Cut maternity leave and give new paid leave to dads -- what do you guyst think?

[Page62]

link here

i would really welcome this

Theyoungvisiter - not at all, and I have raised the issue of the complications arising from non-breastfeeding mothers elsewhere.

I agree, Page62. I was lucky enough to find breastfeeding easy and to have a fairly okay birth but I was still wiped out afterwards because giving birth is really hard work. It made all the difference in the world to my recovery and my baby's happiness (as a direct consequence of my recovery) to have DH there for the time he took off. There was nobody else who could have helped.

Or what about someone who dies in childbirth? Should their baby go into daycare from day 1 simply because the father doesn't breastfeed and hasn't been through labour?

There are other needs here - the baby has other needs. The mother has other needs. Those deserve to be recognised too.

Adoption leave recognises that there is a need to care for and bond with your new child that goes above and beyond breastfeeding and post-partum recovery.

I'm not sure that many fathers are really very qualified to help with breastfeeding, and I think that better breastfeeding support from the NHS would be more appropriate in getting breastfeeding established.

Theyoungvisiter - why are you raising silly arguments like this? I'm not going to bother to respond to them

So Anna what are you saying? I am confused! (I have missed wherever you addressed the FF argument I'm afraid - was it on this thread?)

You seem to be saying that we should not have paternity leave because maternity leave should be for breastfeeding and postpartum recovery. Which implies that if she is not breastfeeding and has recovered from giving birth, the woman should not be on maternity leave.

Apologies if I have misconstrued your argument but based on what you've said on this thread that's the impression I got.

I'm honestly not trying to raise silly arguments - I am trying to illustrate the fact that maternity leave is not only or primarily about breastfeeding and labour. You stated that it was. I am trying to illustrate that there is a bigger picture here.

Why is that a silly argument? I promise I am not being wilfully obtuse here, I am trying to work out what you are advocating.

I am trying to distinguish:

(a) pregnancy/post-partum recovery/breastfeeding leave

from

(b) childcare leave

I believe that:

(a) should be for mothers only

(b) could be taken indifferently by mothers or fathers

When we talk about "maternity" and "paternity" leave, the absolute vital necessity (IMO) of (a) often gets forgotten about in discussions of equality of opportunity about (b) which to my mind is optional for society to subsidise.

I think it's probable that we are violently agreeing here!

I do agree fully that we need better maternity leave and that many women go back to work before they are physically and emotionally ready.

And there should be a fully funded component of maternity leave available only to the mother of course.

But I disagree that the solution is to somehow separate out these issues from the rest of the complex web of caring for a child, and have a separate leave for it, or that women who are NOT breastfeeding or in post-partum recovery are somehow less entitled to leave.

I think a maternity leave component and a parental leave component is probably the solution and what you call it is semantics really.

Although I bfed my DCs and intend to bfeed any future DCs, I do not take the view that maternity leave is about just my recovery and establishing bfeeding. I think that diminishes the role my DH played and will play (if we were to have any more) in those early months. The support he has given me allowed us to nurture the children in the way we wanted to in those early months -- we always have a team approach to how we deal with family issues (just as a SAHM should be seen as an equal contributor to the home even if only the DH is earning money, for example).
No one has mentioned this, because heaven forbid such women exists, but what if a woman chose not to bfeed or just to bfeed for a short period of time -- does that mean no special leave for her? (and this assumes for example, it's not a medical reason but just a choice).
I am all for educating everyone on how long it takes to recover from birth and benefits for breastfeeding. After that, I think parents should be given the flexibility to decide what is best for their own situation rather than taking a prescriptive approach which may prove completely inapplicable or unhelpful

haven't read all the posts - but I totally agree with the EHRC (on this one). My understanding, however, is that it would be nigh on impossible to cut mat leave - as that would be retrogressive, and counter to certain aspects of European law. so the only way of equalising everything would be to extend the current mat leave rights to fathers too - which would be way too expensive. I've read a very persuasive argument that extending mat leave to a year was v. short-sighted and a policy and legal disaster for equal rights.

I think this is a great idea on several levels..it would definately suit DH and I

a) Enabling mum and dad to share the maternity/paternity leave (I am not able to do longer than 5 months due to affordability it would be great to have the option to hand over to DH for a few months, before using more formal childcare arrangements)

b) Childcare responsibilities would not be regarded as a 'women's issue' at work

c) Encourage both men and women to consider flexible working at work.

