Jenna Bush Hager on ending her maternity leave
After a wonderful summer with few work obligations, but mainly pure, sweet [baby] Mila time; my maternity leave [was] over. It is a day millions of women across America experience every year. It is however, a day I [found] nerve-wracking, and bittersweet… a bit like the first day of school….
I think about the enormous love I feel for [Mila] and how she has changed our world in the short time she has been in it.
I am ready to return to work, but know the first summer I spent with my Mila will be the most precious of my life.
~ Today host Jenna Bush Hager (pictured with daughter Mila), daughter of President George W. Bush, on her return to work after her maternity leave, Daily Mail, September 27
Sep.29, 2013 6:00 am |
Pregnancy |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
So we’re now doing non-Bible quotes on Sundays? Is this a policy change, or a mistake?
Another almost unique component of our pro-family country – terrible maternity leave coverage (as compared to other 1st world countries).
Hopefully Jenna pushes some advancements on that front.
Obama is our President. If he cares about women and women’s health, perhaps HE should press for better social maternity benefits. That would be good for American families, and encourage more professional women to have children.
I’d be game for that Del – would be a non-starter with most politicians – but to me, it makes a lot of sense.
As “free stuff” goes, maternity leave is a lot cheaper and less controversial than “free contraception.”
The only people who would oppose it would be Planned Parenthood — this is a social dis-incentive to their sales product. (And there would be the usual fiscal hawks, who fear any new social program.)
I’m a fiscal hawk on most issues, but the social benefit of extra mother-care time for families with infants far exceeds the cost to taxpayers. It’s a good investment of our tax dollars. We could pay for it by defunding Planned Parenthood — that would free up a quick half-billion dollars a year, right there.
I am about to have baby #3 in the end of October, and my husband and I are saving for maternity leave. Between the fact that small businesses under 50 employees don’t legally have an obligation in my state to provide any maternity leave, and the fact that my employer doesn’t provide any paid maternity benefits, I’m expecting to return to work 3 weeks after baby is born. And it’s a terrifying thought in so many ways.
The idea of trying to establish a milk supply, raise a newborn, and be the primary provider-all as the mother (let’s face it, there are things my husband simply cannot physically do for the baby)-is stressful & intimidating, to say the least.
I wish taking a season off were feasible for me. Or that some of my maternity leave were paid. Or that I didn’t have to worry about taking too much time and losing my position (I don’t *think* it would happen where I work, but the fact that it is possible is really kinda scary).
We really DO need better maternity options in the US. For ALL working mothers.
Del – I think you are massively naive if you think that that only people against it would be PP – do you really think society is ready to raise taxes to fully fund maternity coverage? Or pass regulations that all employers have to give fully paid maternity coverage for a certain length of time?
Seriously?
Actually Del, when I was working at the school for pregnant and parenting teens, PP was one of the advocates pushing for and supporting fundraising for on-site daycare for the young moms trying to finish up school and/or have a part time job after having their babies.
I don’t support PP and roll my eyes at 99% of what they do, but in this case, the opposite of your statement is true. The people who have been fighting better maternity laws in the US are the same folks who export jobs to China and Mexico and then complain about the economy: CEOs of huge, influential corporations – with the exception of European companies like IKEA that follow the European model of offering months of paid maternity (and paternity) leave. The way employers are allowed to treat mothers in this country far more closely resembles a developing nation than a world leader. And anyone who doesn’t think our deplorable maternity regulations do not directly contribute to abortions is kidding themselves.
“PP was one of the advocates pushing for and supporting fundraising for on-site daycare for the young moms trying to finish up school and/or have a part time job after having their babies.”
Hmm, interesting. I suppose a broken clock is right twice a day.
Wasn’t it nice of Jenna’s grandparents to be witnesses at a wedding. Good on them.
Mary Rose, I’m really sorry. :( We were in a similar position when I had baby #4. I went back to work part-time 2 weeks after he was born. I was in no way physically ready to do so but I had no choice.
All this talk of paid maternity leave supported by the government is fine but how is it going to be pais for? All these countries with paid maternity leave, universal health insurance etc have a high cost of living and high taxes.
