-
-
Can’t we have a similar approach to Sweden where both get something like 9 months each? There must be a way round this so it’s fair and economically viable.
-
That would be good if it's doable. I don't know enough about economics to know how this would be paid for.
-
That doesn't say either. I'd feel guilty about it when resources for the elderly are already so limited and disability living allowance being cut and so many low income families reliant on food banks. If I could see a breakdown which doesn't take provision from anywhere else...
-
If our governments can find money for war they can sure as shit find money to actually help people.
-
I don't really know what that means, tbh. If money could be safely cut from defence, I'd like it to go to the NHS, services for the elderly, more tax credits for low income families. It shouldn't come to pay me to care for my own child.
-
Then is motherhood not valuable at all? How is elderly and sick care valuable but not motherhood? Why would we pay for someone else to care for our children but we shouldn’t get paid to care for our own children?
-
Yes, of course it is. Because elderly and sick people cannot care for themselves. Because they're our children.We are responsible for them. Obviously, I am not talking about people who can't work and provide for their kids or who do but still need help. No money should come to me
- 8 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Fathers should also have leave, but mothers have the boobs and go through pregnancy and birth and breastfeeding. It takes our bodies two years to fully recover from this. Our recovery and bonding with the child takes precedence.
-
Recovery, yes. Bonding, no. That's important for both.
-
There is primary and secondary bonding. It is most important, biologically speaking, to be close to the mother. Secondary bonds develop with the father when he is home or during the paternity leave, which should coincide with mom’s leave so the family can bond together as a unit.
-
Is there evidence of this? If we were able to have a second one, it would have been my husband who wanted to be main carer. He's a lot better at it and enjoys it more. More nurturing.
-
I wasn’t implying that we shouldn’t have a choice on who stays home. That should definitely be up to each couple. One of my best friends works and her husband stayed home. She makes more. Her husband is an excellent dad. My SO is an excellent dad but he makes six times what I do.
-
I also want to stay home with my baby as I do not want to pay others to raise my children for me. I was working at my oldest son’s Montessori school, which I still sometimes get called in to work for substitution. But I can bring my baby with me for that, so I am lucky.
-
That's a bit all or nothing tho. I didn't get other people to raise my child for me. I was still her primary parent. I just had my own interests and work too.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The employer doesn’t pay all of your salaries. Other countries have excellent approaches to maternity leave. We pay enough in corporate welfare and military bloating. Why isn’t this a worthy endeavor:https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/countries-with-best-parental-leave-2016-8 …
-
I got 12 weeks paid maternity leave in the UK. I think going much over that would be a bit cheeky.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.