There is too much pressure on today's young couples. Two career families with no one to take significant breaks to focus on the children. AND no one lives near the grandparents anymore. It used to be that families remained geographically close and grandma helped when the newborn came along. While it is wonderful for both parents to have time to bond with their newborn, there was something very wonderful about the Mother-Daughter bond when a new mother became a mom. She turned to her experienced mom as a mentor-- something a husband just can't do since he is in the dark as much as her! Now couples are on their own. Soon after, the babies are all put in daycare and the old folks are sent off to assisted living. Paternity leave won't solve the dissolution of the American family itself!
1
Women usually have no choice for the first two weeks, they kind of have to be there; men get to choose even given a choice. Many men choose not to stay home even given a choice. That should be part of any research.
“Resort to caregiving” if overwhelmed balancing work and childcare needs. This is an intractable problem . When two consenting intelligent adults decide to make babies they are not just another species like dogs to care for. Their needs are great and very important. Two parents plus kids equals a family. If you defer to daycare to raise kids the gaps show up in social degradation the likes we see now. Of course the nurturer decides to protect family over employment and the breadwinner prefers winning bread. The generations making babies are confused by all the choices media and reality tv say are possible. There is only one. Be good parents and protect your kids and let them know you love them unconditionally. Don’t fall into these societal bashing new normals. Family is foundational. It deserves full time care.
1
It a simple dilemma. Companies hire less people to do more. Customers are demanding and competition is stiff. If you take time off, everything backs up. There aren't enough coworkers to cover and they are buried. You simply cant afford to partake of the "benefits" that companies claim to provide. That goes for being sick also.
We have entered an age where even professionals are little more than indentured servants.
Even if you are earning 6 figures you'd better be on call 24/7, never take all your vacation and save like mad because you're going to be laid off at 50 and replaced with a younger cheaper version of yourself.
God forbid you show anything but complete and slavish dedication to your employer. A male taking parental leave!?!?! Really?
You might as well commit suicide in the office lobby.
It's worse for women. Want a career? You should seriously consider NEVER marrying much less having children.
1
It doesn't seem to occur to the writer than some mothers would simply prefer to stay home to raise their children.
3
In the dog eat dog corporate world, it is far too risky to take leave, which is often considered a signal of less "fire in the belly" or commitment to one's career path. After all professional women have been and continue to be "mommy tracked" even when they don't have children! Of course men don't want to suffer the same fate. Especially if it means trading a lucrative, interesting job for changing diapers.
2
Most fathers know intuitively that their children are better off if being cared for by mom and that the best thing they can do for their family is to bring home more bacon. Being away from the office for any extended period is at best a neutral event, but it can be career damaging. The fact is that only so many promotion opportunities present themselves and the other candidates are not going to step back and say, hey, let the guy on leave get this one.
This is what happened to my wife's coworker who was planning to take 4 months off. His manager directly told him that if he did he will still have a job but he can't guarantee its his old job. The guy took two weeks and came back.
3
Wage gap - cause or effect? Men make more, so they can better afford to pay someone else to do the care giving. Taking time off does result in losing advancement potential, and with greater potential, men have a greater opportunity cost. And the non-economic reason - still considered women's work universally. I asked my Chines ESL students about the preference for sons because "sons take care of their parents in their old age". Unanimous response - the son funds their care. Their wives do the caregiving.
3
Maybe care-giving isn't that much of a male trait as man-haters would prefer.
Maybe working, risk and providing are male traits, despite man-haters preference.
Maybe inequality rises labor is a burden to profits, despite capitalism-hating preferences.
Not to be a biological determinist here, but this article mentions breastfeeding not at all, as does just one of the 142 (so far) comments, and this one mention is largely in passing.
Granted, the article is about men and why they don't seem to take advantage of the parental leave they could have. And I get the pressure men not to stray far from high-pressure jobs, much of which probably comes from the employer and colleagues. But with all the pressure on women to breastfeed these days, the fact that more women than men now take parental leave if they have it (to what degree is alluded to only sketchily) discussions of breastfeeding must surely play into the complicated calculus young US families report.
I'd just say also that there is much to be learned from Europe and elsewhere in the OECD, which are not mentioned here, but where decades of experimentation with national parental leave policies have built up a rich record of insight.
2
Its also comes down to what "caregiving" means". For men it often means the baby or mom is kept alive. For women it means the house is also spotless and everything is planned out for the week.
3
I am in my mid-30s and expecting my first child.
For practically all the couples we know, none of this is relevant - the woman is by far the higher earner, so for them to step back from their careers would not make any sense.
My husband is self-employed as an attorney - so yeah he gets paid when he bills. Any time off is clearly unpaid. I'm the one with the high paying marketing job and the health insurance. We both will keep working regardless - neither of us thinks that in this day and age any adult should depend on another. Earning your own money means freedom and choices. Looking forward to my measly 12 weeks off in the mean time - only half of them paid.
2
"A large reason, social scientists have found, is that traditional gender role expectations — that men are responsible for financially supporting families, and women for caring for them — are hard to overcome."
I truly still do not understand why these folks refuse to acknowledge that what they like to call gender role expectation is just human nature/the biological difference between women and men. It has been this way since Lucy roamed the African savanna. Being woke, PC and wishful thinking can not change that evolution.
6
The answer is not all that difficult, and that is that using this benefit is either perceived or more likely in reality, will hurt the career of those who use it. Women who take maternity leave do so already knowing their can/will be a hit to their career for doing so, and if not, many of those managing companies (women or men), are very much into the traditional gender roles, see women taking that leave as 'natural'.
Whereas if men take it, they are seen by many managers (and based on experience, again, it isn't just male managers doing this, women managers aren't that much different) as taking time away from important work matters, or worse, basically taking extra vacation, because quite bluntly they don't feel that a father is needed with a newborn baby.
