Women's Rights

Next Year, Give Mom The Gift of Maternity Leave

Published May 14, 2009 @ 04:59PM PT

Today, we have a special guest post from an avid reader and commentor here at Change.org - Criss L. Cox. Criss has jumped into the conversation at the Change.org Women's Rights blog many times and I felt it was time for her to get her own post. Criss is a teacher by day, blogger by night and freelance translator in between, who can usually be found procrastinating on Twitter. She was born and raised in Chile and feels strongly about reproductive rights, immigration issues and her conflicting views with the Catholic Church. You may read her ranting and rambling at http://blog.crisswrites.com or follow her on Twitter @CrissWrites.

***

Mother's Day has come and gone, and while I'm sure moms loved the flowers and cards and macaroni necklaces, wouldn't it be nice if we could we give them something a little more... substantial? Like, decent, paid maternity leave?

Thanks to the Family Medical Leave Act here in the US women can take up to 12 weeks of leave a year without losing their jobs, but that's also without pay, unless you happen to have 12 weeks of vacation time saved up. Some employers do offer paid maternity leave, but those are few and far between, and I can assure you this perk is not available in lower-paying jobs.

Some women get around the unpaid issue by taking out disability insurance the year they plan to get pregnant - this was actually suggested to me by the insurance company's rep when I asked about maternity leave. Because that's what childbirth is, a disability. Isn't that a lovely message to send?

Now, I haven't birthed a child yet myself, but for the past two years I've watched my sister go through the ordeal. It's not a walk in the park, and she didn't even have any complications from her pregnancy. My nephew did cause a few problems after he was born - when he was three days old he had jaundice, and had to be in the hospital for three days. He probably doesn't remember much of those days, but they were utter hell on his mother.

When he was two months old, he had to go back to the hospital for an entire week thanks to a urinary tract infection. My sister's lucky enough that she was not working at the time, but most mothers can't afford that luxury (I won't be able to, when I have my little ones). If you've done the math, you've realized two months is past the traditional six-week maternity leave time frame.

A friend of mine is currently in the hospital on mandatory bedrest until her triplets are born. She's been there 2-3 weeks already, and the doctors are hoping she and the babies make it another 3 weeks before they're born... so that's six weeks of maternity leave gone before the babies are show up.

Six weeks of unpaid maternity leave is a joke. If the United States is such a progressive country, how can we be treating our mothers this way?

I didn't think much of it until I came across this blog post, asking the readers if pregnant women deserved special job protection (a touchy subject in this economy), and the first commenter mentioned that Chile, that skinny little country all the way down there in South America, has some extremely mom-friendly labor laws concerning maternity leave.

According to the Chilean Embassy, maternity benefits in Chile include:

  • State subsidized maternity leave for six weeks prior and twelve weeks subsequent to birth; in the case of death in childbirth or during postnatal leave the father has the same rights.
  • Special subsidized leave for mothers in case of specific illness of a child less than one year old; transferable to the father at her option.

But folks, that's not all! In Chile, women do have special job protection:

"Chilean women are further protected by Article 186 of the law that prohibits employers from firing pregnant women and making it illegal to fire a woman who has taken maternity leave for up to a year after she has finished this leave. Article 187 prohibits pregnant women from doing any heavy work or taking on a night shift."

That's six weeks before the child is born, plus twelve more after it's arrived. 18 weeks of paid maternity leave, offered by a country your average American (USian, I should say) would classify as "third world" because it's in Latin America. Latin American culture is generally considered male-dominated and chauvinistic, and "behind the times" when it comes to women's rights... but Chile's pretty much left us progressive US citizens in the dust, hasn't it? (PS: they also have a woman president.)

So, my friend with the triplets? She should have moved to Chile before getting pregnant. I haven't asked the details of her maternity leave arrangements, but I'll bet you a year's worth of diapers (yes, for all three kids) that it's not as cushy as what a mom in Santiago gets.

And as if that weren't enough, she doesn't have to worry about losing her job because of cut-backs of lay-offs or because she's taking too much time off to sit with her child in the hospital while he's receiving IV treatments for a UTI. If she does get laid off, the company must pay her salary for a year after she returns (or would have returned) from maternity leave.

