Massachusetts Re-Evaluates a Silly, Sexist Policy
Posted on 05. Sep, 2008 by Brian Reid in General
Via WSJ’s Juggle comes word that Massachusetts is looking at how it enforces a law that guarantees new moms 8 weeks of unpaid maternity leave (yes, FMLA offers more leave, but you have to be working someplace with more than 50 workers). Amazingly, the law is gender-specific: only women get the protection of this law.
Now, the state is apparently considering investigating complaints from men under the law. This is, of course, good news, but it amazes me that a legislature — particularly one in as progressive a state as Massachusetts — would have this kind of mom-only law in the first place. Trust me, a lot of us need the time …
Jennifer
06. Sep, 2008
While I’m all for parental (as opposed to maternity) leave, I think 8 weeks after a child is born there is a fundamental difference between a mother and a father, and that is that the mother has just given birth.
In my company (which as required by Australian law gives 12 months unpaid parental leave to be taken by either parent but not simulatenously), mothers are not allowed to return to work until 6 weeks after the birth.
Many women do bounce back from birth, but many don’t. And a breastfeeding relationship takes time to establish - a mother who will end up expressing at work will manage it longer if she’s had time to physically breastfeed first. There are good physical reasons why such a short unpaid leave should be for women in priority to men.
A longer period has much more rationale to be for mothers and fathers equally.
rudy
06. Sep, 2008
I wonder if the mother has died giving birth, would the daddy get the benifits of the mothers leave and giving up the fathers career will have to be decided until he can go back to work. I understand that that we do not need forty days to heal. not so sound mean or ruded. But what do you do when your spouse abondone your twin daughters and leaves. She is not dead now she has gone nuts. This happen for real. does the dad get any help and give up his job. Since the father did not give birth of course he does not. Even if the mother died at birth. I am happy that my wife can provide for our house hold and we do not live beyond our means I was able to give up my career to raise my baby boy. If something should happen and my wife could not work I have no problem working again. And it is still not easy getting use to being a stay at home dad. But I am loving every day about it. I love seeing my childern getting of the bus and running to me. I never had that before. I was at work. I can see where this law is needed. I new young mother needs all the time she can get. Then she can decide to go to work so she can pay the sitter while her husband works and they live happyly ever after. And even that is not to great.
Ed
08. Sep, 2008
The law may reflect the backward thinking of legislators and their staff rather than that of the citizens of the Commonwealth. Politicians often only lead when forced to do so.
RebelMom
16. Sep, 2008
If women need leave because the immediate post-partum period is so difficult, then don’t we need to give dads concurrent leave as well to help mom with recovery and to care for the new child?
Arguing that women are so physically impacted by birth that they have a better claim to paid leave — and then not enabling their partner to share jointly in recovery and care just seems absurd.
Ethel
30. Sep, 2008
The Microsoft company policy seems decent to me: 8 weeks paid recovery leave after giving birth (no man has earned this yet
. Four weeks paid leave for new parents, including adoptive parents. Up to eight more weeks of unpaid leave for new parents.
The recovery leave needs to be taken immediately. I think the four paid and eight unpaid weeks are anytime during the first year - maybe the paid leave is first six months? Most guys take at least two months for a new baby. Most women take the full five months. No hit to the career, from what I’ve heard.