“Witnesses at a wedding?” What does that mean? I do remember that Jenna’s own wedding was apparently pretty low-key compared to the near off-Broadway production that a certain other president’s child had.
And actually in many countries with wonderful maternity benefits, women of childbearing age are massively discriminated against in the hiring pool.
You know what witnessing at a wedding means don’t you MemyselfandI?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/26/us-usa-gaymarriage-bush-idUSBRE98P02020130926
Women should be able to stay home and be moms full time. So far we have been able to swing it. Used cars and a lot of pasta and hot dogs and PBJ sandwiches is a small sacrifice compared to the rewards.
LifeJoy says:
September 29, 2013 at 10:22 pm
And actually in many countries with wonderful maternity benefits, women of childbearing age are massively discriminated against in the hiring pool.
That is an interesting point. In the “old days,” when large families and labor discrimination was common everywhere, the wage-slavers were reluctant to hire women because they took a lot of days off to care for sick kids and such.
The broad social solution to all of this is to avoid relying on Big Business and Big Government for all of your security. If we want to be well taken care of, as a culture we need to learn to take care of ourselves again.
Support small family businesses, start your own family business, home-school your own kids, invest in good relations with your extended family, help each other out as needs arise. Your family can be a fortress of protection when the rest of the culture and economy goes down the tubes.
Should men be able to stay home and be dads full time too truthseeker?
I didn’t know what you were referring to, Reality. I’m sorry.
As to presidential weddings, to be fair, I’m not going to assume it’s just a Democrat thing to overdo it, JFK Jr’s (RIP) wedding was held on a small island, and plans were so secretive that most people only knew about it once it was over. Of course, that could have mostly been done so the paparazzi couldn’t get too close, but still, I was impressed.
I mean most people PROBABLY didn’t know about it until it was over.
Del – I’m confused – so at first, you said we should get funded maternity coverage because everyone would support it, and the benefits outweigh the costs, and now you say that people shouldn’t be supported by government, and should turn inward and homeward.
Those are two pretty contradictory statements – are you now saying that you don’t think expanding maternity coverage is a good thing?
Oh MaryRose! I’ll be praying for y’all – I couldn’t imagine having to go back to work at 3 weeks postpartum!! :( I was a wreck then. Is your husband able to stay home with them??
I am of the opinion that there are no barriers to increase FMLA from its current 3 months to 6. It is a modest increase that can easily be supported by employers. Also keep in mind that FMLA has a provision that allows employees to use their accrued time during this time off. The only problematic part of it is the out-of-pocket insurance premium that the employee has to pay. It is worth it nonetheless.
Jenna Bush would be good spokesperson to that end. A society that cares for families is a society that grows.
The bigger picture-
The corporate cronies of government are supporting amnesty because it supplies a pool of cheap labor which is not eligible for Obamacare. Companies will hire as cheaply as possible. They are cutting people to part time to avoid expenses for benefits. If women become more expensive to hire than men they will be screened out. The main cure for childcare difficulties is to encourage and support the formation of intact and functional families.
The main cure for childcare difficulties is to encourage and support the formation of intact and functional families.
Yes, I agree, but that’s easier said than done. In the African American community 72 percent of children are born to single mothers, which at least in my opinion causes tremendous problems, but I’m in the minority. Overall I think the rate is about 32 percent, and it’s rising. You’re a country girl, Pharmer — you know that you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink!
Ex-GOP says:
September 30, 2013 at 7:41 am
Del – I’m confused – so at first, you said we should get funded maternity coverage because everyone would support it, and the benefits outweigh the costs, and now you say that people shouldn’t be supported by government, and should turn inward and homeward.Those are two pretty contradictory statements – are you now saying that you don’t think expanding maternity coverage is a good thing?
There’s always a paradox and a balance.
– It is a good thing for our government to support worthy programs with our tax dollars.
– It is a bad thing for our society to be dependent upon our government programs.
– And I like to add that it is just as bad for our society to be so reliant on “corporate employee benefits.”
So, I would support a tax-paid subsidy for maternal leave.
