Disagreement over Maternity Leave vs. Extended Paternity Leave

[SybilRamkin]

A friend of mine, let's call him A, is having a disagreement with his DW, and I offered to canvas opinions for him on AIBU. Please be gentle with him, he's a sensitive soul!

Before the birth of their first DC, A and his DW had planned for DW to return to work after 9 months and for A to take 3 months' EPL to allow him to have some lovely bonding time with their DC. However, last week, 7 months into ML, DW announced that she would not be returning to work at 9 months after all, and that she intended to take the full 12 months herself before returning to work. A was very upset, as he'd already arranged with his work to take the time off, and was really looking forward to having 3 months as primary carer to his PFB. He attempted to reason with his DW, but she refused to agree to him taking any EPL at all - her view is that she gave birth to their DC, and so she should be allowed as much time as she wants to spend at home.

Pertinent information:

1. A and his DW earn roughly the same salary give or take c.£20 a month, and DW is intending to return to work FT.

1. A cannot afford to take 3 months of unpaid parental leave in addition to the 3 months of unpaid ML his DW plans to take. They had only budgeted for one of them not to be earning.

1. DW is not breastfeeding (hasn't since DC was 3 months old).

So MNers - does A have a moral right to be the primary carer for his DC for a few months' bonding time or is his DW right that since she gave birth to their DC her claim trumps his? And, perhaps more importantly, what should A do about this (if anything)?

Those who are saying they wish there was an entitlement for the father's leave to be added to the end of ML, rather than an either/ or scenario- maybe it will be, one day. Maternity and paternity rights have evolved and improved hugely over recent years, and the fact that there is a transferable element is an improvement on it being fixed for mother only. No couple is forced to use the transferable leave- but surely whatever they decide to do should be agreed.

I've posted before wondering how this excellent new legislation will pan out... Whether it will lead to better balance for many couples, because by the father taking part of the leave, he's more likely to then have more hands on ongoing care. And I suspect for many couples it will be like that, which is very positive because keeping the child at the centre of it all, it great that they have the experience of being cared for solely by each parent in turn

Sad that she doesn't want her husband to develop that strong a bond with their child. It does seem to be all about her and she isn't thinking about her husband or child.

Those people saying that last 3 months of parental leave are the easiest, I don't think that is always the case.

I found 0-6 months incredibly easy. Ds just slept all the time and I sat and had coffee with my friends who were on maternity leave. Ds only did a poo every 4-5 days so I rarely had to change his nappy. He was exclusively breastfed so I didn't need to bother taking any food/bottles/bibs with me. He never cried.

Ds walked at 10 months and now life is very hectic, he's14 months old now and wakes at the crack of dawn, days are full of trips to the park, playgroups, meals where he feeds himself and covers himself, the parent and the room in food. He has one nap a day.

Dp is on paternity leave now and without a doubt he has a much harder job than I did in those sleepy cuddly newborn days even when I factor in recovering from thebirth and learning to breastfeed.

For those who were asking about DW's reasoning for staying at home, she says (and is happy for me to share) that the thought of leaving her DC and going back to work is literally breaking her heart, and she can't bear to do it any earlier than she absolutely has to.

Not a good enough reason IMO. What if A feels heartbroken at having never had the chance to be at home with his DC? Not impressed.

ikea I want one like yours next time By contrast, DD was premature and in hospital for 3 weeks... she had awful feeding and wind issues (undiagnosed tongue tie) for the first 4 months... she would only sleep on my chest for the first 3 months... she was a total nap fighter and would only sleep in a moving pram for much of the first 6 months. So my life got a lot easier once these stages passed (and we got the tt fixed). She's also bored easily so life got easier once she was mobile and could entertain herself more. She's 16 months now and days are busy, like you describe, but that is heaven compared with the first 6 months. It's amazing how different babies can be...

In this case it doesn't sound like A's wife was in my position anyway.

All she is doing is postponing the inevitable and in doing so replacing a painful situation (handing over primary care giver role to DH) with an even more painful one (handing over to a nursery/childminder)

^^ This. She is being unfair both to her husband, her child and mostly herself in the long run by depriving them of the time together, the time for her DH to run the house on a day to day basis while juggling a child and her the opportunity to have a hot coffee once in a while .

It can't be helped that the first 6 months are the toughest (though many would disagree while pulling a toddler off the stairs for the umpteenth time) but the DW will have had 9 months. The latter 3 which will have been just as rewarding as the 9-12 month period

From another perspective - if DW has to go back regardless (or pay back her generous ML) then surely if she returns for months 9-12 and hates it, then A and DW agrees that she becomes a SAHM, she could issue notice and between them there would be total continuity of care and the child would never go to nursery.

I think number 2 will be a non sleeper who cries lots as I think I have used all my newborn luck. Maybe I will get some toddler luck next time and have a every so slightly calmer toddler, he really is a handful, my friends often make unhelpful comments like "how do you cope?" and "he has worn me out and I've only been with him an hour!"

Oscar, most places make you go back for a certain time if they enhance maternity pay.

I would agree totally with the others about "A" requesting his paternity leave is changed to 3 months, following the 12 months ML.