It is much like companies that claim they want employees to take vacations and get refreshed, who extol unlimited vacation time or generous vacation policies, it is often window dressing and someone who uses that time is seen as a slacker, not a team player, etc (and not surprisingly, many of these same companies don't allow workers to carry over unused time and don't pay them for unused time). IBM was infamous for this in the day, they gave what seemed to be generous benefits but didn't want you to use them; same with parental leave.
The only way parental leave will be used by men is when the law steps in an penalizes companies for discouraging its use, the way they finally did with women.
I work from home and am a stay at home dad. It is more about my upbringing and what I learned about patience and dealing with two special needs daughters, both with acute anxiety.
I have a calmer disposition than my ex-wife and am willing to see my children as part of my career. It also helps that New Zealand has had the Equal Pay Act of 1971 to ensure men and women are paid equal for equal work. The US has failed to pass such an Act ensuring equal pay and until it does, families will more than not have the man go back to work and leave the child-rearing to women as well as the lower paying job.
We're hard-wired toward work, particularly us older workers. It's one thing to acknowledge the shared responsibility of caregiving, but another to actually do it. When each of my children was born, I took a week of vacation, which at the time seemed plenty. My fear in taking off longer would be the difficulty in getting back into the flow of the job (hard enough with a week off, frankly). It will take time for that mindset to change as the idea of paternal leave is still fairly new and will become more accepted over time. But when you work at a smaller company in a vital role, someone has to pick up the slack, which begs the question: Is it fair to always have the childless cover for us reproducers? If were the one always having to work more to compensate for someone, it might get old.
1
The system is not going to work as long as men and women only get leave for having kids, while hose who don't have kids don't get any leave. We should instead offer a sort of sabbatical to all workers, so everyone can take leave from time to time if that is what they want to do.
At the same time, there are many jobs where it is impractical to take a leave. Look at a lawyer who has to maintain close contact with clients - those relationships can't be easily switched to a new lawyer and then back.
Leaves work best when workers are easily replaceable, and work less well when specific individuals are needed. Which, unfortunately, is the opposite of the system we have, where the companies that offer leave often only offer it to white-collar workers in jobs where it is hard to find an immediate replacement.
4
There need to be set-asides for mothers in all aspects of the U.S. workplace - procurement, c-suite, etc
$ set asides and work set asides to financially incentivize productive mothers, that is working motherhood at top wages at a wage that is profitable for one parent...
There needs to be flexibility in the work as they have in Finland and medicare for all and work of value and human respect. The U.S. worker has given over too many of her rights and needs to take them back...
1
Men are not wired for patience with infants and young children; they would rather work outside the home.
@n1789
Generalizations like this are absurd.
My wife was the oldest in a family of 7. She had her fill of 'motherhood' before starting college.
I stayed home to raise two children - and renovate two houses. We were lucky that we could afford for me to stay home. My being home let her go farther in her career. Two high powered careers often leave both plateauing out as parents try dealing with the uncertainties of child care.
This meant career suicide for me but then a good number of my former co-workers literally dropped dead dealing with corporate absurdities. Frankly, NOTHING I did in my work career remains. Companies die, things change. Your children are the only lasting legacies you will have.
THAT is the problem with society today. We do not ALLOW parents to actually raise their children - and that is a topic worthy of a few thousand pages.
1
I imagine there is a female walking the planet that has less interest in care giving and or patience than you have. You care enough to write your thoughts; I wonder if you have more capacity for care giving than you have yet to discover.
While the benefit exists. In private most men are happy for the stigma of not being a team player. Most, not all, have no real interest in hanging around with a new baby and the threat of losing ground at work helps sell it at home. Sorry, like it, don’t like it that’s just the way it is.
3
Early in my years in private legal practice, one of my fellow associates took ‘paternity leave,’ which the firm I was with at the time touted as a benefit of employment and an emblem of its broad-minded management.
He was castigated for doing so; a real ‘team player’ never would have used the benefit, of course. Although he had been something of a star pupil prior to that time, it was made clear my colleague would not be considered for partnership. He soon left the firm for a job as in-house counsel for a local business.
I was already a longtime partner/shareholder in my law firm when my daughter was born. I took about six weeks away from the office. Another partner — a ‘client getter’ who routinely passed the work off to me once he had brought it in the door, while drawing the profits from the work — was incensed. My compensation for the year was slashed and I continued to pay for my sin for a number of years before my earnings returned to the status quo ante. That ‘paid paternity leave’ cost me multiple six figures when it was all over.
That, my friends, is why fathers do not take paternity leave.
82
@chambolle Perhaps. But everyone doesn't work in a high powered lawfirm. Very few people do, in fact.
4
Same principle with any male employee. As a 1099 contractor who supervises more than 100 temp workers at a dozen client sites, I make less than my minimum wage subordinates yet am expected to work 65-72 hours a week and be available 24/7/365.
13
@terrils: Not sure I get your point. An attorney at a ‘high powered law firm’ — particularly with a share of ownership in the firm — would presumably have more bargaining power and be less subject to the whims of management than a fungible corporate employee. So how would the typical at-will employee be more empowered and more inclined to risk the fallout from taking leave than a tenured member of a closely held business?
If there’s a message intended by your comment, it escapes me.
9
First child? Second? Third? It would be interesting to see results of a study that accounted for differences between new fathers/mothers and “repeat” parents.
I had no clue what to do in 1985 when our first child came home. I was in the way. The friends and family that swooped in made faces at the baby while uttering strange and fascinating noises. I was in the way. I went to work.
2d child? 3d? Lots to do. Got the hang of it.
