6 ms·

> while fathers are given 2.2 months until the child turns two. However, on average only one in four of them take what they are given. The current plans now tal

> while fathers are given 2.2 months until the child turns two. However, on average only one in four of them take what they are given. The current plans now talk only of parental leave. Is it conceivable that fathers actually don't want to spend that much time at home and that the Finland Government is strong-handing them into doing it? One frustration I have in this topic is that it is seldom mentioned that any parent with any savings and a decent job has the option of taking unpaid leave and take as much as they want with their kids, but choose not to. That is a very strong case for revealed preferences.

hugg 7y ago
Well, they could just not take the days, then.
- conanbatt 7y ago
  I am pretty sure that if instead of parental leave you gave a bonus equal to the salary of that leave, thats what would happen. Because that is what happens. Somehow it is egregious to say that you will get a 50k Euro/100k dollar bonus if you have a kid, but somehow if its paid by not working it makes sense?
luch 7y ago
this is paid leave (it's only an allowance, not usually a full salary though). Where I live it's up to a year for a father, but most of them do not take it since we are still entrenched in the "father at work/mother at home" society
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  If it provides a competitive advantage for fathers to sell their labor to not take parental leave, then they won’t. In that case, if the government wanted to incentivize fathers to take parental leave, they would have to mandate it, but of course that would conflict with goals of providing freedoms. It’s the age old conundrum of what is good for society versus the individual, and how an immeasurable benefit (fathers spending time with children) can lose out to measurable benefits (fathers being able to sell their labor for a higher price due to having more experience/getting promoted since they didn’t take parental leave). The other benefit of forcing fathers to take parental leave, would be to help equalize the playing field for men and women. But then the country may lose a competitive advantage to other countries since their products might be cheaper since they have a greater supply of labor, but in the long term it would be beneficial for the world to have mothers and fathers both spend time rearing children, however it unquantifiable unlike their cheaper products resulting in higher exports.
- conanbatt 7y ago
  The key issue with paid leave is...paid by whom? If its not paid by the parents, who is paying for it? It often is a mix of co-workers, consumers, and taxpayers. What society is and can be changed is one thing, what you do by making that society ilegal is another one.

hugg 7y ago

Well, they could just not take the days, then.

conanbatt 7y ago
I am pretty sure that if instead of parental leave you gave a bonus equal to the salary of that leave, thats what would happen. Because that is what happens. Somehow it is egregious to say that you will get a 50k Euro/100k dollar bonus if you have a kid, but somehow if its paid by not working it makes sense?

luch 7y ago

this is paid leave (it's only an allowance, not usually a full salary though). Where I live it's up to a year for a father, but most of them do not take it since we are still entrenched in the "father at work/mother at home" society

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
lotsofpulp 7y ago
If it provides a competitive advantage for fathers to sell their labor to not take parental leave, then they won’t. In that case, if the government wanted to incentivize fathers to take parental leave, they would have to mandate it, but of course that would conflict with goals of providing freedoms. It’s the age old conundrum of what is good for society versus the individual, and how an immeasurable benefit (fathers spending time with children) can lose out to measurable benefits (fathers being able to sell their labor for a higher price due to having more experience/getting promoted since they didn’t take parental leave). The other benefit of forcing fathers to take parental leave, would be to help equalize the playing field for men and women. But then the country may lose a competitive advantage to other countries since their products might be cheaper since they have a greater supply of labor, but in the long term it would be beneficial for the world to have mothers and fathers both spend time rearing children, however it unquantifiable unlike their cheaper products resulting in higher exports.
conanbatt 7y ago
The key issue with paid leave is...paid by whom? If its not paid by the parents, who is paying for it? It often is a mix of co-workers, consumers, and taxpayers. What society is and can be changed is one thing, what you do by making that society ilegal is another one.