I do think it should be optional though, as this option will not suit some, and not to disadvantage singles mums etc. I like Cosettes suggestion re 6 months enhanced maternity package for women then optional split (on SMP) for the second 6 months..

.. Page62 you have managed to say pretty much everything I wanted to say, but a lot more clearly !

thanks!

i try to sell myself as the "special parent" to my DH because i was the one who breastfed but we both know the truth! hahahaa

LOL.. Exactly

I agree completely with BonsoirAnna. I'm really uncomfortable with the implications of this proposal that "motherhood", "parenting" and "fatherhood" are pretty well interchangable.

They aren't. They are all linked in one rather messy venn diagram that I wouldn't like to draw - but to suggest that mothers and fathers are interchangable after the first 26 weeks totally belittles the whole process of pregnancy, birth, and the post-natal period. What about PND? the tiredness evoked earlier? the physical recovery?

Breastfeeding is not the whole story here - but we need to remember that this country came pretty close to wiping it out through our misguided perceptions that it was somehow liberating to be separated from your baby from an early age through what amounted to virtual denial that we are the ones who carry the baby and deliver it. Six months is when solids should start to supplement breast milk; it is not the point when a baby is able to be left all day. Please don't all chorus, "she can express" Not everyone can and, why on earth should she spend every waking hour when she is not at work trying to produce enough milk for the next day.

Many employers would take the view that because a father could "take over" a female employee could be discriminated against for not returning.

I'm all for the Scandanavian approach, where the leave is spread over a longer period to cover the child's infancy rather than early babyhood.

No-one is suggesting that mothers and fathers are totally interchangeable, or that this would work for all families.
BUT - it would be nice to have the option so that the families can decide for themselves, not be dictated to.
What do people think about the discrimination aspect - would it be more difficult for emplyers to discriminate if they did not know which parent would take how much leave?
Another slant is that female dominated industries/businesses currently bear the larger brunt of covering leave. More male dominated businesses taking some of this would at least give a little more balance.
I am not saying it would cost more either to give the choice - same stat pay for mother or father, just that we could choose who takes it and when.

UQD - it is possible to skirt around paternity leave issues if one sets themselves up as a director of a ltd company, and takes a certain amount of "drawings" of salary in the months prior to the leave. So, in essence, it's possible, but you need a very good accountant to help you maximise your opportunities.

I don't think that all women need six months recovery time from childbirth. Some will need much more, and some will need less. If it's all on physical and emotional "recovery" then an illness approach would be a better option, with some sort of assessment of "recovery" by a professional. You don't have to be off work to maintain breastfeeding either - some people go back to work very early and still maintain breastfeeding (not saying it is easy mind - personally I totally failed at pumping).

I went back to work to recover from babies, and I know I'm not the only one. For me flexibility is the important thing, and being able to transfer leave between partners seems a very sensible approach. Maternity leave was six months when I had my two, so nine months with the option to transfer three seems fine to me, in fact very generous.

"Pumping" is not "breastfeeding"

the EHRC is not proposing that all women would only have 6 months leave (or less as I think someone suggested on this thread). The proposal would have adequate flexibility for women to take up to 14 months:

"Beyond the first six months of maternity leave, the commission proposes three blocks of "parental leave", which could be taken any time before the child's fifth birthday, each of about four months, one block dedicated to mothers, one to fathers and one either could take." from the guardian

tbh that leaves a lot of the weaning and b-feeding discussions not all that relevant. relevant in general, obviously, but not to the particular proposal that the EHRC have put on the table.

No, pumping is not breastfeeding. It's much more stressful and tiring.

6months leave is no where near long enough for the mother.
the babies should be bf for the 1st year,
6 months ex
then after 6months bf and begin weaning gently.

otherwise with 6 months leave the woman might have to leave work 2 months before the baby if shes having a difficult pg.
then it leaves 4 months with the baby.

how about the partents get a years leave between them an they choose how to divvy it up?

where they have gone wrong with this ide is cutting th eleave from the mother.
giving with one hand then take away with another.

Jean - see the link below - the proposal would enable a woman to take upto 14 months.