athletics department at those schools.

This is incredibly common in the academic world--where one spouse is the leading, superstar spouse career wise and the other spouse is trailing and gets hired by the same schools as part of the package deal. The trailing spouse usually ends up getting a LOT of parental leave and flexibility as part of the package deal as well, which I suspect is what happened here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's bad for women. It makes it look like it's easy and now men will expect all women should be back at work with no break. Even 6 weeks is not enough and other countries give women like a year off paid. Maybe she didn't want to lose her job so felt pressured to go back to work early?

Like Kate Middleton coming down the hospital stairs in stilettos and full make up hours after giving birth.

Imagine expecting women to be able to walk after giving birth. Crazy!

Anonymous wrote:I think it's bad for women. It makes it look like it's easy and now men will expect all women should be back at work with no break. Even 6 weeks is not enough and other countries give women like a year off paid. Maybe she didn't want to lose her job so felt pressured to go back to work early?

As we all know, coaching basketball is hard work. You spend hours in the field digging for new offensive schemes, followed by long hours in the mines looking for players in the earth. The job is almost entirely mental. She didn't give birth with her brain.

Anonymous wrote:I think it's bad for women. It makes it look like it's easy and now men will expect all women should be back at work with no break. Even 6 weeks is not enough and other countries give women like a year off paid. Maybe she didn't want to lose her job so felt pressured to go back to work early?

Like Kate Middleton coming down the hospital stairs in stilettos and full make up hours after giving birth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Knew a woman who adopted a newborn and went back to her demanding medical job 3 days after bringing the less-than-a-week old baby home.

She has a very, very healthy trust fund, no mortgage, no car payments, etc. and does not need the money.

I didn't understand this. At all.

You don’t understand why wealthy men work?

Why adopt. a baby then? You can't give it a few weeks of attention?

Idk this woman.
My friend found out on a Friday she was adopting a baby on Monday.

She needed to train someone to do her job so worked the 1st month she had the baby.

Which only shows how bad our adoption process is. Why didn't this parent have a plan in place with employer for this scenario?

Studies have already shown there is a primal loss from mother at that age, then the infant gets stuck with a caregiver because it's more important for adoptive mom to train someone rather than provide the infant bonding time for a month.

Anonymous wrote:This is why paternity leave is so important.

She has a husband.

Also, this is why breastfeeding rooms are important. She can bring the baby to work. The baby can feed and sleep there with help from her H.

In 6 weeks the season will be over and she can then take full maternity leave.

This makes me so thankful that I complete and total control over the timing of my pregnancies. I know that not everyone is so fortunate.

Anonymous wrote:I think it's bad for women. It makes it look like it's easy and now men will expect all women should be back at work with no break. Even 6 weeks is not enough and other countries give women like a year off paid. Maybe she didn't want to lose her job so felt pressured to go back to work early?

You are treating her as if she isn't a capable adult. Believe it or not, some women make decisions that benefit themselves and their families.

Anonymous wrote:I think it's bad for women. It makes it look like it's easy and now men will expect all women should be back at work with no break. Even 6 weeks is not enough and other countries give women like a year off paid. Maybe she didn't want to lose her job so felt pressured to go back to work early?

Men aren’t paying attention nor do they care about what some woman in Tennessee is doing.

Voting for rapists is bad for women.

Stay focused.

Anonymous wrote:I feel bad for the baby.

Who at one week of life won't know difference.

Anonymous wrote:I think it's bad for women. It makes it look like it's easy and now men will expect all women should be back at work with no break. Even 6 weeks is not enough and other countries give women like a year off paid. Maybe she didn't want to lose her job so felt pressured to go back to work early?

Agree.

I think it's bad for women. It makes it look like it's easy and now men will expect all women should be back at work with no break. Even 6 weeks is not enough and other countries give women like a year off paid. Maybe she didn't want to lose her job so felt pressured to go back to work early?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what society has driven women to. A week old baby needs a mother full time.

STFU Gertrude. Mom clearly loves what she does and is able to bring the baby with her. No one is forcing her to do this. She's clearly choosing to as she 100% should be able to.

Yes, she clearly made a choice.

She loves her work more than her baby.

It just hurt when you try to use your brain.