15
My wife and I have 3 kids. I took a week vacation for the first 2, and by the time #3 came around, my company was offering 6 weeks paternity leave so I took it. Best decision of my life. A lot of people seem to comment on how useless they felt, but I felt just the opposite. Yes, there wasn't much I could do for the baby, other than hold him and change diapers, but being there to support my wife during that phase was priceless. As a supervisor now, I encourage all of my staff to take parental leave. It's not just for your kid, but also to support your spouse. Plus, I have yet to meet a new father who was at all awake or useful the first couple of months after childbirth. Might was well take the leave and do the much harder work of parenting and being a good spouse. We'll manage.
42
@Felix Well, once your baby was 6 weeks old, it no longer needed your care?
1
At my previous employer, the male general manager of the plant (1200 employees) took a month off; my male colleagues in leadership positions planned their "pat leave" like anything else. That's a first step, to culturally normalize it.
Secondly, pass laws to ensure jobs remain after the leave.
35
I'm a retired HR Mgr, I've worked for Fortune 500 firms, smaller firms and the fed govt.
Being off work, paid or unpaid, no matter why - paternity leave, to care for an elderly parent, or even the employee's own illness, it's still the same.
Extended time away from work means being out of the action. Family Medical Leave (FMLA) altho unpaid covers absences. Paid time off is great, but you're still not available. High visibility assignments go to those that are there and can go above and beyond. It takes a long time to get back up into that top tier. Or maybe never, as newer, eager talent is always being hired.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) offers protection for the employee's own health needs if the person can do the essential reqt's of the job. Or they may need a reasonable accommodation (RA). That may include more time off. The day to day work still has to be done, it's just not as richly rewarded at evaluation time. And because the company knows there are certain demands they can't make, crucial assignments go to those that can do everything, be readily, constantly available, and able to put in 110 pct including extra hours.
Legal? Yes. Being there most of the time and meeting the essential reqt's keeps you employed. But availability to go above and beyond is where the $$ and promotions are. And you may not be able to do that if you're out.
Doesn't take long for anyone in the work world to figure this out
27
@Ann Good answer. The old days of co-workers 'covering' for someone who was out for a week or two, even for vacation, seem to be long gone. It's easier on everyone to bring your laptop with you and at least answer emails.
1
@Ann
The real problem is companies preach the mantra of 'we are family', while projecting all these great benefits, how the company understands, the reality is that today's corporations are no more enlightened than 19th century ones were. One of the core 'values' of the company I work for is to make sure that if someone is not available, that there are others who can take over, the 'next person up' idea. In theory, with that as a value, someone taking paternity time, temporary disability, etc, would be covered by others.....
the reality is that corporate managers in this day and age of cost cutting and stock price over all, is that those running the company don't care about the workload on coworkers, they have to pay for something that doesn't improve the current bottom line. Whether it is vacation pay, family leave, maternity/paternity leave, they see pay in terms only what they get back for it, period. HR departments once upon a time acted as a check and balance against this kind of thinking, these days HR departments are there to find every way possible to make sure employees don't use the benefits they have, and more importantly, to find ways to justify doing that so they don't get sued.
10
@Ann Coworkers can't cover anyone on leave because they are already doing two jobs to make up for all the people laid-off, outsourced, or never-hired.
7
Last year at our workplace they took away the fifth week of vacation / paid time off from those with over 15 years of seniority. It was to fund a new " bucket " for paid paternity leave and also some extra money for short term disability. So there was a cost to providing paid paternity leave. It is the same length as a woman taking maternity leave. A few weeks for a man would be okay, but 12 weeks is too much. If the baby is healthy , he needs to go back to work. There is often support for the mom with a mother-in-law or mother coming over. Like the lady at work I spoke with today. The cost needs to be accounted for. I like the idea of extra money for short term disability and will give up a few days of vacation time for that. But now I have less vacation and it would be hard to ask the company to reveal if men are actually taking these weeks off, or is the company just saving money. Or if they are not taking the time off like anticipated is that money flowing over to extra Short Term Disability pay ?
2
Many of these comments show just how much we value work above everything, even our marriages and families. Not me. If you work at a job where you're afraid to take even a short amount of time off perhaps having children is not a great choice. Or that's not a great job.
12
@Andrew
Western society DOES value work (i.e. money) above everything else. For millennia, motherhood alone was exempt from the cash nexus and seen in and of itself as the greatest boon.
Several things caused this to change and feminism was among the most salient of these. It devalued the role of motherhood, exalted "career" (money) over everything else and so potential mothers hurled themselves into the money rat race. Feminism also denigrated males and, in doing so, fatally undercut marriage
For all of civilization's history men have had a price tag dangling from each of their necks -- exactly how much monetary value each is worth. This was true when men were serfs and it is true now that many are coders.
Women have no. value, absent sexual gratification, other than what they can earn in the local currency.
5
@Observer - I disagree with your implication that career = money. Obviously you make money by working, but for many of us that’s only a piece of the puzzle. I’m a physician and so is my husband, and when I had my daughter I could have easily stayed home for as many months as I wanted to, as my employer was flexible and my husband could continue working full time to (comfortably) support us. I went back to work, albeit part time, after 8 weeks. Why? Because I’m a physician, I worked hard to get here and I love my work. I love the sense of camaraderie, intellectual challenge, and knowing that I’m helping people and my community. If I had ten million dollars in the bank, I would keep working. The only think that feminism changed in this equation is that I’m allowed to be a physician AND a mom without stigma (imagine that!).
6
@Andrew Work is valuable and not just because we like living indoors and eating food, which is no small thing. But producing goods and services for society at large still matters. People balanced families and work for centuries, and yes, much of that burden fell on the mothers and we're now trying to adjust that. But in the process, let's not devalue the concept of work as some sort of greedy selfish pursuit. That baby needs food and shelter, and the only way to provide it long term is to produce something of value.
