Why shouldn’t life be made easier for pregnant women/mothers?

I think its your last line OP. It's a good thing for pregnant women and parents. No one would deny that, and many would be pleased for them. Its when 'it's a good thing' is presented as 'it's a good thing for society as a whole' that you start to lose people. I think there would be a lot less push back if parents stopped telling non parents that it's 'good for everyone', because not only is that arguably untrue (colleagues without children do fill the gap left by family friendly employment practices, from being last in line to get Christmas off, to being first in line to mind the shop while parents WFH) but it also frames the choice to have children as some act of altruism for the benefit of society that should be supported by non parents, when really it is a lifestyle choice. (I speak as a parent myself btw.)

But who will pay your pension when you retire if no one had children? And who would look after you in old age if there was no one younger than you fit and able? Doctors/nurses, if no one had children because of lifestyle choices then we would all be in a slight pickle

Bingo!

@CostelloJones my local midwife only scheduled appointments on Mondays and Tuesdays as these were her days in my local area with other days elsewhere. Usually you don't get much choice.

She said she's spoken up and hasn't been listened to.

@YaMuvva
Can you tell us what is so “unreasonable” about an ill pregnant woman that the only route is to sack her?

That's not what I said, is it? I think an ill pregnant woman should have just the same rights, protections, and adjustments as any other ill or disabled colleague (specific maternity leave aside). The same amount of adjustments or sick leave before disciplinary/capability stuff comes into play. (As an aside, the fact that illness can lead to "disciplinary" actions for anyone is awful. It should surely always be about capability, not the language of punishment.) It doesn't seem fair to me that pregnancy-related illness gets treated differently, in that sense. It is no less fair to sack a pregnant woman who can't work, than to sack a woman who's ill/disabled and can't work. (I'm not actually saying either is great, just I don't see why the two scenarios should be treated differently.)

What I think is fairer would actually mean women who are very ill in pregnancy wouldn't be forced to take very early maternity leave (which seems unfair when other women who get to use the leave to have more time with the baby). I think whatever the maximum sick leave is before disciplinary/capability stuff would happen for anyone, should be added on to the front of the mat leave. So you'd have X weeks on the sick and then maternity leave starts.

What is not fair is if the pregnant woman in question is still working but in a flaky way that means other colleagues are detrimentally affected. Because she is not actually doing her job properly. If she's ill she needs to be signed off so a proper replacement can be found. Or if there are reasonable adjustments that can be made, these should be the same for any other ill or disabled person.

And then it comes back to employers. Sounds like an awful lot just expect everyone else to pick up the slack. Not getting proper cover for long periods. Even past pregnancy/baby stage expecting the childless to always work Christmas and other antisocial shifts, instead of clamping down on that expectation. At least covid showed just what is possible in terms of working from home and flexibility that previously parents and disabled people were told "not possible"!

They won’t be picking up MY work. They will be picking the the organisation’s work. I wasn’t thankful for that, it was nothing to do with me.

IME - public sector is terrible for not covering maternity leave or distributing work well. I now work in life sciences for a private company that very swiftly and diligently recruits staff when someone’s maternity leave is looming or when someone hands their notice in. I work in public sector for ages and honestly if people knew the half-wits in management they’d be terrified that they run our country. Everything takes forever, has about 1,000 tick box processes, the interview process is absolutely BONKERS and when you do get someone in post who had the brain and work ethic of an earthworm, they’re far more protected as an employee than the organisation is as a place which relies on competence.

After having DC1 and returning to work, I was tired, I was still breastfeeding and not sleeping and I was SO nervous about going back to work because I felt my brain had melted in the year I’d been off and I forgot how to speak to humans. Rocked up on my first day back and my boss went “Oh yeah, forgot you were back today. Well I’m really busy and have no work to offer you, why don’t you do some photocopying for Alice.” Alice was a new staff member in the exact same role as me who was very much the attitude of “ew women having babies and getting perks!” Like people on this thread. And after a week of her bossing her about I had to inform her that i was absolutely not her PA, I was in the same role as her and on my first day I should have refused to do her photocopying (we were all in senior roles) but my confidence was too low on the day to object, but that doesn’t make it ok for her to treat me like an underling.

I can well imagine Unis follow suit with poor arrangements for cover. I work closely with academics in my work and the things they tell me make me very worried for what is going on in higher education. I think they’ve stolen some of the half-wits from public sector management!

But technically it is I you could say no. You DO have a choice.

Anyway that poster wasn’t advocating being being a carer as being seen as a ‘lifestyle choice’ she was showing how utterly ridiculous it is to say having a child is a lifestyle choice like it’s knitting and mountain biking.

But if a person is caring for an elderly parent, would you not think it a good thing that work were able to offer some flexibility? It shouldn't be about saying make no exceptions for group A because Group B don't have them, but look we make these exceptions for Group A, they should be applicable to Group B / the whole work force.

What about things that come under risk assessment that require changes to working practice? Should we refuse to accommodate that because we wouldn't make the same exception for someone who wasn't pregnant? Even if we would for someone who had a physical ailment that impeded them?