But this is still a poor second to the best option — by which a family lives well below their income and saves plenty of money, so they can afford to have Mom take off for a year or more to care for her newborn. Perhaps the extended family pitches in to assist them. And thus families could live better without reliance on more taxpayer debt.
Thank you all for your concern. I will admit that it is quite daunting. I would far rather be able to stay home for months after baby comes, but we have to do what we have to do.
My husband . is currently the stay-at-home parent in our home. We have always tried to have a primary stay-at-home parent and a primary provider, and so far have been fortunate enough to be successful. That does, however, sometimes mean that I’m working when we’d rather my husband were the primary provider :/ We are hopeful that this spring the circumstances will change. Meanwhile, we’re making do and trusting in God’s Providence.
Del-
Your optimal preference for maternity options is nice, but not terribly feasible for a lot of families these days. Living below our means enough for me to take a year(I wish!) off work would mean years of planning for each kid. And is incredibly difficult with the substantial tax increases recently. :( And I’m married and this is #3 for me; I don’t have to worry about childcare costs, setting up a whole new nursery, a large existing family to support, etc etc. Think about all the young women out there with surprise babies and no support from the dad whatsoever!
Personally, I think that the FMLA which allows mothers to take up to 3 mos without fear of retribution at work should extend to businesses of all sizes, for starters. I understand how difficult this would be for some employers, but I also think that it isn’t exactly easy for mom either.
Reality, I personally think that having one parent at home is preferable and should be possible for all families. Because Mom is the one who gives birth and nurses, it makes sense for her to be the one to stay in the home, at least with a newborn, but there are other benefits of having women stay at home. Mothers tend to be more natural nurturers, automatically seeing and reacting to the child’s selflessness and kindness more than Dad. This isn’t an always and forever thing, but I really believe that it would be generally preferable for Mom to nurture in the home and Dad to form the bridge into the world. BUT all families should, ideally, be able to choose one parent to stay at home. For us, this is not remotely easy. We are able to do it, but we are living WAY under the average, as far as I can tell.
“Reality, I personally think that having one parent at home is preferable and should be possible for all families. Because Mom is the one who gives birth and nurses, it makes sense for her to be the one to stay in the home, at least with a newborn, but there are other benefits of having women stay at home. Mothers tend to be more natural nurturers, automatically seeing and reacting to the child’s selflessness and kindness more than Dad. This isn’t an always and forever thing, but I really believe that it would be generally preferable for Mom to nurture in the home and Dad to form the bridge into the world. BUT all families should, ideally, be able to choose one parent to stay at home. For us, this is not remotely easy. We are able to do it, but we are living WAY under the average, as far as I can tell.”
I don’t know if I buy this whole thing the woman being better equipped to be the stay at home parent. I did read a study that I am having trouble finding now that children fare just as well with SAH dads as they do with SAH moms. I think it’s far more important that it be the person who is equipped for full-time childcare, rather than gender. I LOVED staying at home with my kids when I was married and my wife was miserable when she did it. Some people just aren’t cut out for babies all day, and some of those people are women.
I’m not saying that there’s not a general trend of women being better with kids, because there is. But I do think some dads would love to be the stay at home parent but feel like it’s not something that’s okay for them, and that sucks. It’s great to get to be with your kids all day if you’re up for it! And like you said kids almost always do better with one stay at home parent even if it’s not the mom.
And if more dads would stay home with their kids maybe people would stop asking me how often I “babysit” my kids when I take them out in public lol.
Del – in theory, I agree with you.
I don’t believe all social programs are bad programs. Some things are good investments for society. I personally believe that as a country, we’d be better off building a few less war planes and instead funding maternity coverage so that it is a real option for a parent to stay home for months.
There is a balance though, in any social program, between an investment and waste.
I differ with the Democrats regarding how many social programs to fund without regulation.
I differ with the Republicans in thinking that all government spending is waste and ripe for abuse.
Maternity coverage, health insurance, education, support in transition between jobs, and jobs programs – I believe all of those things get too quickly demonized these days.
