20 ms·

Compare this to 480 days of shared and paid parental leave in Sweden at 80% salary. The fathers are looked at negatively if the don’t take some of this time.

• souprock 6y ago
  That is enough time to have another kid. I have 12 so far. If I lived in Sweden, I wouldn't have to work. I could keep it going for decades. It's odd that Swedes aren't taking full advantage of the situation.
  • klipt 6y ago
    Probably not many houses in Sweden can fit 12 kids?
    • pmiller2 6y ago
      I’d say it’s probably more like there aren’t many Swedes who could deal with a house with 12 kids. The after school logistics alone must be a nightmare. Either that, or there’s something plugging the loophole the GP mentions.
      • 082349872349872 6y ago
        Would "taking full advantage of a situation" being frowned upon suffice in swedish society?
        • pmiller2 6y ago
          I would say so. Social pressures are very powerful forces that act on humans. Last I checked, Swedes were human, too. :-)
          • 082349872349872 6y ago
            Geopolitics and prison are the only two areas I'm aware of where everything becomes a strictly transactional all against all.
        • deleted 6y ago
          [deleted]
      • imtringued 6y ago
        What about the difficulty of having 12 pregnancies? You'd have to set aside 12 years in the first place. A woman in such a family isn't planning on working.
        • pmiller2 6y ago
          Your point is taken, but you’re assuming something about the family structure of said hypothetical, 12-kid house.
        • baq 6y ago
          they might not have the same mother, though it is possible if you start early enough - but the health risk is terrifyingly large.
        • Broken_Hippo 6y ago
          Women don't need to be off work for the entire pregnancy nor the entire year after giving birth, though. If you are splitting your maternity leave with your spouse, you might not take an entire year off. You might just take the time that pays you more instead of being paid less: I don't know how it is other places, but you aren't getting paid for maternity leave if you don't work. (IIRC, in norway, the man doesn't get much leave if the woman isn't working). Your job is probably protected while on maternity leave too. I*d say that one of the main difficulties with 12 pregnancies is the actual pregnancies - they are hard on the body and honestly, it isn't recommended that folks have a pregnancy a year - if one even is able to have so many. The more likely situation is that having 12 children means some of those children are fosters or adoptions. And at that point, I don't actually care if someone has 12 children so long as they are good parents.
  • garbagetime 6y ago
    Most swedes don't want so many kids.
    • tjs8rj 6y ago
      Well I don't want 12 kids, but my mindset changes if enough kids means early retirement ;)
      • fileeditview 6y ago
        I don't think you can relax a lot and enjoy retirement with 12 kids at home ;) This sounds like hard work to me..
        • ido 6y ago
          With that many kids the older ones are probably helping raise the younger. My wife's cousin has 5 kids (in relatively short intervals, I think there's less than 10 years between the oldest and youngest) & the 2 oldest ones help out a lot.
          • hansbo 6y ago
            So it turns into more of a management role, and less like hard labor. Still not really retirement.
            • ido 6y ago
              Yeah I dont think you'll be lazying about but also that the difficulty is much less than a linear 12x the difficulty of raising one child.
      • st1x7 6y ago
        Even if we're being that cynical - taking on much more work than you can handle and increasing your expenses multiple multiple times for the next 20 years - that's not retirement.
  • timc3 6y ago
    I am a Swede - there is no way that I want 12 kids. From both a personal point of view, and for the environmental reasons (though I get it if you are adopting).
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  • xornor 6y ago
    Twelve kids is 24/7 work. Why I would change 8 hours to it? It is also unethical way of life in this planet.
    • acituan 6y ago
      > It is also unethical way of life in this planet. Let’s not project western purity codes to the entire planet. This planet still has countries with high mortality rates, infant and otherwise.
      • herbstein 6y ago
        Well, the context is specifically Sweden. I don't think that's projecting any "western purity codes" anywhere.
    • upgrejd 6y ago
      > It is also unethical way of life in this planet. According to you.
  • rasz 6y ago
    The new "asian" Swedes are.
