I'm most familiar with the parental leave policies at tech companies, and they seem to take the approach that you get a "parental" leave of 2-3 months for becoming a parent and then an additional "medical" leave of 2-3 months for giving birth. So for an adoption, each parent would get 3 months, but for a birth the father gets 3 and the mother gets 6. I think the division between "leave for becoming a parent" and "leave for giving birth" makes a lot of sense, and it values caregiving for its own sake while also acknowledging that giving birth takes a specific toll on mothers.
Our daughter just had her first baby. The value of stories like the one in The Washington Post, where the author meticulously tracked the “cost” of time spent feeding her baby is to set realistic expectations. With smaller families it’s less likely that today’s new parents spent any time around newborns. Stories like these help new moms know what to expect so they don’t feel like failures when they have days where literally all they do is feed the baby.
Maybe there is a fear that, if women considering having a baby knew what an impact on their bodies pregnancy has, and if they better understood the demands of breastfeeding, that they would avoid either one. Especially breastfeeding--maybe there is a belief that "if they know what they are getting into, they'll bottle feed."
We need to reconsider the messages we are sending to young women. "babies are a lot of work" just isn't very helpful. I don't think we are setting young parents up for success when they don't have a lot of specific information about just exactly what it's like to keep a tiny infant fed, clean, and comfortable. It doesn't have to be scary or bad--but I do know that L. was unprepared for just how difficult breastfeeding was, and how much harder it is to figure things out when you are recovering from abdominal surgery!
"It's natural" doesn't mean it's automatic like breathing. Pointing out that women have managed to nurse their babies since the beginning of time ignores the fact that until the last 50 years or so, girls grew up around nursing mothers.
I am firmly “fed is best” and I’ve also had such a good time breastfeeding that I couldn’t imagine pumping! (I work from home). I do want people to know it can be hard, where to go for help, and that it’s fine to switch to formula. But I definitely want them to know it’s also possible to really *like* nursing. For one thing, it makes me feel great about my body, whatever shape it is.
Oh absolutely, as long as it's clear that sometimes your body really surprises you with what part of mothering you are good at--the first time I ever really felt good about my body was when I was pregnant. I was a complete klutz (last kid picked for the team, etc.) and it was such a revelation that this body I had felt bad about was actually really fantastic at conceiving and gestating and birthing. Never gained more than 25 lbs, popped out 7 lb babies, went right back to work in the fields after a shower (I am totally making up the last part).
I never had any trouble nursing, so never thought it was that big a deal, but I don't think that is how most new moms feel. Some moms power through sleep deprivation because their bodies are OK with shorter periods of uninterrupted sleep.
And also wet nursing was a thing! It's not a new phenomenon that some moms aren't able to nurse or struggle a lot. It's just that we feel squeamish about wet nursing and forget that women in earlier eras did it.
Hi Leah, thanks so much for the response to my comment (and in the newsletter no less!), I'm very excited to dig into your Families Valued report. For context, I work in a privately held company in a STEM field with 500+ employees, where all but one of the C-suite executives are male, and the one female executive does not have children, though she has been a family caregiver. That's why I feel so strongly about the proposal being as broad as possible (e.g. my choice to call it "paid leave" rather than "maternity leave" or even "parental leave") and why I think it should be tied to the existing federal standards that determine eligibility for FMLA leave. By virtue of our size we are already required to provide FMLA leave, so using those eligibility standards removes the need to establish our own requirements of who gets it and when. And as I've grown in my career I've realized that by virtue of seniority, most people who are advanced in the company will get their needs for flexibility and support met informally. I discussed my passion for this issue with a (non C-suite but still very senior) woman a few years ago and she said, "I never had leave when I had my three kids, I just talked to people and got what I needed." Great for you, but this is honestly what I perceive as the biggest hurdle - how do we prevent framing this as a need that is only needed by OTHER PEOPLE and is not "of value" to senior management who primarily think of it as a cost to the bottom line? How do we insure that our administrative assistants and construction inspectors and lab technicians get the same benefits as our senior level managers and executives?
I think FMLA is a great place to start. And I agree it's the most junior and marginalized people who benefit the most from clear rules about leave. More senior or privileged people can often work out a private, better arrangement.
