Advantages of Going Back to Work Early

[Judy1234]

Coming out of several other threads this is interesting. As I said elsewhere with my first child I went back to work after 2 weeks. I always work up until I went into labour. I think the longest I took off was 5 week with any of the 5. You don't often get parents writing about returning to work quickly so I thought just setting out some of the advantages might be helpful for those who can't decide how much time to take off at home. I don't want this to be seen as me saying all parents should both be back at their desks within 2 weeks however; just food for thought particularly with the new paternity leave rights coming in next April.

1. The baby does not have a huge wrench when you suddenly return at 6 months or a year. At 2 weeks she can get used to her good childcare from the father, relative, nanny or whatever so has continuity and no shock to the system of a later return.

1. You don't have time to get out of the swing of work so it's all less disrupting to your life.

1. You can establish a breastmilk expressing system early on without worrying about how to manage breastfeeding when going back at 3 months.

1. Both parents are equally as involved with the children. The pattern at home isn't established that the mother does everything to do with the baby. The mother isn't better than the father at child things. You may get a more involved husband.

1. You only lose 10% of pay in the few weeks you take off.

1. You don't lose touch with work, lose promotion, position etc.

1. If I'm allowed say it, being at home with babies can be boring (not for everyone, I know) so you can skip all that and concentrate on the fun cuddles bit.

1. You inconvenience an employer or your customers less. No one will like me for saying this but in the real world fathers and mothers taking leave is hard to manage. I can say this having had to manage maternity leave for two of my nannies over the years.

1. You may find the physical recovery from birth easier in an office than managing small children and domestic work at home with heavy lifting, toddlers who kick you, heavy rubbish to put out, floors to scrub etc.I certainly found sitting still at a desk, time to rest, relax, get drinks at my leisure helped me get back to normal. Dressing in office clothes too helps get you back to being your normal self. I loved leaving behind the clothes at home covered in baby sick etc.

10. Sometimes it aids mental health particularly if you hate being home with a baby.

Xenia, nobody's ever going to change your mind, I don't think.

But I wonder if you ever think that if there's an enormous number of people all disagreeing with you, it's probably you who's disagreeable.

Mmm, whether to reply to this as if it was a serious post.

Two weeks after ds was born, I honestly thought "god, would be nice to go back to work for a bit of normality and something under control". In some ways I do think it's easier to work when they are tiny (not that tiny, obviously) because they are less aware of your absence. Bear in mind my dh is a SAHD so I am talking about leaving child with the other parent, nothing else would do. I still couldn't have done it, I left ds for 2 hours when he was about 2 months old and it nearly finished me off.

What I want is maternity leave to be flexible, and perhaps called 'parental leave' (obviously am not just ripping this off from Sweden - okay, I am). I want to be able to take a set number of days as it suits my family, and share the days between parents as we find appropriate. I could definitely have gone back part-time sooner, and stayed part-time longer, if it was being appropriately subsidised. Not everyone has, or wants, those choices, but why not cater for all?

Crikey, Xenia, I've just discovered who you are. You live rather near me! Want to meet up and talk about our wildly different lifestyles?! PMSL!

Well, I say live, you work rather near me - but by the sound of it, you're there a lot!

Unfortunately I know many belgian mothers (I live in Belgium) who go back to work full time very quickly after having a child. It's perfectly normal for a 14 week old to spend forty - fifty hours in child care a week. I know women who have gone back to work full time even earlier. I'm the unusual mother for insisting I get to know my children before putting them into a creche.

lol hunkermunker at the live/work balance!

I'd have my children with me, that's the only thing - you know, children - small people, look a bit like their parents?

Thing is though, if you go back to work when your baby's two weeks old, and you do it five times, you're gonna think you ARE right, aren't you?

If Xenia had done it differently even once, she may very well get we're all banging on about.

But you can't know your children as well as someone who's with them all the time if you work full time, long hours. Not possible, because you aren't there to get to know them.

And before I'm accused of being smug, I'm speaking from experience. I've been a SAHM, worked part time and near-enough full time.

But - and I do so hate to be defending the Xenia corner - men are 'allowed' (in the UK) to abandon any prospect of childcare in favour of returning to work. This is so not the case in Sweden. Normally the early days are still done by mum because obviously bf will not get established by naffing off back to work first chance that comes along My friends have generally done a swap at about six months. My situation was different because my dh has been hands-on since day 1.

There are different models, that's all I'm trying to say. Even ff and with a SAHD I couldn't leave a small baby, it's just wrong for me.

Trib, I think it's different if you are a dad and you go back to work and leave your baby with its mother. I would say that if a woman went back to work at two weeks (though why anyone would want to do this is beyond me) and left their baby with its dad, that would be OK. It's about being with a parent, IMO.

Wish I live in Sweden - fantastic idea.

I'm in two minds on this.

on the one hand, I am working again, and have been since ds was 2 weeks (albeit part time). but that's because dh and I run our own company and dh would collapse under the pressure if I didn't. our admin assistant (hired to cover my maternity leave) buggered off the day ds was born.

otoh I wouldn't dream of working full time with such a little baby, apart from anything else because I wouldn't be able to breastfeed. I'm lucky really in that I can work from home so can do half my work with no childminder (he has one really long nap in the mornings, but is awake after the other two are in bed). there is no way in hell I would be able to keep ds happy with expressed milk alone.

but - and I know I shouldn't, but I have to post this - I feel rather a lot less guilty about it all after reading xenia's post. perhaps I will go full time. because heaven forbid that ds's attachment formation should inconvenience any customers, or my boss if I had one. on the other hand maybe not.