    • vinay427 6y ago
      The fertility rate is about identical or even a little lower among Swedes with at least one foreign-born parent [1], although there is some difference for foreign-born Swedes [2]. [1] https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Total-fertility-rate-by-background-in-Sweden-1970-2012_fig1_316022476 https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Total-fertility-rate-by-... [2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2019/08/09/is-sweden-our-fertility-boosting-role-model/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2019/08/09/is-sweden-our...
    • dijit 6y ago
      I take the point, but there is a lot of evidence that birth rates decline as safety increases (this includes financial safety). Here is one study (of many): https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337068662_Declined_Total_Fertility_Rate_Among_Immigrants_and_the_Role_of_Newly_Arrived_Women_in_Norway https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337068662_Declined_... Even in the UK (from where I come) it's only first generation migrants that have many children, the second generation seems to fall in line with the society. From my anecdotal experience.
      • mhaesh 6y ago
        24614115
  • MichaelGlass 6y ago
    Florida Man informs Sweden and Germany that their societies are failing. In other news https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBqY-4oDWAQ&feature=youtu.be&t=196 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBqY-4oDWAQ&feature=youtu.be... But in all seriousness, Germany and Sweden (and the USA for that matter) all have sub-replacement fertility rates. I understand that you believe that people will reproduce like rabbits, especially if incentivized, but the data doesn't reflect that. In every system there are those that game the system. The question is: does the benefit for the majority outweigh the cost of those abusing the benefit?
    • Thorrez 6y ago
      Does Sweden want more kids? If so, I don't think someone having 12 kids is really abusing the benefit, but rather providing Sweden with what it wants.
      • deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    • raxxorrax 6y ago
      This is only problem with that is out economic system. Normally I would assume that would clearly point out the perversion of it, but that seems to be just a dream. Otherwise humanity isn't really in danger of dying out. You think people not having children are abusing the system? I know many who just don't want to become parents at 40 anymore, so they will never have children. That decision is also influenced by economic situations.
  • vmception 6y ago
    There is a lot of evidence to suggest that people want to be sexually active and don't want children until they have an existential crisis and many existing people are unplanned happenstances. Educated people don't have enough children to replace themselves, and its not because they are too busy. Give people the choice and most choose to do things preventing children until they have existential crisis. Remove the choice and people are have children at twice the rate, pretty much coinciding with when they become sexually active. It's not that hard to understand or perceive.
    • sakjdlask 6y ago
      Would you mind sharing some of these evidence ?
      • vmception 6y ago
        Average age of first birth by country, across years. In a place like the US you can get more granular data down to the county level and see the same thing. Economic centers having the same trends in first birth age as other developed nations. There is an even distribution of sexual activity, you might just have to trust me on that one, but there might be some study to cross reference and show thats a constant. Given the same result occurring in so many places, the evidence suggests people aren't interested in children until they are afraid they can't pass on their genes in a healthy way. Fix that and I would expect to see the age increasing another ten years. Fix the stamina deterioration and I would expect to see the age increasing further again.
        • phtrivier 6y ago
          You seem to ne completely writing off many other factors that could make having kids later (at which age are people wealthy, independent, secure about their future, committed in a relationship, etc... compared to X generation ago ? How much access to people have to contraception ?) , as well as factors that could make you have kids earlier (peer pressure, cultural norms, etc...). "People being more selfish" might definitely be a factor, but you might come across as considering it like the factor, which would required exceptional data..
  • m0zg 6y ago
    Dunno man, raising kids is hard work. Although I heard incremental difficulty of raising more than 2 is sub-linear.
  • gspr 6y ago
    Having 12 kids seems like a lot more work than most jobs.
  • kryptiskt 6y ago
    The kids are a big win for society, so it's not an exploit, it's an incentive to breed.
• cluoma 6y ago
  Germany also has quite generous parental leave. 14 months to split between parents as they see fit. But no single parent can take more than 12 and it's only 65%. 12 of the 14 months can be doubled as well, up to 24 months, at half the regular salary replacement. A good option if a parent wants to work part-time.