It's terrible for either to be held back/fired due to taking leave. A woman who loses her job is still a mom with that society sees as having the "hardest and most rewarding job in the world." A dad without a job is a deadbeat or an additional kid around this house to take care of. And if he does not find another job quickly the marriage will likely be in jeopardy quite quickly.
8
The dad should get his 6 weeks when the kid is between grade school and middle school, or maybe right before high school. Let the kid spend some quality time with the old man then.
1
There has been some progress, although probably in spurts. When I returned to practicing law after a long stint at as a SAHP, I was pleasantly surprised to find a number of the younger male associates taking lengthy (6 months at least) leaves to be the primary caregiver after their spouses returned to work. As far as I could tell, there were no negative career repercussions, although I’m sure that was a concern when making this decision. Hopefully the younger generation keeps pushing for more work-life balance, not just for parents.
6
It's sort of a grey area..if you have two working parents then I think extended leave makes sense for both parties. But if you have a stay at home parent, I find it hard to imagine the working parent needing to be out for 6 weeks...2-3 seems more reasonable. Did anyone look into that when doing research because I think that might be one of the reasons.
@MJ Are you speaking from experience?When I had my baby, I was broken when at 2 weeks my husband had to go back to work. I was exhausted and still recovering while taking care of a brand new life.
1
It's not that complicated. Staying at home with young children is mostly housework -- endless cleaning and laundry -- and extremely isolating. A lot of people prefer interacting with adults at their office jobs. It's not surprising that the partner with more privilege may decline to spend extra time on household drudgery, with or without the influence of "subtle messages".
14
While fathers have a responsibility to their child(ren) and the child’s mother related to childbirth, men do not have a responsibility to become fathers or husbands/significant others. How much inefficiency and economic damage is done by men who lose focus on their jobs, employers and customers? You know, the ones who pay the bills. My employer is vociferously against his male supervisors becoming fathers due to the distraction that it causes and the resulting expectation of higher pay.
1
Well, after our daughter arrived 10 years into our really great marriage, things turned different. I started off as a single mom, like most mothers in Germany. Man working, we at home... Horrible. Once i got divorced, I was no longer singe mom (the ex-husband had to take responsibility) and got a career. Now i am happy with 15 year old daughter and LOTS of money...
9
Most men feel well enough after a baby is born to continue as before. Most women are recovering from 9 months of pregnancy,14 hours of labor and/ or surgery.
4
A man takes care of his family, and that usually means taking care of his wife and children financially.
Real men put up with degradation at their work in order to do this. What's the surprise?
2
@Travelers Money isn't the only thing children need.
4
@Terrils The basic thing children need is security and safety, which is what money provides. See Maslow's Need Hierarchy.
That is what real men do. They give children that. I wonder if you and others really appreciate that.
just finishing 3 months of unpaid paternity leave (fmla) this week. my workplace is supportive but only because they have to be. The boomer men roll their eyes. and the boomer women have mixed feelings. also had to keep on top of things administratively. that was annoying. anyways, it's been a blast but a 4 year old and a 10 month old are a lot of work (especially as weather turned colder). I'm content to go back to work but I'd rather just take a week vacation and then another 3 months of paternity leave (if i could afford it).
7
@Anon. From a Boomer, GOOD FOR YOU!!! Unlike some of us who similar to our parents like to brag about walking 10 miles to school thru the driving snow, not needing a computer or iphone, many of the societal changes are positive and provide more equality and opportunity for people. I expect your generation will make improvements and show us Boomers what you are capable of. Then some day, when your kids are grown up, they will roll their eyes at your stories of the early days with pathetically inadequate computers and very limited cell phones. It is a cycle.
2
I am male and was provided with two weeks paid vacation by my employer. I intended to take the full amount of paid time off plus one additional week unpaid. For the first few days, I felt like I was truly helping. My wife was exhausted, and I was sorely needed to clean, cook, do laundry and do midnight runs for diapers. I was happy to help with all of these tasks. After the first week, she figured out how to do these things with baby in tow, or when baby was sleeping. I wasn't needed so much, and I was getting in my wife's way. One boss is better than two bosses who want the same task to be done differently. Since I wasn't welcome at home, I took the baby to "mommy and me" story time at the library. I went to "post-pregnancy yoga" class and other events outside the house where infants were welcomed but I was ostracized. I was the only male at these events. Women scowled at me, and I felt unwelcome. I was asked a few times why I would even go to these events (I thought the infant on my lap was an obvious answer). I wasn't welcome at home and I wasn't welcome outside of home. So I went back to work early.....
21
@Guy in VT That's unfortunate. I'm so sorry that you felt unwelcome in your own home and at events where you were trying to be supportive. The birth of a child certainly seems to upend the dynamic for many couples. It's one reason why I have decided to remain child free. I sincerely hope things improved or are improving for you now. Women and men (and nonbinary folks) need one another more than ever and it's laudable that you are making so much effort.
7
@Guy in VT That's unfortunate. I'm so sorry that you felt unwelcome in your own home and at events where you were trying to be supportive. The birth of a child certainly seems to upend the dynamic for many couples. It's one reason why I have decided to remain child free. I sincerely hope things improved or are improving for you now. Women and men (and nonbinary folks) need one another more than ever and it's laudable that you are making so much effort.
@Guy in VT
This.
When I took paid leave to watch my twin newborns a few years ago, I was also ostracized and/or ignored at extracurricular events by the other women, or treated with pity and sympathy. Plus, these events were oriented towards female participants (Mommy storytime) and men were discussed like they were all clueless idiots, at best.
Was I clueless? IDK but I was watching 2 kids pretty well while they were watching one, so you tell me.
