“Birthing parent” language in work policy – inclusive or erasing women?

[InvisibleBumble]

Our workplace has just emailed all staff about changes to parental leave. Throughout the email they repeatedly use the term “the birthing parent”. There is no mention anywhere of women, mothers or maternity leave.

I’m honestly really uncomfortable with it. In trying to be “inclusive”, it feels like women - and our lived experience of pregnancy, childbirth and recovery - are being erased from a policy that is specifically about leave after giving birth.

I’m not anti-inclusion, but I do struggle with language that refuses to even acknowledge women or mothers in this context. Childbirth is not a neutral experience, and maternity leave exists for a reason.

It’s really bugged me, but I’m nervous about pushing back at work in case I’m labelled difficult or “not inclusive enough”.

Am I being unreasonable? Has anyone challenged this kind of language at work, and if so, how did it go?

Exactly - I can’t understand why people think something is being taken away from them because another group are included - using biology to justify their argument in the same way as it was used against women by men to justify discrimination

also so many women complain about those roles and now don’t want to share

trans men who haven’t had bottom surgery

one thing I don’t like is when male and female couples say “we’re pregnant” 🤮

Is this not in case there are 2 women/mothers in a relationship. So the one giving birth has one policy and the other is entitled to the same as the male partner woulf

I am on the fence - I appreciate they want to differentiate between birthing parent and non-birthing parent in same sex couples. But equally my employer is quite happy to use the word “father” in the paternity leave policy (and indeed elsewhere - people with uteruses and men with prostate cancer, etc).

Often in the same document as well, and yes it does irritate me that only “woman” and m”mother” are banned. It honestly wouldn’t annoy me at all if it was all one way or all the other way.

Exactly. Funnily enough it's only "women" and "mothers" who are erased - not "men" and "fathers". You see it all the time. Same old sexism.

I am 100% against the erasure of sex specific language including "mother". However I would assume this is more about lesbian couples, where there are 2 mothers, only one giving birth.

Ah see what you mean

no doesn’t sound right

people on these threads confidently assert time and again that "only women can give birth". Not true. Children can and do. This language serves to include them, as well as lesbian couples and transgender people.

Everyone who has ever given birth are female and they are mothers, no man has ever given birth nor will one. So how about we use the correct words instead of dehumanising women to pander to some fringe belief system

I wouldn’t be using this! The same goes for chest Feeding instead of breast feeding. Absolutely woke BS 🫃

Lesbians are still women! The proportion of girls or trans people who give birth is absolutely miniscule, and does not justify the full erasure of the word "woman" from all communications about pregnancy and childbirth.

There are cases of M/M and F/F same sex parents. Even in Male/Female cases, in adoption the "mother" and the "birthing parent" are not the same person. In cases of surrogacy there could be 3 parents all entitled to some parental leave. A workplace parental leave policy has to cover all these cases as well as the more usual Male/Female where the Female is the birthing parent and the mother.

A lesbian is in fact a woman!

A girl or young woman can have a baby. ‘Child’ could indeed work too. It differs from ‘birthing parent’.

Do you think OPs workplace employ children that are in need of maternity leave?

I never said lesbians weren't women! The language of 'birthing parent' serves them to distinguish that one of the women births and one does not. Others have pointed this out already so I didn't think it needed explaining.

You’d be surprised how many trans men do give birth - when they have physical changes but just left the reproductive bottom - don’t know how to say it!

It addresses the fact that not all mothers are entitled to Maternity Leave.

Well, if they were really talking about lesbian couples, they could refer to "birth mother" (since that's what she is) rather than "birth parent". But come on now, everyone know this policy was not written with lesbian mothers first and foremost in everyone's minds. It was written to placate the TRAs who want to erase the words "woman" and "mother" from anything relating to female biology.

given that you can work from your early teenage years and teenage pregnancies are not a rarity then it is certainly very possible.

Wasnt aware that bottoms could reproduce! In fact I'm fairly sure mine wasn't involved at all unless I include shitting myself during labour

I actually couldn’t find my maternity policy on our portal because of language like this. It was something stupid like primary carer leave but also talked about birth … further perpetuating that women are default parent?! I didn’t like it anyway.

Has anyone actually surveyed the trans men who give birth to ask what they think? I wonder how many of them think it's necessary and proportional to erase the words "woman" and "mother" from any and all general communications about pregnancy and childbirth?

My view is that as long as a trans man is treated respectfully and communicated with according to their own preferences in reference to their own maternity care, that should be enough.

I'm female and married to a woman so I find birthing parent is more inclusive to our situation as we are both mothers and women.

So you prefer "birth parent" to "birth mother"? Why? Are you not both mothers?

The adoptive parents would not be entitled to maternity or paternity leave, they would instead be entitled to adoption leave and is a completely different policy and law.
In cases of surrogacy only the surrogate mother would be entitled to maternity leave, the adopting woman or men would get adoption leave. So no you argument is fundamentally wrong