If this is absolutely no-go on his employers then it's worth the argument that seeing as DW will be going back to work anyway, it's far better for the family as a whole to do this in 2 stages ie for A to take on full-time parenting when DW returns to work, before pfb is left with a stranger. It would b less stressful for everyone concerned.

Those are 2 options, if she is still insisting in the full 12 months denying A any paternity time at all, that is pretty selfish and isn't considering everyone as a family unit.

My employer is happy to give sabbaticals and a number of people I know have had them. Worth him asking.

Sorry if I've repeated others but I haven't read the full thread.

Linguini, whilst A's employers could give parental leave or unpaid leave, they cannot give paternity leave if the DW takes the full allowance.

I think that this a thread where the opinions are in no way representative of the general population. Only the mumsnet population. The general outcome 'she is selfish and unreasonable' was inevitable on this site.

Perhaps the DW should canvas some opinions from a population she knows will be sympathetic to her.

I agree with this from upthread
This thread really highlights a big problem with the EPL system. It's always going to be the later, easier months that the father does - which many women will (rightly) feel is an unfair bargain. I can't think of an obvious solution though!

^I think that this a thread where the opinions are in no way representative of the general population. Only the mumsnet population. The general outcome 'she is selfish and unreasonable' was inevitable on this site.

Perhaps the DW should canvas some opinions from a population she knows will be sympathetic to her^

Like who? Surely if a load of she can't get sympathy from the majority on a parenting forum with the majority of the replying being mothers themselves, she isn't going to get much elsewhere?

... Plus we've already agreed that there is no general concensus about the relative difficulty of different phases of babyhood. Personally I found months 0-3 pretty easy, but then I had a good sleeper so it was basically a round of feed/ change/ sleep and a walk every afternoon, plus a lie in every morning til baby woke up.. At least with baby number one there are no school runs to do!

Sorry disagree with those who think the later months are necessarily the easy ones. My DS was an angel up to 9 months when he started walking., From then on it was non stop to keep up with him as he very soon learned to climb. First few months were a piece of cake.

The real killer for me was the first three months of baby and toddler....

I think a site full of mothers would be her best bet for sympathy - I really can't see which sector of the population would empathise with her any more! The fact that a lot of women responding have a full understanding of how hard it is to leave your baby and return to work, yet still believe she is BU...that suggests that her behaviour really is unreasonable.

In fact, it's my knowledge of how much I have missed since returning to work that makes me feel even more strongly that I would never deny my dh, the equal parent with the same love for our children as I have, the chance to spend time with them. Maternity leave is a wonderful privilege that I am so grateful for - and I believe that the father of my children should get to experience some of that joy as well (once breastfeeding isn't a barrier and finances permitting).

I think there would have been more sympathy for the DW if it hadn't been "an announcement" from here - remember her reason that she'd find it unbearable only got posted after about 180 responses.

"For those who were asking about DW's reasoning for staying at home, she says (and is happy for me to share) that the thought of leaving her DC and going back to work is literally breaking her heart, and she can't bear to do it any earlier than she absolutely has to."

Yet her DH had no choice and had to go back but shes quite willing to deny him the three months. Selfish taken to a whole new level.

I hope she has savings to cover and isnt expecting her husband to pay for it. Somehow i suspect she will be.

There do seem to be a lot of entitled people out there. If she chooses to go back part time or not at ll its not her decision to make alone. Women seem to think its their right and the husband must obey. Yet if their DH said they were quitting work or jut fancied a few hours a day I suspect they would have a great deal to say.

And we want equality... only when it suits it would seem

Totally this.

Op what are the wife's plans for when her maternity leave finally ends?

I have every sympathy with the DW for finding it hard to go back to work. I can understand that. Totally and utterly.

Where I lack sympathy is the idea that she feels that she can simply announce that she is solving that problem by depriving her husband utterly of a time that he had looked forward to having with his child.

Surely the mature response is to come to your husband and say "I know we agreed X, but now it is getting close it is breaking my heart to even think about it. Are there any other options we can think about?" I think it's not a brilliant sign for an ongoing shared parenting relationship TBH if her response is "I want Y, I can take Y, so I am going to."

Before my dd was born we had decided to do similar set up I'd have the first 7 months off and Dp have the final 2 months. Fortunately for me, Dp changed his mind just before dd was born, as he got family friendly hours agreed at work and so him going on epl could have hindered him returning on those hours and so I'm having the full year off.

I would have said the dw ibu to only now state she is going to continue with her maternity leave she must have been feeling like this for a while and should have told dh her feelings. Not just spring it on him and also his company as they might have lopled to hire a temp, the paperwork etc.

I also found the first 6 months of babyhood easier than the 9 to 12, they sleep a lot, easier to feed and don't get so bored when I'm going out with friends for lunch or coffee. Now it's all an effort, they want to be on the move and entertained most of the nap and those long 2 hour naps are a rarity.

I had both dc before this legislation, but I think the argument for A doing 2-3 months is it means he will be more hands on and involved in years to come. I get that DW does not want to leave baby, but an involved dad means surely a more balanced partnership in the long term.

If they both work FT, rather than arguing about these 2 or 3 months, can they not both look at ways of getting more time every week for the next few years, maybe working 0.8 or something. I think a long term commitment to more time with dc might allay the fear of losing time in the first year.

Yy penguins.