Regardless, the women were definitely more judgmental then my male peers, who had no issue with an involved dad...not that they wanted to care for a pair of 2-month boys, and I get it! It's rewarding but a lot of work, and generally not fun. My wide and I both took paid leave because we didn't want to pay for full-time care until all the other options were exhausted.
3
I work for a company that provides 6 weeks of paid leave. I took it for both of my children, and both times I didn't take the full 6 weeks up front. It's not that I didn't want to, I loved the idea of spending time with my children when they were new, squishy, and cuddly. However, there wasn't much for me to do in those first few weeks. The babies are so dependent on mom for food. Chores, diapers, grocery shopping, and additional snuggle time could be done in off work hours.
We decided to take 2 weeks post delivery for myself and save the remaining 4 weeks to use as vacation time in 1-2 week chunks throughout the remaining year. That way I had more time to bond with them as they grew.
6
Three and a half weeks into my partially paid parental leave (courtesy of the State of California, not my employer), I got a call from my boss informing me that a colleague of mine had just quit, and they wanted me to attended a special training the following week in Denver as my colleague who just quit was originally supposed to go to the training. While I was told it was "my choice," I was also aggressively lobbied by HR about how getting this training would be a big help to my career, and the company. So in reality, the message was, you need to come back to work two weeks earlier than planned.
So I did what my company wanted, and only took four weeks to bond with my new son, even though that is not what I wanted to do. I'm sure there are thousands out there have experienced something similar.
21
@Michael
You'll bond with your son for years.
We raised 5 children, and have 12 grandkids. The kids are middle aged and the grandkids are mostly in their 20s.
I have always been close to all of my children, and, in fact, being a good father is my best accomplishment in life.
There is no need for a dad to be hanging around a newborn for weeks, all day long.
4
@Longue Carabine
I'm really curious what the heck you mean by 'no need for a dad to be hanging around a newborn for weeks..'
I guess newborns these days really can just raise themselves! Give me a break.
I commend you Michael. Ignore those who perpetuate the notion that fathers and mothers have different roles. Utterly absurd and patronizing.
5
@Longue Carabine No, but sometimes there's need for a husband to support his wife by helping her during those first weeks.
When I had my twins in 2013, one of the partners at my firm congratulated me and then in the next breath asked if I could fly out to New York and work from there for a month on a new case. I politely declined, making up some nonsense. That exchange reveals two things relevant here:
One, people at work assume that the man is NOT a caregiver, that someone else is taking care of his kids. So as a man you are always fighting that baseline assumption anytime you do assume the role of a caregiver, as I have co-equally with my wife, who also works full time.
Two, maybe it is all my perception, but I feel that if a woman is a caregiver, saying something about needing to take care of your kids is an acceptable excuse to leave work, but if a man is a caregiver, it is not. I mean that not in an official sense, but just how people feel about it when they hear it. I have to leave early every single day to go pick up my kids from school and every single day people are either surprised by it or make jokes about it. I don't know, I just don't think they would act that way towards a woman.
46
@Michael I am currently experiencing this exact situation at my job as a public school teacher.
5
Those that are commenting here about “the needs of the workplace” have completely drunk the KoolAid. If your organization dumps extra work on you and your coworkers when a team member takes leave, that’s on management. Don’t resent your coworkers, ask for a temp to help with the work load. Companies are making huge profits by squeezing workers and giving a meager paycheck in return.
What good are benefits if you don’t use them? No good, that’s what. You’re leaving money on the table by not using them. Companies need your talents as much as you need a paycheck.
There is definitely room in the budget to pay for a temp. Whether they do will portend the long term health and talent retention of the organization.
Life happens. People cannot be asked to forgo living because of the “need of the business.” People run these companies. It’s time we the value people that make these companies what they are. Family leave is just part of that.
52
True, and they manage to do this in other countries.
2
@Elli not all jobs are fungible. The amount of training required to get a temp up to speed can be prohibitive
4
@SDC If not fungible, then the employer would do well to treat that employee well and keep him happy lest they be faced with the expense and lost productivity to recruit and onboard his replacement.
If not fungible, all the more reason to provide flexible work arrangements to keep key employees happy.
3
This shouldn't be a surprise that one gender is genetically predisposed to caring for children and the other one for performing work and labor, despite the fact that this flies in the face of the modern progressive theology.
6
@Kev : Genetic predisposition is irrelevant. Regardless whether they're "predisposed" to it, men can, and do, learn to care for children. As reflected in the comments here, many men want to care for their children and take advantage of family leave to do so. By suggesting otherwise, you are actually insulting and hurting men.
10
@Kev
Citation needed. Thanks in advance.
5
@Kev 1) There is no scientific evidence to support this idea that women are "genetically predisposed" to caring for children. 2) There is nothing more like "performing work and labor" than caring for a small child. 3) I would like to point out that this article is commenting not just on the statistics about taking leave for child-rearing, but also for caring for aging or ill family members (e.g., elderly parents).
7
The thesis is wrong. It's not that men don't take all the time allotted but women do. It's that women get stuck doing these tasks but would not if they felt they had a choice
8
@FerCry'nTears That's the other side of the same coin. Both things are true, and inexorably interrelated.
Let me put it another way - most of the women I know that hold high positions in the workplace are not primary caregivers. Their husband, mother, nanny, etc. takes care of the kids, not them. The ones that are primary caregivers are largely in part time roles or at least not on the fast track work-wise.
We just need to decide as a society whether it should be that way or not. There is an issue of principle here that I think is not fully resolved that is driving everything - should society step up and allow a woman (or really both parents) to be both a primary caregiver and have a successful career, or do we think that there is just inherently a tradeoff that needs to be made between taking care of the kids and having a successful career?