I ran back from the post office when I popped out the the post office when DS was two weeks old -panic stricken - despite huge BF norks, stitches still healing and a flabby belly....

Hunker can you add me to your MSN not sure which addy you use - Floss_am at Hotmail dot co dot uk xx

2 weeks - are you crazy?

I had a CS with DS1 - and even if I was working - wouldn't have been able to get there as I'd probably had to have driven.

Bad tear with DS2 - and couldn't sit down comfortably (without my little cushion) for weeks.

With DS1 I was a 'proper' SAHM - there all the time. With DS2 I had outside 'commitments' but wouldn't really class it as 'work', not even part-time work.

I'm currently pg with no.3 which will be born after the changes take place in April which slightly extend the amount of time you can take off at 90%, and SMP. I shall work it so that I take my full annual leave before my maternity leave, and if all goes well shall go back to work part time when DC3 is about 8/9 months old. I've been working for a year now (still have a pre-schooler and one in Yr1 so still young) but enjoy my life balance.

HOWEVER, going back that early - and all the reasons you give for it.......why bother giving birth yourself? Why not just find somoene to be a surragate mum - then you won't have the 'inconvinience' of being pg

hunker - I do agree. Being a dad and being a mum are not the same thing. Two weeks is not an option for me, and not an option for dh cos he is too ill to work, but that's an entirely different kettle of les poissons.

Pooka - there are downsides to the Swedish way of life too (like crippling tax) but I have found my views on parenthood altered utterly by having lived there. There, it's okay not to organise a meeting to finish after 4:30 because everyone - men and women - finish then to pick their kid up from kindergarten. This is just how it is. And frankly why shouldn't it be?

The latest hilarity is that the Swedish government now mandates that the man must take 90 days of the parental leave (to address inequalities in the workforce) so one of my friends is back at work whilst her dh slogs through parental leave, just cos he has to - ha ha. He wouldn't have done it otherwise, so I say "go Swedish government, go!".

Crippling tax ok though if you get what you pay for.

hm so okay to leave 2 week year old with father but not with anyone else. Not sure how you work that out. Do you need a genetic blood tie then to look after children properly? That's unlikely.

Lost of nannies look after new babies and maternity nurses will start the day of birth not that I used a maternity nurse.

It;s interesting people on the thread (most) can't be neutral about it. You have a value judgment that is't a moral wrong to leave that 2 week year old. My argument is leaving it at 2 weeks is probably easier for the baby than this massive wrench at 9 months when suddenly that 24/7 relationship with mother is rent asunder.

Abroad is useful to look at even in France, women being helped in hospital to get their figures back etc. We have a differen culture in the UK and I'm not sure it's always quite the best balance. May be some countries are better at getting women back together again as workers and women etc.

Of course your job is relevant which is why the law distinguishes between 2 week return for most workers and 4 week for employees in certain jobs. if like the other person below you're self employed then you do tend to get back to work quite a bit quicker as if you don't work you starve in many cases.

fa, i really enjoyed pregnancy and I adore new babies. Just don't want to be with them all day. You can enjoy them and love mother hood and like breastfeeding and still want to work. They are not mutually exclusive.

but xenia - the reason there is "no great wrench" when leaving a two week old is because they haven't formed a proper attachment yet. that's fairly well established.

and yes, it's ok to leave them with someone who will have a long term relationship with the child. that would usually be the father, unless you know any nannies that will guarantee availability for 16 years + ?

What do you mean, not sure how I work that out? Because the best nanny in the world won't love your child like its parents do. In an ideal world. But if you feel you can't offer that, then probably better you give them to a nanny who might manage a semblance of affection for them.

I see you didn't take me up on my offer of a meet-up then

but Xenia you're assuming that because someone has been at home for 9 months that they have done ALL the childcare! my DH does a HUGE chunk of the housework and childcare in this house - in fact we're evenly split 50/50.

You're also assuming that the 'wrench' of being dragged off to nursery/childminder/nanny/whatever is going to be worse for a baby than the wrench for your children as they get older and look at photos of them doing the sorts of things parents often do with their children (feed the ducks, go to the park, blah blah blah) and realise that their own mother wasn't in most of the pictures - but a stranger..........

lol you adore new babies......but would much rather palm them off on someone else until they're old enough for you to kick them out to University..

..our nanny was with them for 10 years, the first one. But they attach not just to one person - father, mother, sometimes grand mother, in my case the much older siblings. I don't tink it has to be one person attached to only. They have infinite capacity to love. Sadly even fathers disappear and sometimes mothers. I still think the hours at night of silent close breastfeeding can bond you to that child, all the hours of care you give except during the working hours. I don't count them as nought. I didn't feel unbonded. I don't feel unbonded now. That first one is here tonight, 22, very bonded. I can't seen an adverse effect. I can't see her unable to form close emotional attachments because everyone she's ever loved has left her. I can't see an inability to be physically affectionate. I just see loved children whose parents worked.

So there is there an age others on the thread think it's fine to return to work and how do you choose that period? Is it 5 years old or 3 or 6 or 12 months or really is it better if you're around even when they're doing A levels, after school.

I think meeting might not be a good idea.