am I going mad? Has that nanny thread being deleted or did I dream it?

[Chequers]

Message withdrawn

I'm just glad DP isn't in the police force yet, they only get 5 days.
His employers have been great about him taking the time off, and said he can book the holiday days as and when he knows he needs them etc but they won't pay him full pay for paternity live.

DH took one week of holiday each time. He works in a fairly senior position in a very male-dominated industry. Neither of the companies he worked for when our dc were born paid more than SPP.

And the first time his (female) boss wasn't awfully happy about him taking the holiday either.

If I had the money I would outsource EVERYTHING apart from childcare, I would love a chef, cleaner, gardener, personal shopped, infact I would just love an all round PA as well.

No actually I would love one afternoon a week "off" and maybe the odd night out with DP.

I honestly couldn't care less about other peoples childcare arrangements, they don't affect me so why would I? If people want to employ a nanny 24/7 good luck to them it's their choice as long as they are happy with it.

Yes so women get 6 weeks at 90% pay whether that's £1m a year or £200k or £20k and men 2 weeks. After that most of us plummet to £112 a week which for someone on benefits is of course a goodly sum so it just depends on what you were on before.

"The rate of paternity pay is the same as the standard rate of maternity pay, which is £112.75 per week, or 90 per cent of the employee's average weekly earnings. "

If couples are planning returns to work and a first baby and the new rules come in then it may be something women want and men that the woman takes 6 months off and then the man the next 6 months particularly easy given how very very few women in the UK breastfeed beyond 6 months.

But if the both really do need the pay they both earn which was always our position then both getting back to work pretty fast is more likely to happen. If the wife earns a fortune and the husband not very much but the couple think a parent at home for a year is best then man off for longer might be the better choice.

Abbymumsnet why didn't you just delete the op?

Teachers get it too, but then they can't really take holiday can they?

And then of course you need to be in the kind of job where you can realistically take that much time off.

In many jobs personal relationships with clients are extremely important so to be able to go back to your job at the same elvel and have the same clients etc it can be even harder if you take more than a week or two off.

Now this sort of thing is why I'm glad I'm a SAHM and only DP has to worry about the circumstances, but it also explains why many people (if earning more than childcare would cost) feel they have no choice but to go back to work.

Hatrick, a few people on my antenatal thread have got the full pay.

My dh got 2 weeks paternity pay, with an option for another 10 weeks unpaid leave.

Has the paternity leave gone up too or was it just the maternity?

Is the ten weeks paternity leave or is that the 'parental leave' entitlement?
I know DP can take days off, unpaid, if needed as parental leave.
That seems to eb the same as the women at his work as I know one of his colleagues uses it for if her children are ill and he has been told he is entitled to it too.

So, have I got this right, it's a violation of mumsnet policy to start a thread quoting another mumsnetter? Is that right?

So no one can say MumsnetterX said "Y" and I take issue with it?

I actually beg to differ that I made any personal attack on Desi. I quoted her and I said it was a rude thing to say, but I specifically tookissue with her post and not with her personally.

I think it was paternity leave, that what we were told anyway. It was the same as you could take a year off as maternity leave but you only got paid for 6 months, which has now gone up to 9 months off.

El, It was an over-reaction to delete the thread i think. I'm sure a lot of people would agree. There's been a lot worse. I guess if enough people are sensitive on someone else's behalf, this is what happens.

I wouldn't have started it.. but hey we're all different. And it's right to say it's not very helpful to start criticising people's lives when they've put out an appeal for help and support, just because you disapprove or have a bit of a thing about it. But we all can if we want, and we all should be able to, it's just not very nice. It reminded me of barging into a conversation in a playground saying "well I think.. " when it's got nothing to do with you and nobody was really talking to you.

stuffit, the thread apparently had a few digs at Desi so it isn't an overreaction, especially as it was reported by more than one poster.
It's MN policy, I thin if it had just been one mention of ehr and the thread had gonea different way then MNHQ would have either deleted the OP or the offending posts, as it was they believed the thread was offensive to a singular poster.
(FWIW it take a lot for MNHQ to delete a whole thread, they don't just delete things willy-nilly)

Can someone point me to the "personal attack" rules please? Must make sure I do no repeat the error of my ways.

eleusis, I don't think it was your OP itself that was meant to have been the personal attack, more the way the whole thread itself went, or it's likely it would've just been your post that got deleted.

It's okay. But where is this silly policy so I can better understand what is and is not allowed round here?

I think it's just the top of the talk page.

Eleusis, the policy re personal attacks etc is refered to on the home page but I think you will need to contact MNHQ for further details/explantion.

Abbymumsnet has already posted re this though.

i can imagine it does take a lot to delete a whole thread.. that's why i'm surprised that this went as I've seen much worse in my v limited experience.. i mean a few digs.. I don't know. I've seen worse. Maybe it's because it's a personal attack and they are not there to defend themselves -- that would make more sense.

anyway VS no point going over and over ..I guess i'll see a lot more and a lot worse again if I stick around long enough...

eleusis you sound like you're getting really fed up, can I urge you not to get fed up and send you a big because it's horrible when mn "stays" with you in this way

I actually don't think it is a 'silly policy' to remove posts that are abusive or constitute an attack upon an individual. I think it is easy to regard the policy as silly if you are not on the receiving end.
There can be debate about what makes a posting abusive but surely not the principal ?

I'm not fed up. I'm fine (but thanks for the . I'm just genuinely interested in reading the policy now and can't find it. Needless to say, I've never before been motivated to read the talkpolicy.

BTW didn't actually see the thread in question - just talking in general terms