8
@FerCry'nTears It's also possible that some women coopt the choices because they assume their male counterpart won't. I mean, it does happen sometimes.
1
@Michael There will always be a trade-off as long as it's women who do the caregiving. If men were doing it (if they had to), there would be no trade off. Companies would make space for their caregiving duties without derailing them from professional success.
Women are still willing to pay a personal price for some things that men will not pay a personal price for.
4
Leave is still unpaid leave for most people. When it’s so difficult to make ends meet, couples may make the cold hard calculation of whose salary they can afford to be without for a while, not just which of them is in the best position at work to take time off.
For many couples still today, that is still the husband or male partner. Even for dads who are eager to stay at home with the kids, it simply may not be financially feasible.
I’m happy to be a pioneer, though. After she graduates, my wife will probably be making 50% more than I will, and I will happily take family leave after our future kids are born and spend time with them.
5
My husband took the full leave available when I had our first born. At the time I asked him if he was afraid he would lose his job and his answer was that his family needed him more and there was always another job. He was willing to take the risk. It made a huge difference. He’s still employed and his relationship with his child is completely different then any of the dads we know who didn’t get that time. It was also a HUGE help to me. We both encourage Dads to take the time.
21
Another challenge with "signalling from the top" is that at my previous jobs, higher-ups of both sexes have all easily been able to afford a full-time nanny starting from day 1. "taking the time you need" when there is someone dedicated to to assisting you is obviously less difficult than when you are doing everything yourself, yet they seem shocked that you may require more time or can't stop on a dime while out to deal with a work emergency by handing your child off to the person trailing along behind you with wet wipes.
23
When my children were born, 1989 and 1993, there was no paid leave and we were lucky to have our jobs to come back to after 6 weeks away. Absolutely nothing for fathers. So we have made progress. My daughters work for companies that offer paid maternal and paternal leave, they complain about the additional workload on top of 50-60 hours already. To make this work, companies need to balance everyone's needs.
3
I like the idea of leave for fathers, but I’m not sure we’re all on the same page about the purpose. I have 2 children. My husband took 3 weeks off (vacation, sick time) when both were born. To me, the purpose is for the father to take care of the mom and the house, while mom takes care of the new baby. I want to be the one holding and nursing the baby, not handing her off to my husband. It would’ve been great for him to do that for longer than 3 weeks, but 3 weeks is fine. I think a lot of older men don’t understand that new mothers today need help because their wives probably had mothers or other family around, or just gritted their teeth and did it alone. Anyway, with the second baby, my husband’s role during his 3 weeks off was to take care of our toddler, but to be honest, he is not cut out to take care of a toddler all day for more than a couple days. He just does not have the patience. I think with the second baby we were all better off when dad went back to work.
13
@L, I can see why you posted this anonymously. :)
5
@L - But do you see where there might be some cause and effect between “not handing [the baby] off to my husband” and “he is not cut out to take care of a toddler all day”? If mothers aren’t giving fathers the chance to learn childcare skills, early and unsupported, then fathers won’t develop those skills. It doesn’t necessarily come naturally, especially if men subtly but repeatedly get the message that it’s not their job. That’s what some of these comments about men feeling useless are missing — by learning to become useFUL from the very start, fathers and mothers often end up transforming their whole parenting and marriage approach going forward in a way that’s more equal and healthier for everyone.
(Please note I’m not judging your choices. I’m a mom too, and I know we all do what works best for us at a difficult time. It’s just that I’ve read enough in this area lately to understand that structural problems and stereotypical gender roles mean “what works best for us” usually ends up at the same place, which is mom doing most or all of the care work.)
7
@L Hardly anyone is "cut out" to take care of a toddler full-time, especially when you haven't worked up to it by taking care of her the previous 2 years. We all develop patience we never know we had. But men can do it just as well as women. They may just have to try harder.
4
Let's not ignore that most employers, whether or not they offer paid leave for new fathers, still look at the use thereof as suspect. What is socially acceptable for women is not yet for men.
12
Nor should it be.
I’m going to take a different approach to this argument.
Before my retirement, I headed three departments in a billion-dollar corporation. Of course there were women who needed to take time off for childbirth, recovery, parenting. And I was happy for them, same as they were when my wife and I had children.
But it always meant that the rest of the staff, including me, would have to pick up the slack. If we had two women out, it really got crazy.
I can hear the naysayers telling me to get over it, but when you’re already working a 50-60 hour week, plus commuting, an additional hour per day becomes exhausting, and you start making work errors.
As for me, I think my company offered paternity leave. But I never pursued it. It was made very clear to the men that if they valued their career, they needed to erase paternity leave from their mind. Human Resources was well aware of it.
7
@David G
Did you ever think about hiring temp help when the women were out
15
@David G
Well your company had the money to hire and train temps and decided not to. Why?
14
@David G Sounds like you needed to hire more people instead of working 20 hours overtime.
25
We’ve just been through this exact situation, we’re fortunate in Australia to have great parental leave, my companies policy is 6 months paid parental leave for the primary carer. Before our baby was conceived we agreed my husband would take over looking after our child until she was 12 months once my leave entitlements finished up and I needed to head back to work -as my salary was over double his. But the reality was that my husband wasn’t prepared for how tough raising a child is, he’s amazing most of the time but finds it hard going in the times where it’s not obvious what’s causing our child to be upset (wind, hungry, wet nappy etc). I did the first six months caring so my skills have naturally developed further than his purely because I’ve had more practice. So it wasn’t money or career limiting reasons in our situation, he just balked at how it’s really hard work raising a kid all day and going to work is actually far easier.
He did end up taking one day off a week to look after our daughter, which has been amazing for everyone, he is a wonderful Dad and plans amazing weekly trips for them - he just also has to have an afternoon nap as he’s exhausted at the end of the day!
