Parental leave

[slemslempike]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12204525

Great - encouraging more fathers to take a primary carer role. It could be a really good move by the government to help change the way that childcare happens.


But:

1) "fathers will be able to share maternity leave with their wives" - Is it really only open to married couples? If so, that's appalling, and if not, the BBC should damn well know better than to write it.

2) "when she asked me I was more than happy to do it" - it's still presenting the responsibility for looking after babies as for women, who can choose to delegate it to (male) partner if they wish, rather than as a joint decision and responsbility. (Also that when his wife went back to work she wrote him loads of lists, so he didn't have the task of working out what to do - that's more of a handover thing, perhaps, but in context it grates.)

3) It's all about male/female probably married couples - can same-sex partners share? (I've also just realised that I don't know what happens for leave when the parents are men now, and whether this is something that could be improved.)

Comments

[felinitykat]

I can help a bit in terms of legalities if a couple are adopting a child, though I don't know the situation if, eg, a same-sex couple use a surrogate.

In terms of adoption, this is from one of the employment law briefings (emphasis on 'brief'!) that my company writes and maintains. It's actually all I can find about adoption.

"An employee who adopts a child qualifies for adoption leave and adoption pay on similar grounds to those for maternity leave and maternity pay. Where a couple adopt a child, only one can claim adoption leave and pay. The other can claim paternity leave and paternity pay, regardless of gender, provided he or she qualifies." ('Qualification' in this context means having worked for the company for the requisite period of time.)

[chiasmata]

Yes, this is my understanding of it, too, based on Ox Uni's rules. (It's amazing what I find to read when I'm meant to be working...)

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

My employer's webpage states: "An employee who is married to, or the partner of, an expectant mother or adoptive parent (or the joint adopter who will not have the main caring responsibilities for the child), is entitled to claim University paternity or birth and adoption support leave, if s/he meets the qualifying criteria. All men and women employed by the University who meet the relevant qualifying provisions, and regardless of their staff group, grade or hours worked, will be eligible for the provisions of the University paternity or birth and adoption support scheme." It also mentions that the "parental leave" bit can be taken by a legal guardian. There's nothing to indicate that there would be any difference with a same-sex couple, so when addiitonal paternity leave comes in, I'd expect that to be the same, too.

I imagine rules around leave following surrogacy would depend on whether the mother were relinquishing all rights to the child and it was a "complete" adoption (though she'd still get her maternity leave), or whether the mother would retain parental rights, in which case if, say, one of a male couple were the child's biological father, he could claim the additional paternity leave, but not adoption leave?

[simply-fly-away.livejournal.com]

My husband would absolutely love to be the one to take any leave given when we have children (in fact he's currently campaigning unsuccessfully for me go to work whilst he handles childcare full-time), I'll be the one tell him to "GO BACK TO WORK!" after two weeks. I don't know if this makes me any less of a feminist or simply proves that he drives me insane when he's underfoot.

(Not that he wouldn't be a brilliant stay-at-home-dad, but I would live in constant fear of coming home one day to find they had built a nuclear generator in our backyard. It just wouldn't be good for my stress levels. Or our relationship with our neighbours.)

[steepholm.livejournal.com]

Yep - I had the same questions and irritations - especially with q.2, for many of the same reasons as this did.

On question 1, I've heard news reports saying that the mother can choose to share the leave "with the father", rather than specifically with "her husband". But I imagine that must be a casual shorthand too, since I doubt the father would be entitled to leave if, say, he lived in a different part of the country. (On the other hand, what about surrogate mothers? Do they get maternity leave even though they're not doing childcare? I've never thought to wonder about that before...)

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

Maternity leave can be claimed for stillbirths after 24 weeks, so I'm sure it is available for surrogate mothers, just as if a woman gave up a child for adoption without it being part of a surrogate arrangement.

[antisoppist.livejournal.com]

This report says "partners" rather than husbands and wives. But I don't see why flexible working has to be extended to grandparents just to make men feel OK about taking it.

About time too, though too late for me, but the reaction from companies is depressing. Our more equitable childcare plans were originally scuppered by my husband's employer sending out a memo saying "you are now entitled to ask for flexible working but we wish to inform you that any such requests will not be granted". It needs legislation.

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

So it is the BBC being rubbish then, which is better than the alternative.

How charming of your husband's employer.

[cangetmad.livejournal.com]

It's the BBC being rubbish, given that the current thing (Maternity Support Leave not Paternity Leave, actually) is open to the mother's partner, or the baby's father if he is involved in the baby's life. Or, um, if you're my family, both. So I can't imagine that the new arrangements legally could be more restrictive.