3 ms·

I am from Brazil, and I think one of the few things we actually do properly, is that here the law follows exactly what you just said (paternity and maternity le

by speeder 11y ago

I am from Brazil, and I think one of the few things we actually do properly, is that here the law follows exactly what you just said (paternity and maternity leave aren't touched by the company at all, the state foots the entire bill) Still not enough sometimes (I know a person that worked at 3M, and refused to have kids, fearing the temporary replacement if she ever got pregnant and went on leave might become permant and displace her... after she got fired, near her 40s, and tried to have a kid and failed, she went to the doctor, that informed here that she missed the boat, she was fertile some years before, but now wasn't fertile anymore...)

douche 11y ago
It seems like the new reality is that most of us are going to be working through our 40s, 50s, and 60s, at the least. If there was some way that we could reconfigure the world so that it was possible for people to work on starting their families in their 20s, when they are the most fertile and the risk of birth defects and difficult pregnancies are lower, that seems to me like a better way for the world to work. The way the math works out, if you had children in your early 20s, by the time they were grown, and you were freed up to really devote yourself to a career, you'd still have 25 or 30 productive years to make something happen. I have no idea how we would get there, though. The current system leaves young people buried in a deep hole, with very limited resources - huge student loan debts, nonexistent savings, precarious, transient work and living conditions. You've got to work like a dog for a decade to achieve some level of stability. On the other end, ageism leaves people that hit 40 at a disadvantage, just when they are reaching the point that they become experienced enough to really be useful.

3 ms·

I am from Brazil, and I think one of the few things we actually do properly, is that here the law follows exactly what you just said (paternity and maternity le

by speeder 11y ago

douche 11y ago
It seems like the new reality is that most of us are going to be working through our 40s, 50s, and 60s, at the least. If there was some way that we could reconfigure the world so that it was possible for people to work on starting their families in their 20s, when they are the most fertile and the risk of birth defects and difficult pregnancies are lower, that seems to me like a better way for the world to work. The way the math works out, if you had children in your early 20s, by the time they were grown, and you were freed up to really devote yourself to a career, you'd still have 25 or 30 productive years to make something happen. I have no idea how we would get there, though. The current system leaves young people buried in a deep hole, with very limited resources - huge student loan debts, nonexistent savings, precarious, transient work and living conditions. You've got to work like a dog for a decade to achieve some level of stability. On the other end, ageism leaves people that hit 40 at a disadvantage, just when they are reaching the point that they become experienced enough to really be useful.