The United States needs to realize that while we may have been ahead of other countries when it came to women's rights and other issues, we have not kept it up. Other countries are catching up and leaving us in the dust. If you really meant what Hallmark printed on that card you gave Mom last Sunday, let's do something about it and ask our government to take care of our new moms

Share this Post

Related Posts

Comments (9)

  1. C W

    There are several issues presented here including:
    1  Protected UNPAID maternity/parental leave,
    2  Pay/financial support during maternity/parental leave.

    The U.S. Census Bureau projects a 40% population increase by the year 2050, and states that 71.7% of U.S. women (responsibly) complete their families with two or fewer biological children. Therefore, UNPAID parental leave should be in effect only for the births of the first or second child. This unpaid leave should be available for 24 weeks for both the mother and father (or the mother and partner), and may run sequentially. 

    Employers should not be responsible for paying people who are not working, and doing so is unfair to working employees. However, a basic subsidy for parental leave could be paid from the parents' social security account for the births of the first or second child.


    Posted by C W on 05/15/2009 @ 04:13AM PT

  2. Thomas McHugh

    Really ?

    So with this attitude...If in the majority...A wannabe mother would have to choose between working or becomming a mother which because of how things are for most couples financialy really aint much of a choice at all...

    Now...How is that logical or even right ?

    Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/05/2009 @ 08:49PM PT

  3. Reply to thread
  4. Shannon Turlington

    I believe the US is behind most of the rest of the world when it comes to nantionally mandated maternity leave. I work for a nonprofit that provides maternal health services mostly in Africa. With the exception of a couple of countries, most of the countries where we work have more progressive maternal leave policies than we do! This is a question of valuing employers and business over all else in our culture, despite politicians' claims to support family values.

    Posted by Shannon Turlington on 05/15/2009 @ 05:05AM PT

  5. Alexis Hinde

    Canada is not without its problems, but I am so grateful to be a new mom here - 50 weeks of paid maternity leave is standard across the country. (Paid for not by employers, but by federal unemployment insurance, premiums for which are deducted from every employee's pay cheque.)

    Mine ends tomorrow.

    Posted by Alexis Hinde on 05/15/2009 @ 06:59AM PT

  6. Lisa Smolen

    I am self-employed and could not afford to take any time off for the birth of my child.  Thankfully, my baby was born on Tuesday after Columbus day, so I at least had the holiday weekend off before he was born.  I was back to work 2 weeks later.

    The sad thing is my husband was still working (he wasn't given any sort of paternity leave - he had to use up precious sick days - so he was able to only be with me while i was in the hospital) but without my added income, we still felt the crunch. 

    It was difficult making it just those 2 weeks without pay, I don't know how women can afford to do it any longer than that.

    Posted by Lisa Smolen on 05/15/2009 @ 08:22AM PT

  7. Thomas McHugh

    And the thing about it is miss smolen...

    That shouldnt be the case...

    Money should never be more important than the health of any countrie's citizens.

    Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/05/2009 @ 08:52PM PT

  8. Reply to thread
  9. JJ Keith

    Before I had my baby I was an adjunct college instructor that worked on semester to semester contracts. I simply wasn't offered a teaching post the semester I was due. I don't know if the decision was based on my big belly (discriminatory) or just lack of positions available. Some of both I imagine, but I'd never be able to prove it either way. I had no maternity leave. I am simply out of work. I can't afford not to work, but I also can't afford to pay for childcare. 
    As grim as my finances are, I still prefer being broke to having to go back to work right after the birth. I mean, hell, even most kittens get six weeks with their moms before being adopted. Can't American women be afforded the same luxury as our pets? 

    Posted by JJ Keith on 05/18/2009 @ 08:39PM PT

  10. Thomas McHugh

    They should be miss keith...

    In fact, Im convinced that if we truly made the health and welfare of our citizens the number 1 priority it should be in fact rather than just in lip service then our nation would be much better off than it is now.

    Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/05/2009 @ 08:55PM PT

  11. Reply to thread
  12. Thomas McHugh

    Your right miss cox...

    The united states is still behind the times...

    And whats really sad is that, in this as in other areas...

    It clearly illustrates what the priorities of the elite are and they definatly aint for mother's or children...

    Pathetic.

    Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/05/2009 @ 08:45PM PT

Add a Comment

For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

close

This user's Profile page is not public. They have restricted it to only their friends.

Already a Member?

Create an Account

You must create a Change.org account to complete this action.
If you already have an account click here.