Jack, my friend Beth (changed to protect her privacy) is a lovely woman whose gray hair made a very early appearance on her head. She’ll see your “babysitting your kids” and raise you a “how nice of you to be having lunch with your grandchildren!” LOL!!
We could pay for it by defunding Planned Parenthood — that would free up a quick half-billion dollars a year, right there.
Well, pro-lifers like to pretend that people who use Planned Parenthood can easily go somewhere else for the same health services, in which case “defunding” Planned Parenthood wouldn’t do anything except send the money to other providers. It would only free up money if the result was for people on government aid to not get health care at all.
Disclaimer: these are opinions, not verified by fact-checking so much as by personal experience and observation. Please take them as such.
Jack,
My husband is a SAHD at the moment. It’s not that I think our children fare any worse. It’s that I think that there are certain roles that tend in a general way to fall more naturally to one or another gender. My husband gets incredibly frustrated with newborns because they don’t have the ability to communicate the way that older children do. I don’t have that issue. However, my husband does much better at encouraging perseverance and safe risk-taking in our children. Pushing their boundaries. Also, I hate to be away from the house all day, but he seems to see it as a respite.
My little ‘rant’ was not intended to say that men aren’t perfectly capable stay-at-home parents, or that women can’t suck at it. Both of those can be very very true. I meant more that it seems to me from observation and experience that men trend towards natural working parents more than women do, and that I think it would be preferable in a general sense to see more encouragement of SAHMs, but that ultimately, every family should be encouraged to have a stay-at-home parent of their choosing because it is so much better for the kids to have a parent in the home, generally. And better for the family as a unit, too.
9ek
My dad has gotten “It’s so nice of you to take your mother out!” when out with my mom. People have no filter lol.
Ex-GOP says:
September 30, 2013 at 6:21 pm
Maternity coverage, health insurance, education, support in transition between jobs, and jobs programs – I believe all of those things get too quickly demonized these days.
In general, we need fewer government programs and a society that is encouraged to be less dependent on government programs.
And we have an urgent need to get the government out of the education business entirely. Only most people can’t see the need, because they can’t even imagine education without the government running it. It only took two generations to completely forget about local liberty.
If government really wanted to help us all, and not spend a lot of money to do it — then government should invest in a public ad campaign that encourages people to “Don’t buy stuff you don’t need.” Spots on how to use a grocery store instead of restaurant, how to enjoy a used car instead of a new one, how to live with your old cell phone because it still works just fine. If we just dropped the crass consumerism, we could afford our home-schooling supplies on a single-adult income. And the welfare assistance could go to the single moms who really need it.
we have an urgent need to get the government out of the education business entirely – Del, without some sort of centralized education curriculum and assessment system employers wouldn’t know if a potential employee had the required knowledge.
How would you know if a doctor was capable? An architect? An engineer?
What about the update and delivery of new knowledge? The dissemination of scientific discoveries?
Leaving ‘education’ to an unstructured, ill-defined and inconsistent variety of home-schoolers would not achieve the maximum possible benefits.
I do agree about the crass consumerism.
Yeah MaryRose I got what you were saying and I do think there are trends by gender. I just don’t want people to feel trapped if what they are doing isn’t really working for their family. If Dad is better with babies and Mom has the higher paying job and wants to get out of the house, I don’t think they should feel like they have to have it the traditional “mom takes care of the house, dad is the breadwinner” way. And when I was a stay at home dad I talked to several stay at home moms who felt just absolutely trapped by their choice to stay home, I don’t know if their husbands would have done better at home with the kids, but I do think it’s regrettable they didn’t enjoy being the full time parent as much as I did. I also met many stay at home moms who did a great job while finding it fulfilling. To each their own I guess, I just don’t want people to feel forced into things that might not be right for their family. I REALLY miss being with the kids all day (yes even as infants, once I figured out what to do with a crying poop machine I found infants just as fun to care for) and it’s honestly one of the very few things I miss about being married.
Agreed :)
Reality says:
September 30, 2013 at 11:10 pm
we have an urgent need to get the government out of the education business entirely – “Del, without some sort of centralized education curriculum and assessment system employers wouldn’t know if a potential employee had the required knowledge.”