7
@Charlotte see, this is why men keep working and women take care of the children - because men don't want to do it (because it's hard and gains them no status) and someone has to.
1
@Charlotte I'm starting to be kind of sad and annoyed at all the "He participates 10 percent of the time in child-rearing - he's a GREAT dad."
That is not a great dad. If you don't have the patience, learn the patience. A great dad is "there" 100% of the time, not just when it's convenient for him.
6
@Charlotte It's too bad he didn't persevere through the six months. He would have learned so much. It's hard for mothers, too, to start taking care of an infant on day one. At least her father was not recovering from pregnancy and childbirth, when he took over the responsibility for a six-month old.
1
The answer to this question is very short: Because they are afraid they will lose their jobs. Same reason people don't use their vacation time. We live in a mercenary society. People are afraid of showing any signs if weakness or reduced productivity.
86
@Patrick, I think this is a very good point that deserves to be echoed.
In my state job, with a strong union, I have no worry about job security were I to take family leave. Even if I were to get stink-eye, I could easily brush it off.
But in my previous job, without any kind of strong union backing, had I tried to take family leave I would have been sidetracked on a great many future projects and opportunities.
15
@Patrick Happens to women all the time - heard of the mommy track? But we do it because someone has to.
23
@Patrick There may be some people who don't use their vacation time, but many do. In academia, we don't get vacation time, but my father was an R&D engineer and always took all of his, and my brother is an engineer who always takes all of his. Of course, they don't take it all in one large chunk, but don't most white collar workers take at least one week-long vacation a year?
My brother took paternity leave when his newborn was ready to come home from the hospital before his wife. A layoff was hovering and his boss suggested he get back to the office. He couldn't and got laid off. So, then he had a newborn, a sick wife still in the hospital and no job.
86
"Subtle messages about what's expected at work?" I work in a bank. We were told in no uncertain terms by a male superior, off the record of course, that we could forget promotions if we took time off to care for our kids. That deterred at least three men in a ten-person team from taking leave.
The only partial way around that, aside from cultural change, is giving more leave if fathers take time off, too, like they do in Sweden.
25
Women have been told this for years. Our response is “just watch me”. Time to stand up for what you want guys!
7
@Stephanie yeah just watch me and then watch me get mommy tracked.
7
@MSB : But if men do it too, there won't be a "mommy track."
1
Simply, taking 6 weeks off of work seems indulgent. Why would a man need six weeks off to acclimate to fatherhood? Why would you not be penalized among your co-workers for disappearing for six weeks? Quite frankly, it seems an absurd conversation.
5
@Edward Recovery from childbirth takes six to eight weeks for women. During that time, she's typically also getting little sleep, and her body is still busy producing breast-milk. Support from a partner can make all the difference in the world for mothers.
Not to mention, fathers wish to bond with their newborn babies and also face sleep deprivation themselves, if they're hands-on. It makes sense to allow fathers to focus on their new child.
My husband was able to take three weeks off after the birth of our kids, all saved up vacation time, as there was no additional leave for parents. He was heart-broken to go back to the office each time, and I would have loved for him to have had more.
37
@Edward Wow. When my baby was born, parenting was absolutely more than a full-time job for both me and my spouse for more than six weeks, not to mention that neither of us was getting enough sleep to function well at work. This comment reflects either a failure to understand how all-consuming a newborn - even a healthy, full-term newborn - can be, or a misguided assumption that all a father is doing is "acclimating" in some philosophical way, as opposed to sharing the work and responsibility of being a parent to a tiny human being who relies on caring adults for survival.
46
@Edward writes: "Why would a man need six weeks off to acclimate to fatherhood?"
Ummm, maybe because that's not the purpose of leave.
11
When an employee (whatever the gender, whatever the circumstances) takes extended leave, there's two outcomes: either the work needs to get done and is done by someone else, or the work never really needed to get done in the first place.
In the jungle that is the 21st century workplace, I would not want to put such an obvious target on my back, discrimination laws notwithstanding.
37
@Andy Deckman No one wants to. But people have sick children, elderly parents, etc. In other words, people are human. Something corporations love to forget.
1
The reality is, men would rather be in the office with their business buddies than take care of an elderly parent or young child. Many of them actually enjoy their work, but regard caring for someone as an onerous and unpleasant task. Millions of years of evolution have provided men with different tastes and priorities than women, and that's not going to change quickly.
11
@Jonathan as a man myself that is... insane? There is never a scenario in which I would rather be at work with my “business buddies” than out of it. My friends can visit me at home where we are not being paid to let an owner take the fruits of our labor in the form of profit.
20
I feel the same way often but life comes with responsibilities that you don’t always enjoy but your family and community need.
9
@Jonathan Do you have anything to back up what you are saying?
What you are saying about millions of years of evolution in regards to evolution is simply not true.
3
Very simple explanation - corporations are still living in the age of Ward and June Cleaver and generally have a brutal set of "unwritten rules" that go against raising a family. If a man takes paid leave, he is considered not as driven and ambitious as they guy who is going to put in the face time, no matter what the former accomplishes.
13
@DeeBee And since women will take care of their children and parents regardless of this stigma, they are second-tracked.
1
Subtle signs at work? REALLY? They're subtle if you consider getting someone's attention by hitting them with a two by four between the eyes. Sexism is alive and well in the United States.
51
If more men were involved in the raising of a baby, and women indeed were wholly responsible for life/choice pregnancy (rather than men), then perhaps, if not likely, couples qua humanity would focus on the actual issue: should we have a baby(s) or not?
Too many kids born today to parents who believe you just have a few, put tech in their hands, and send them on their way. Too many parents who think "kids" is merely a bucket-list line item to check off.
