Entry 6: Paid Maternity Leave in the US
"Other countries offer paid maternity leave because they're facing reality — we have our head in the sand."
- Joan Williams
- Joan Williams
Paid maternity leave: something that is guaranteed to women in all but two countries. In Canada, paid maternity leave is not perfect, but new mothers can take up to a year of paid maternity leave.
Having a child can take enormous physical and financial tolls on new mothers. Without paid maternity leave, mothers lose time for their bodies to recover, time to bond with and care for their babies, and can face financial crisis. Surprisingly, one of the two countries that does not offer paid maternity leave is a country that prides itself in its level of development and being a mother to its people. That country is the United States of America. In the United States, women are allowed 12 weeks of unpaid leave. This meager “maternity leave”, though, comes with some pretty heavy restrictions. It only applies to full-time workers who work at a company with 50 or more employees. These women must also have been working for the company for at least a year. To match the 12 weeks of unpaid maternity leave offered by the US, only 12% of all Americans have access to paid leave. These women must either live in California, Rhode Island, or New Jersey- the only states that offer paid maternity leave- or must work at a company that offers paid maternity leave voluntarily. Otherwise, new moms are simply out of luck. What does “out of luck” look like for new moms in the United States? Well my dear sirs, it looks a little like the story of Letitia Camire. Letitia Camire entered this stage of her life in the worst possible way (not that being pregnant or having a baby was unfortunate, only the situation in which she was pregnant). Letitia had been working at her new job for one week when she discovered that she was pregnant. Shortly after telling her boss that she was pregnant, the company where she worked terminated her job in a reorganization move. A likely story. When she tried to find employment elsewhere, she was met with great difficulty. Fortunately, she was able to find work. Unfortunately, being a new employee she did not qualify for the company’s short-term disability insurance. And so, like many mothers, Letitia took only nine weeks off of work: using up her sick days, vacation days, and temporarily relying on her husband’s income and credit cards financially. Many mothers also choose to quit the work force entirely to take care of their newborn child. Some knowledge claims that can be made about this issue is that:
(a) Maternity leave is very important to the health of mothers and babies; (b) Financial concerns greatly affect American mothers’ abilities to take maternity leave; (c) It is unethical to force mothers to return to work so shortly after they have given birth. What logic drives the prevention of maternal health in the United States? It's all about the money, at least I’m pretty sure… Legislators and senators voting against paid maternity leave claim that it is anti-business, anti-growth, and would mean more taxes. Would it, though? According to a survey done in California that is the exact opposite of the impact maternity leave has on businesses. In a survey where business owners in California were asked about the “adverse” effects of maternity leave, 91% said that maternity leave had either positive or no effects on their business. Logically, it makes sense that maternity leave would have adverse effects on businesses and tax payers. An employee leaving means that the company must take care of her/his pay, take on a new employee, and allow the employee on maternity leave to return work after her maternity leave has concluded. Paid maternity leave also would seem to mean an increase in taxes. As mentioned above, though, the only effects of paid maternity are healthier mothers in more sound financial situations. Although it seems logical to deny women maternity leave, any argument that refutes the evidence becomes illogical. What then is most illogical: forcing new mothers to either return to work or struggle financially during the first stage of motherhood or to implement legislation that benefits American mothers and has no real adverse effects anywhere they are implemented. Other WOK's and AOK's that can be applied to this issue include math as paid maternity leave is debated mostly for the monetary gains and losses for mothers and businesses on both sides of the issue; reason as it is clear that the senators are being unreasonable in preventing America from moving forward with the world by granting paid maternity leave; and the natural sciences as paid maternity leave means healthier moms and healthier babies. Ethics and logic were chosen for this entry, though, as they are closest to the heart of the issue. Knowledge claims that could be made about the logical aspect of this issue are that: (a) Logic is not always an accurate source of truth (b) The logic of the senators in their arguments against maternity leave, regardless of the fact that it was false, was more influential to their decision than the ethical implications surrounding maternity leave. After considering these two aspects of this issue, the following knowledge question can be formed: To what extent does logic absolve ethical responsibility? In this issue, the senators clearly felt that their economic logic overrode any ethical obligation they might have towards the people- despite the fact that they are only the mothers of the nation- of the country. Despite the fact that evidence and ethics all refuted any claims that paid maternity leave would negatively affect the United States, the politicians refused to budge in favor of their lobbied logic. In brief conclusion, maternity leave means healthier moms, healthier babies, more financially sound families, more working women, and a higher national standard of women’s rights. One other situation to which this issue could be applied is the short story A Modest Proposal by Jonathan Swift. The short story features a man proposing that the children of the poor should be sold as food and other goods. His economic logic is quite sound; his emotional and ethical explanations, not so much. In the argument, though, Swift completely abandons what is traditionally thought of as ethical in favor of the economic benefits of trading children as goods. Like with arguments against maternity leave, in an area where the ethical implications of what is being argued are in no way excusable, logic seems to absolve Swift of any ethical responsibilities for his words. Works cited: A Modest Proposal by Jonathan Swift http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/careers/career-advice/maternity-leave-basics-canada-vs-the-us/article4197679/ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-01-28/maternity-leave-u-s-policies-still-fail-workers http://theweek.com/articles/445827/how-america-ended-worst-maternity-leave-laws-earth http://www.techrepublic.com/article/10-things-you-need-to-know-about-maternity-leave-in-the-us/ |