I'm most familiar with the parental leave policies at tech companies, and they seem to take the approach that you get a "parental" leave of 2-3 months for becoming a parent and then an additional "medical" leave of 2-3 months for giving birth. So for an adoption, each parent would get 3 months, but for a birth the father gets 3 and the mother gets 6. I think the division between "leave for becoming a parent" and "leave for giving birth" makes a lot of sense, and it values caregiving for its own sake while also acknowledging that giving birth takes a specific toll on mothers.
Our daughter just had her first baby. The value of stories like the one in The Washington Post, where the author meticulously tracked the “cost” of time spent feeding her baby is to set realistic expectations. With smaller families it’s less likely that today’s new parents spent any time around newborns. Stories like these help new moms know what to expect so they don’t feel like failures when they have days where literally all they do is feed the baby.
An excellent point! And also a good reason for engaged couples to do some babysitting together (for children of all ages).
Maybe there is a fear that, if women considering having a baby knew what an impact on their bodies pregnancy has, and if they better understood the demands of breastfeeding, that they would avoid either one. Especially breastfeeding--maybe there is a belief that "if they know what they are getting into, they'll bottle feed."
We need to reconsider the messages we are sending to young women. "babies are a lot of work" just isn't very helpful. I don't think we are setting young parents up for success when they don't have a lot of specific information about just exactly what it's like to keep a tiny infant fed, clean, and comfortable. It doesn't have to be scary or bad--but I do know that L. was unprepared for just how difficult breastfeeding was, and how much harder it is to figure things out when you are recovering from abdominal surgery!
"It's natural" doesn't mean it's automatic like breathing. Pointing out that women have managed to nurse their babies since the beginning of time ignores the fact that until the last 50 years or so, girls grew up around nursing mothers.
I am firmly “fed is best” and I’ve also had such a good time breastfeeding that I couldn’t imagine pumping! (I work from home). I do want people to know it can be hard, where to go for help, and that it’s fine to switch to formula. But I definitely want them to know it’s also possible to really *like* nursing. For one thing, it makes me feel great about my body, whatever shape it is.
Oh absolutely, as long as it's clear that sometimes your body really surprises you with what part of mothering you are good at--the first time I ever really felt good about my body was when I was pregnant. I was a complete klutz (last kid picked for the team, etc.) and it was such a revelation that this body I had felt bad about was actually really fantastic at conceiving and gestating and birthing. Never gained more than 25 lbs, popped out 7 lb babies, went right back to work in the fields after a shower (I am totally making up the last part).
I never had any trouble nursing, so never thought it was that big a deal, but I don't think that is how most new moms feel. Some moms power through sleep deprivation because their bodies are OK with shorter periods of uninterrupted sleep.
And also wet nursing was a thing! It's not a new phenomenon that some moms aren't able to nurse or struggle a lot. It's just that we feel squeamish about wet nursing and forget that women in earlier eras did it.
Hi Leah, thanks so much for the response to my comment (and in the newsletter no less!), I'm very excited to dig into your Families Valued report. For context, I work in a privately held company in a STEM field with 500+ employees, where all but one of the C-suite executives are male, and the one female executive does not have children, though she has been a family caregiver. That's why I feel so strongly about the proposal being as broad as possible (e.g. my choice to call it "paid leave" rather than "maternity leave" or even "parental leave") and why I think it should be tied to the existing federal standards that determine eligibility for FMLA leave. By virtue of our size we are already required to provide FMLA leave, so using those eligibility standards removes the need to establish our own requirements of who gets it and when. And as I've grown in my career I've realized that by virtue of seniority, most people who are advanced in the company will get their needs for flexibility and support met informally. I discussed my passion for this issue with a (non C-suite but still very senior) woman a few years ago and she said, "I never had leave when I had my three kids, I just talked to people and got what I needed." Great for you, but this is honestly what I perceive as the biggest hurdle - how do we prevent framing this as a need that is only needed by OTHER PEOPLE and is not "of value" to senior management who primarily think of it as a cost to the bottom line? How do we insure that our administrative assistants and construction inspectors and lab technicians get the same benefits as our senior level managers and executives?
I think FMLA is a great place to start. And I agree it's the most junior and marginalized people who benefit the most from clear rules about leave. More senior or privileged people can often work out a private, better arrangement.
I think this responds to your assertions: https://jill.substack.com/p/what-we-lose-when-we-lose-women-at
Until men start doing at least half of the domestic crap, women absolutely must pursue public careers.