But it’s certainly your employer who should
A. Notice and
B. Address the problem with the individuals
C. Address the problem of the culture of Pisa taking if there is one

Also - do you speak up? If I thought a colleague was taking the piss and I didn’t speak up I’d only have myself to blame if it continued.

Which is exactly why the attitude shouldn’t be “waaaah lifestyle choice” it should be accommodating human beings when life inevitably ly throws a challenge their way

Not ‘I didn’t get that so why should anyone else’ but ‘I managed fine without that so why are some women now saying it is impossible’. Obviously reasonable adjustments when needed.

Re need to WFH because of having young children I am firmly against it as it means women will work while looking after DC, which then discredits all mums working from home.

Regarding midwife appointments, she may have not had much choice when they were.

Mine were only on Tuesdays or Thursdays - she may have had similar.

I don't have kids, through choice, so have very little skin in the game (apart from obviously hoping SOMEONE produces a few future tax payers, since I cant be arsed to!).
I'm happy for any disadvantaged group to benefit from better conditions.
Let's face it, in the case of this example, if I wanted those benefits too, I could just have a baby.
I just desperately wish the conversation was about mothers AND FATHERS! I know the reasons for a mother typically doing more than a father are complex, but women will always be on the back foot if fathers aren't expected to do their equal share.

I've been treated appallingly at work (public services) throughout my years of being a single mum to young children. They are now teenagers and my home life is easy. I manage lots of women (and men) now as a middle manager and I go out of my way to make sure they are valued, looked after and treated better than I was. Yes their lives will be a lot easier than mine and that is a good thing.

I could not agree more OP.
My working life when I had kids was sprinting between nursery/childminder/school. It would have made a huge difference to me to have the ability to work from home sometimes.
Same with tax free chilcare/universal credit which helps women stay in work. I am so glad that this is now available with improved maternity/paternity.

In the UK statutory mat leave could certainly be improved but it could be worse, @YaMuvva . Carers may have progressive employers and I applaud that but I believe that otherwise they really struggle; am I wrong?

I cannot see that someone with an adult child with a serious disability, who cannot care for themselves and lives at home, needs less help than the parent of a young child. All need more (realistic) support than they are getting now

The key problem is that employers try to economise by parceling out the mat leave worker’s to her colleagues rather than hiring in cover as they should. Certainly in my (university) workplace. What is the experience of others?

We never get mat cover. Sometimes that’s management trying to save money and not do numerous recruitment rounds (we currently have 5 out on mat leave). Sometimes they will try to recruit but nobody wants a temporary cover job for quite a niche role. I wish we could always have cover as that’d help a lot with burnout of remaining staff.

We live in a patriarchal society. Internalised misogyny is real. So just because an opinion comes from a woman doesn't mean it is fair to women.

But maternity policies isn’t about privilege who deserves what, it’s about enshrining women’s rights as a physically pregnant woman to support what her and her baby needs in the temporary state.

Its not as easy to say “carers of elderly parents should have they same they deserve it too” because whilst caring is a temporary state, it could be for 20 years or 20 days and it’s not appropriate to set out a set time for this. Thankfully I’m coming across more and more workplaces that have a carer’s policy that allow employees to take time off or have flexible working arrangements in place if they’re carers.

‘Random colleagues’ is perhaps a slightly harsh way to describe the team members who will be picking up your work, as these are usually close colleagues.

But I agree with your larger point. The key problem is that employers try to economise by parceling out the mat leave worker’s to her colleagues rather than hiring in cover as they should. Certainly in my (university) workplace. What is the experience of others?

She lives round the corner from me and literally used the same service as me… I was mostly able to reschedule my appointments by a day or so to be on non working days, even with a high risk pregnancy. It’s a busy maternity hospital not the middle of nowhere with one overstretched midwife.

and as for “is she not allowed to go outside”… I have no objection to anyone going away as much as they like. But when you are so unwell with your pregnancy you can barely do desk work but you can somehow gallivant around Dublin for a weekend with your boyfriend? Come on.

I just think a little acknowledgement that life goes on (and has to for people with chronic conditions for example) doesn’t go amiss and you don’t always see that.

Caring for elderly parents - your choice

Nobody chooses for their parents to become infirm and need care. And opting out of caring for them is not a choice for many. Bringing into the world someone who is wholly dependent on you is more of a choice I would say than caring for an elderly parent.

It's a shame that some posters have made the points come across as "parents vs childless/childfree" because I don't think that was the point of the Op.

Also, many childless/childfree people have made points on this thread in favour of the Op, and some parents have made points against this.

Someone asked further up the thread about why childless people could need flexibility. Some points have already been made on this but another example is going through fertility treatment - intense, time consuming, unpredictable and stressful - but it's not easy for some women to go into work and say you're going through this.

FWIW I'm very pro supporting women and parents in the workplace - if you have a valued member of staff then supporting them when life gets tough hopefully pays in the long run for the business. But, I also think it's really important to recognise that flexibility and understanding is needed for a range of reasons and, ideally, a workplace would be supportive enough to accommodate flexibility and adjustments through the range of challenges that life can sometimes through at us.

(I say this recognising some of the practical challenges for very small teams that a some people have pointed out).