The university system existed long before government got involved in their operations.
But mostly, I am talking about the primary education of children. There is no need for state and federal standardization of curricula. The fact that home-schooled children routinely out-perform the best public-school students is proof enough.
A standardized test such at the SAT is sufficient to measure a student’s readiness for university. Government does not need to be involved in the primary education, testing, or university — and I don’t know why we should want that.
My village can run its own school district without state or federal oversight. We can teach our kids.
“The university system existed long before government got involved in their operations. ”
Yeah, back when a college education was not remotely required for the vast majority of jobs. You don’t have to standardize something that affects a very small amount of the population and that a lot of employers don’t care about anyway.
“There is no need for state and federal standardization of curricula. The fact that home-schooled children routinely out-perform the best public-school students is proof enough.”
No, there DEFINITELY needs to be government oversight of homeschoolers. The only reason anyone taught me to read is because the state “meddled” when they realized I wasn’t being enrolled in public school and also wasn’t being tested annually like the law states. The law forced my parents to at least give me the bare minimum of education to pass the annual tests. Some people leave huge gaps in their children’s educations (not out of malice, usually because it’s something the parent themselves are not good at) when they homeschool. I hate this worshipping of homeschooling, there are definite benefits to it for many families but it’s not for everyone, and someone has to keep an eye out for the kids and make sure that they are getting everything they need (sometimes it can cover up neglect and abuse). And it’s definitely not possible for every family.
As homeschooling becomes more widespread, school districts have discovered that it is a way to reduce their dropout rate. When they need to get rid of failing/discipline problem students, they can suggest that parents homeschool. I know a woman who is with a local homeschool group and she says the school district has taken to giving parents their contact info when they withdraw students. And then they can put that the student left not as a dropout but to homeschool. Some school districts may be interested in providing services to at risk students but plenty of them don’t want to have anything to do with them. If they can find a plausible legal way to avoid them, they do.
Yeah hippie I’ve heard that’s a problem. That really sucks, because students with discipline and learning problems often don’t have the family structure that makes homeschooling successful (from what I’ve seen, there are some students who did poorly in public school that blossomed while homeschooling, I’ve read stories from some). I think it’s a subject that deserves more attention than “Everyone can homeschool, why do we need public school?!?!!” or “Homeschooling is bad! Everyone should be forced to put their kids in an “official school!!” No, homeschooling can be great, and public school can be great, it depends on the kid and family. No kid is going to do particularly well with a parent who’s terrible at teaching, and some kids simply don’t do well in public school no matter what. Public schools need to be available and homeschooling families should have support. But I firmly believe there needs to be standards set by state so we can ensure that all children are getting the basics whether they are homeschooled or not.
LisaC, our local free county clinic offers more services than PP could ever dream of.
LisaC, our local free county clinic offers more services than PP could ever dream of.
Del believes that the government doesn’t pay for services that are not offered by Planned Parenthood. Can you confirm that?
“Del believes that the government doesn’t pay for services that are not offered by Planned Parenthood. Can you confirm that?”
I think most pro-lifers are fine with some amount of government funding of most of the services that places like PP provide (like STD testing, contraception, PAP smears, etc), most of us just dislike government funding of facilities that provide abortions, even if they supposedly don’t use the tax dollars they receive to commit abortions (which is ridiculous to me, obviously even if government monies are used to support other things the facility provides, that frees up other funding for abortions, so any government money provided to such facilities is indirectly assisting their abortions). Of course you have the minority of pro-lifers who don’t agree with providing money to any place that provides contraception, but I think that’s a minority, just like it’s a minority that think there should be NO government funding of sexual and community health clinics all together.
I think most pro-lifers are fine with some amount of government funding of most of the services that places like PP provide…most of us just dislike government funding of facilities that provide abortions
Yes, I know pro-lifers often say that they are entitled to pick a Medicaid patient’s health provider, but that wasn’t Del’s point. His claim was that the government could save a half-billion dollars by defunding Planned Parenthood. Either he does not understand that much of Planned Parenthood’s government funding is payment for services rendered, or he thinks that the government should not pay for any health care services. I’m curious which one it is.