Paid Maternity Leave
Find a Conversation
| Mon, 08-25-2008 - 5:26pm |
This week, I mailed off 7 copies of a maternity reform bill I designed. I sent the copies to my state legislature, governor and US legislatures, as well as one of the presidential candidates. The best part of my bill is that it provides for extended paid and unpaid time off for both mothers and fathers without costing extra to the government or companies. If anyone really wanted to take the time to look at it, I believe it would really make everyone happy and be very workable.
Since I know it takes awhile for anything to get done in the government, I though I would send a copy of the bill to you. If you like it and think it could work, please feel free to pass it on and encourage others to send it to their legislators. The most important thing is to get it instituted as quickly as possible. I am just one person. There is only so much I can do alone. But with others, perhaps we could get somewhere. Below is the content of my bill (worded for US legislators). Only a couple of minor rewordings are needed for state representatives. Thank you for your time.
Pregnancy/Maternity Reform Bill (Roland's Bill)
An Act Relating To Pregnancy/Maternity Reform in the Workplace. Premature births are on the rise in the United States. Approximately 1 out of every 8 babies born each year are premature. This increases medical expenses and leads to several long term health complications, including developmental problems that may not be noticed until years later. There are many contributing factors, but insufficient work leave/compensation exasperates an already complicated situation. Mothers must choose between getting the rest they need to carry their child healthfully to term and providing for their families financially. Anxiety over this lack of a choice creates a great many health problems that would not otherwise exist.
Current FMLA guidelines allow mothers and fathers to take up to 12 weeks of job protected leave for the birth of a child or an adoption. This is limited to people who have worked with their company for at least one year, have met the hours requirement of at least 1,250 hours worked the previous year and whose company employees over 50 employees within a 75 mile radius. That is approximately 60 percent of U.S. workers. This is unpaid leave, helpful for job security, but not helpful for people who cannot afford to take a pay cut for several months. Companies are not required to offer more than this. Though many do offer paid maternity/paternity leave, most do not pay for more than 6 weeks, and many companies require employees to use any vacation or sick time accrued, to be included in that 6 week period. Six weeks is the typical recovery period needed for a woman after childbirth. This short amount of time does not take into consideration time needed for bonding with the child, doctor appointments and immunizations, many of which occur after 6 weeks, time for breastfeeding mothers to adequately transition to pumping and bottle feeding, extended hospital stays for the baby and any bed rest needed before the child is born. Women going on bed rest before their due date must start their 12 weeks of FMLA and any company paid leave at that time. Early bed rest could add up to where the leave is exhausted before birth even occurs, leaving the mother forced to return to work almost immediately after the child is born, before she has recovered and had an opportunity to bond with her child. Fathers whose company does not offer paid paternity leave are often unable to afford to take off the time allowed under FMLA. They are forced to miss out on the initial bonding period afforded to the mother. Once the mother returns to work, if other company leave was included in her maternity leave, she will not get paid for time off to take the child to doctor appointments or for any illness she or her child may suffer for the rest of the year.
Also to consider is the difficulty and inconvenience of continuing to breastfeed once a woman has returned to work. Although some women continue to pump and breastfeed their children, not all women can afford to buy a good pump to use, and limitations of appropriate pumping areas at work may force mothers to stop breastfeeding sooner than they intended. Some women are forced to pump in bathrooms and many experience pressure from employers who do not want their employees unavailable several times a day while they are pumping. Many women experience criticism and lack of support from employers and coworkers who feel uncomfortable with pumping taking place around them. The health benefits of breast milk are well documented. If women were able to stay home for longer after the birth of their child, women who choose to breastfeed all of that time would be more able to do so. Even if they decided to discontinue breastfeeding upon return to work, that extra time would make a big difference in the overall health of the child, illnesses experienced by the child and subsequent doctor appointments the parents would need to miss work for later.
Some companies offer generous leave pay options, but that is not the norm, and it is not guaranteed. If the mother decides not to return to work, she does not receive any of the leave she earned and healthcare benefits cease at the time she needs them most, leading many women with no desire or intention of returning to work to wait until the last minute to inform their employer or returning for a brief time only to leave shortly after, leaving employers with little time to adjust to their loss. Although the guidelines under FMLA have helped many families, they are not enough. The current rules do not alleviate enough of the pressures felt by working mothers. Further action is needed to address the increase in prematurity and other health concerns faced by working parents and their children.
1.

Pages
<>
Sorry Janet but you lost me on this statement.
Umm it could be a rider on medical insurance and those who want to pay extra for it can. Why should I have to pay for L&D of other peoples children? Why should
Ivf I agree. But instead we have insurance mandates many of those who don't want or need this benefit that is not in any way related to ones overall health/longevity must help pay for. This in turn makes their premiums unaffordable and so they chose to go without coverage.
an American's main priority appears to be "looking out for number one".
I know this is off topic but I have a link you may find interesting.
I am not sure I am replying to the correct person here, but wanted to say that there are so many health care plans to choose from, so you only have to pay for what you require.
That's a good observation. It's why capitalism works best.
system recognizes that man will always look out for his own best interest as it's human nature to do. It also doesn't demonize the point but instead recognizes that in allowing that natural tendency to take it's course everyone is better off.
>>The essential nature of capitalism is social harmony through the pursuit of self-interest. Under capitalism, the individual's pursuit of his own economic self-interest simultaneously benefits the economic self-interests of all others. In allowing each individual to act unhampered by government regulations, capitalism causes wealth to be created in the most efficient manner possible which ultimately raises the standard of living, increases the economic opportunities, and makes available an ever growing supply of products for everyone. The free-market operates in such a way so that as one man creates more wealth for himself, he simultaneously creates more wealth and opportunities for everyone else, which means that as the rich become richer, the poor become richer. It must be understood that capitalism serves the economic self-interests of all, including the non-capitalists.
Contrary to widely held beliefs, capitalism is not a system which exploits a large portion of society for the sake of a small minority of wealthy capitalists. Ironically, it is actually socialism that causes the systematic exploitation of labor. Since the socialist state holds a universal monopoly on labor and production, no economic incentive exists for the socialist state to provide anything more than minimum physical subsistence for the workers except to perhaps prevent riots or revolutions. Exploitation is inherent to the nature of socialism because individuals cannot live for their own sake, rather, they exist merely as means to whatever ends the socialist rulers -- the self-proclaimed spokesman of "society," may have in mind.<<
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Politics/Articles/Capitalism/capit-2.htm
I am not speaking of state health insurance, but private, whether it be a stand alone plan or through a company.
Pages