Too little thought. Too much ego. Lots of stupidity.
Harsh? So is the world. Look at it. We can label generation after generation and blame those who came before, but ultimately, it is your PARENTS who have created your world, so consider that before you decide to be a parent.
Perhaps you'd rather not. And that is a perfectly fine choice.
And for many, it is a really rational, wise choice.
2
How does biology not factor into this at all? Obviously if you have two parents and they're both getting partially paid leave, the one who didn't have to give birth is the one who goes back the soonest.
Most paid leave is only 50-80% of income, not fully paid. Men don't give birth.
This isn't rocket science.
25
@T. Although that's true, women still don't get paid leave in the United States. Shouldn't the woman get help from the man especially since it took two people to make that new being that needs to be fed and changed every 1 to 2 hours? Also, yes, biology...we carried that baby for 9 months and then pushed it out of our bodies, so why can't he take the little paid leave he's allotted to to help the sleep, energy, nutrient deprived woman.
13
@Ann Because employers are far more likely to unemploy men who take advantage of leave than women. Courts are inclined to doubt there is gender discrimination against men. And like it or not, on average, women ultimately value a man based on what he contributes economically to the house. From my observation of divorce cases, most women will not tolerate an unemployed husband for more than a few months. Bottom line: men are in a double bind when it comes to taking family leave. Women say they want the physical help, but god help the man who risks his job to help out.
1
Time off benefits at many white collar jobs are often benefits that are difficult to fully enjoy because organizations wind up penalizing employees who take all their leave.
It's almost never overt, but implicit in the work culture. Desirable projects get reassigned to other employees on the basis of their time-sensitivity or other work flow reasons, and returning employees lose these opportunities permanently.
Common issues or problems in work-in-progress or recently completed that would be "solved" without dispute turn into larger issues because management or co-workers don't want to get stained by "someone else's problem" and then the worker on leave gets the accumulated blame for problems they were unavailable to fix.
I took the 2 weeks leave when my son was born, and was forced to go on site twice to deal with problems because management insisted and I was afraid of the consequences.
Men taking less or shorter leave might also have cultural explanations -- maybe men, on the whole, are just less interested in child care. They do it full time for a week or so and find out it is unappealing to them, and then use work as a justification to not do it. It may not be entirely gender related, either, as I had a woman say she was glad to not be a full time mom anymore once her leave was over and she was able to put the baby into childcare. Childcare is hard and often demanding.
17
@Mobocracy When my son was born prematurely three weeks early, a female executive insisted that I complete my handover notes immediately in order to take my two weeks of paid paternity leave. So I spent the rest of the day doing just that before checking out to take on my parental responsibilities. Messaging from leadership is critical for men to feel that they can focus on parenthood when a child is born.
10
Since we are indulging in somewhat cliched gender traits, let me suggest another one: men are more task oriented than women. If true, then I can imagine that more men approach care-giving with specific goals and timelines, which might lead to shorter leave periods.
1
@Bob Krantz While you admit it is a cliché, I find it puzzling because it is so opposite of my lived experience. In my (heterosexually partnered) home, I'm the one with the to-do lists of items getting crossed off one by one, setting deadlines and parameters for work getting done.
I'm also in a home where my spouse is the one with a deep desire to parent from home and reduce work hours though, so perhaps I'm an anomaly.
8
@Bob Krantz I'm sorry but this makes absolutely no sense. You cannot approach caring for another human being with "specific goals and timelines." - the work goes on as long as one of you is alive. Yes there are tasks - feeding, bathing, etc. But you do it today and you have to do it again tomorrow. There's no - I'll wrap this up in 3 weeks vs. six. People aren't projects.
10
@Bob Krantz But we aren't indulging in cliches. And I would like to see evidence of that clearly sexist claim.
The Upshot treats this differential in men and women as if it were a big mystery, despite its being clear as daylight:
"The biggest hurdle seems to be financial... 87 percent of respondents said not being able to afford to take leave was a reason that men didn’t take it...
"Men also receive subtle messages about what’s expected of them at work. Whether senior male leaders take leave, whether managers encourage it, and whether colleagues are penalized for it.."
The United States needs to offer paid family and medical leave to all working people, fund it properly, including by corporations, and also guarantee workers' previous jobs and salaries when they return. Just as does every other developed country on the planet.
It's no mystery. It's not hard.
51
@Sean
Not hard? Who does the work of the person on leave? Do coworkers have to take on additional work, perhaps putting in extra hours? Do companies hire (and train) temps--and then what happens to temps when people return from leave? Do they have job claim rights, too?
9
@Bob Krantz When women go on maternity leave the long-term replacements typically get (in my experience) the job vacated by whoever else at the company inevitably leaves mid-leave. More to the point, people should put in a few extra hours if needed but staffing should not be such that this drives someone from 100 hours a week into physically impossible territory--it should, like the rest of the civilized world, perhaps bump us from 35-40 to 40-42.
5
@Bob Krantz Who does the work, the staff that is in the office daily. Hire Temps for coverage, I wish. Over a career of 40 years this November, I have done 10 maternity leaves. I was never giving back, since I never had children. Extra pay, no. Overtime, plenty of hours, but I was professional staff so OT pay.
Of course, absences effect a career. The staff in the office getting the job done and being professional about it, certainly may get a better raise then the employee who was absent for months.
Anyone not taking all leave available is totally understandable.
4
I suggest you study how many men that actually took such leave still had their job a year later versus those that didn’t. I am sure you’ll find that leave isn’t as protected as you think/hope it is.
92
@Jeff The American male needs to get his head back on straight and take back his worker rights. The company is not a spouse, the company should not run all aspects of humanity... Slavery is supposed to be over in the U.S.
Men need to man up and take back their worker rights in the U.S.
2