3 ms·

1. UK fertility rate: 1.79, US fertility rate: 1.77. So not a very big difference in spite of seemingly huge differences in the system as you portray. What coul

1. UK fertility rate: 1.79, US fertility rate: 1.77. So not a very big difference in spite of seemingly huge differences in the system as you portray. What could be the reason? 2. You mention that you are in the valley and a FAANG engineer. Between my partner and me, we have experiences of 4 out of those 5. All of them had far more generous parental leave policies than "2 weeks paid leave" like you claim. Can you please name your company? Because it honestly doesn't jive with our experience as an engineer in the valley.

spacedcowboy 6y ago
1. You're assuming there is a decision made by US couples / women about whether to have a child based on income. I don't think that conscious decision happens very often, I think there's a whole bunch of people who convince themselves they'll "get by" because reproduction is a basic drive. Fertility rate therefore would not be much affected by the level of family support, but the quality of life for the individuals concerned very much would be. It's that quality of life that I was trying to highlight. 2. I am in the valley. I work for Apple, and 9 years ago when the kid was born, Apple's policy on paternal leave was in fact 2 weeks paid leave, you could opt to use your vacation (which I did) after those 2 weeks, and you could cash in a week's accrued sick leave as well as a bonus if you had it, but that was it. It's better now, but that doesn't make my experience any different. 2(a) My wife worked for Chevron at the time, and their policy (who knows what it is now) was similarly 2 weeks of paid leave, then you can take accrued vacation, then you're back at work. She quit. Reading back my original post, I can see it's confusing where I'm saying "I" and talking about being in hospital - I was trying to continue the "My sister":"Me" but it was of course my wife giving birth, not me.
- RestlessMind 6y ago
  > and 9 years ago when the kid was born Thanks for clarifying. I interpreted your original comment as the current state of affairs. From my first-hand experience, Apple's parental leave policies are far more generous now than just 2 weeks of paid leave.

spacedcowboy 6y ago

1. You're assuming there is a decision made by US couples / women about whether to have a child based on income. I don't think that conscious decision happens very often, I think there's a whole bunch of people who convince themselves they'll "get by" because reproduction is a basic drive. Fertility rate therefore would not be much affected by the level of family support, but the quality of life for the individuals concerned very much would be. It's that quality of life that I was trying to highlight. 2. I am in the valley. I work for Apple, and 9 years ago when the kid was born, Apple's policy on paternal leave was in fact 2 weeks paid leave, you could opt to use your vacation (which I did) after those 2 weeks, and you could cash in a week's accrued sick leave as well as a bonus if you had it, but that was it. It's better now, but that doesn't make my experience any different. 2(a) My wife worked for Chevron at the time, and their policy (who knows what it is now) was similarly 2 weeks of paid leave, then you can take accrued vacation, then you're back at work. She quit. Reading back my original post, I can see it's confusing where I'm saying "I" and talking about being in hospital - I was trying to continue the "My sister":"Me" but it was of course my wife giving birth, not me.

RestlessMind 6y ago
> and 9 years ago when the kid was born Thanks for clarifying. I interpreted your original comment as the current state of affairs. From my first-hand experience, Apple's parental leave policies are far more generous now than just 2 weeks of paid leave.