However we also need to recognise the fact that the majority of new parents can't afford to have a year off so perhaps if the gov. really wants us to do this it needs to be better renumerated in some way

Ceedub, what are you going to feed your baby on after 6 months? Formula? They can't drink cows milk until they one year old.

I completely agree that the current arrangements place way too much emphasis on the mother being the sole caregiver. Breastfeeding means I will have to stay at home for 6 months when I give birth early next year, and more importantly, I want to spend that time getting to know my baby and caring for him or her. But my partner also wants to have that experience (not the breastfeeding, but the caring!) and financially and professionally, I can't take more than 6 months off. But he'll only get 2 weeks off after the birth, and our baby will need some form of daily childcare once I go back to work because I can't transfer the remaining 6 months to him.

While the government promised to introduce a long-overdue measure to allow women like me to transfer my extra maternity leave to my partner, they've apparently just delayed its implementation again - to 2010!

I run a workplace with 6 employees, so I know all about red tape and the burden on employers - especially small ones - but it's not as though this is really going to cause that much hassle. Getting the necessary evidence and completing the paperwork for male employees will be much the same as for women, and frankly, when you manage people, you just have to deal with the fact they have personal lives as well as professional ones and will occasionally need a bit of flexibility. Assuming otherwise is setting yourself up for some big problems when people inevitably fall ill/have accidents/leave suddenly etc.

I earn more than my partner, so the economic arguments that used to operate in favour of this discrimination no longer stack up (not that they ever did), and I know he is frustrated that he doesn't have the same parenting rights as me.

Nicola Brewer is absolutely right that the current arrangements perpetuate unacceptable discrimination against women by allowing employers to (illegally, I know, but it's hard to counter something that's never openly said) discriminate against women of child-bearing age while denying fathers the opportunity to take a substantive caring role in their child's earliest months. It's archaic and it really needs to end.

Great, 12 months sabbatical. Now lets see if the men can have the same like in those more civilized countries. Then the employers wouldn't be forced to chose between super able me who is likely to be absent for 12 months whilst the littl'n gestates and after its dropped, and that big load of emotinal baggage who spends most of his time at work. Who sald equality wasn't a bad thing ? Let's give it to them gals.
And so you see, sharing roles is a good thing, but in this Country unfortunately the Laws and Childcare Institutions are still operating in the Victorian era when men worked down pit and women looked after kids. Just as women are searching for equality in the work place, men want equality in childcare..........no more men taking their lives and the children with them now PLEASE....God forbid that a man should be emotional !!!!!!

I agree with prettybird that men are often invisible in discussions about child rearing. We (as a society) often talk about 'parents' when we actually mean 'mothers'. This doesn't do any of us any favours, men or women.

For example most books about parenting babies have a chapter on staying at home or going back to work which assumes this is a decision that only women have to make, not a question that both parents should think about. When I had my daughter plenty of people asked me what I was going to do about work - no one asked my partner.

I have been thinking about this issue a lot more.

I reckon that if you are prepared to put your job before your kids/caring responsibilities then you will experience relatively few barriers, regardless of your sex. If not then you are likely to take a financial penalty.

This is something that really bugs dh - the qhole emphasis on mothers as being the primary carers. As it happens, he is the one that once ds started at nursery, took the primary role as he was in a position to take a package and work form home.

He thinks (and I agree) that current policies and attitudes positively discourage fathers from getting involved.

He really hates the presumption that "dads don't want to get involved" and that he is supposed ot be unusual in caring and getting involved in bringing up his own son. He gets really fed up with snide comments being made about "men not helping".

On a practical note, he points out that we keep on complaining about the lack of represenation of ethnic minorities on our school's parent council (= approx a PTA), given that the school is over 60% ethnic minorities - yet fail to notice that 50% of the pareents are not represented - as h e is the only male involved. It's like men are invisible in child rearing - and women push them out or make facetious comments when they do try ot get involved.

I personally think that maternity leave of a year shouldn't be maternity leave but parental leave - available to be taken by either parent. Same goes for any rights to felxible working. That way, employers can't disicrminiate against women - as they can't be sure that a man might be the one asking for the time off.

Even the in paractice, for some time to come, it owldmostly be woemn who wwold take it - at least it wuold begin to break down the barriers to men being more fully invilved.

I'm very fortunate in that my employers have family-friendly policies (that don't discriminate on the type of carer's leave required), allow me to work flexibly and implement the salary sacrifice childcare vouchers scheme. It makes a big difference to my life.

Contrast with dh's employer (a big fat cat conglomerate) which makes it very difficult for him to take leave, refused to let him work in the least flexibly (and our request was for a very tiny adjustment) and will not consider the vouchers scheme. This costs us a great deal of extra faff, and of course about £1000 pa.

It also means that my employer has to be more flexible than it otherwise would be if dh's company were more reasonable.

Ergo, dh is looking for work elsewhere.

I can't help thinking that if it had been me working at dh's company they would have paid more attention. I really feel he was discriminated against because he was a father and therefore shouldn't "need" to be flexible.

To respond to geordie's point about people taking the piss about leave - where i work ATM each employee can have 5 days paid dependent's leave a year. This can be for a child or adult they are caring for. Any leave taken over and above this is unpaid. at my last job I did have someone who actually took the piss in the way she says above - so I made her take any further time off as unpaid as she'd used up her entitlement. Hey presto no more sick kids! Quite an easy way round this problem.

thanks Will for answering my Q