  • woodpanel 6y ago
    I can echo that. Still only 2% of men take the leave, while 42% of women do [1]. I can only speculate as to why. 1) Our cultural wiring runs deeper than just "sex is a social construct" 2) The German system is still quite complicated. As countless online calculators and private consultancies helping you filling out the forms prove. As well as the above statistic itself, since financially it would make more sense if the father took as much leave as possible (if he earns more, the family gets 65% of "more"). [1] https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Arbeit/Arbeitsmarkt/Qualitaet-Arbeit/Dimension-3/elternzeit.html https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Arbeit/Arbeitsmarkt/Qualit...
    • teraku 6y ago
      I have a much simpler explanation. Most people can't afford it. The median income in Germany is ~44k/yr. If we assume the woman earns a bit less, we can already see why it's more common for the mother to take the paternal leave. It's less of a hit on the finances. If the dad takes it, or both, they might not be able to sustain themselves for long.
      • woodpanel 6y ago
        If I imagine the women earning a bit less, I imagine them getting 65% of less. Whoever of the parents is earning less, in most cases it would make more sense for the less compensated parent to just switch into part-time, if he/she isn't already working a tax-free "mini-job", while the higher compensated parent takes the leave. This yields the highest income per hours@home.
        • 6y ago
• lloeki 6y ago
  > at 80% salary. This hits home hard: my newborn is now one month old, and I had to forgo the 11 days of leave. Why? Because there’s a hard cap on the salary: I ran the numbers for me for the current 11 days in France it means over 1k€ of income just vanish, and it’s not like we can make loans, rent, and other fixed expenses disappear, right at the moment where we have to shell out money for the hospital and general baby equipment. If it were 28 days that would be over half of my salary going poof. Union agreements say that for the employer to fill in the remainder it’s required I’d be in this company for at least two years, but I joined only a year and a half ago. It so happened that I took barely any off days during this time so I took a month to bond, which sure took its toll on me (not the bonding of course, the lack of time off for over a year)
  • seszett 6y ago
    The Swedish paternity leave is caped at 1006 SEK per day (94€), while the French one is capped at 89€ per day. That's not a very large difference, the main difference is that the Swedish one never goes over 80% of your salary while the French one goes up to 100%.
• setr 6y ago
  I dont understand how this could be a viable strategy -- unless your job is entirely useless, the business must replace your position during your absence in order to continue normal operation; even thirty days absence should disrupt things, if an alternative isn't found.. So then what exactly do you return to? It can't be your old position exactly -- you were replaced. So its more like a vague promise that the business will rehire you into some arbitrary position? Or even worse, make up a new position of equivalent power upon your return?
  • jahaja 6y ago
    Since it's normal, companies adapt and it isn't really an issue at all. I've never seen anyone in my jobs (IT) that have been "replaced" in any way shape or form.
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  • lagerstedt 6y ago
    First of all, if a company fires someone because they are on parental leave, that's a lawsuit waiting to happen. Now how a company handles employees depends. In some cases you hire a temp, in others your colleagues covers your responsibilities. I work as a developer and in the places I've worked it has never been a problem. You leave and while you're gone your responsibilities are shared by other colleagues. When you're back you resume your old position. It's true that you might not get back to doing exactly the same work as before you left, but in my experience that's rarely a problem. In my case it's been quite the opposite and an opportunity to take on new things. I think this is quite common It's true that the employer overall needs to keep more staff around since some percentage will be away on parental leave and your need to cover those fluctuations. For small companies this can be a problem but in general I think this system has great acceptance with the public.
  • pi-rat 6y ago
    I think it's quite healthy for the business TBH. In Scandinavia this is the norm, at a medium sized company there will probably always be someone on parental leave at any given time. You expect it, and therefor deal with it by reducing the bus factor up front.
• mytailorisrich 6y ago
  France has both paternity leave and parental leave, which are different things. France has 1 year parental leaves, which may be extended up to a total of 3 years (and more in case of twins, etc). But they are unpaid though the employee may then qualify for various benefits. There is also a 'birth leave' of 3 days. So when you have a baby you can have a 3 day leave at birth, then the now 28 day paternity leave within the next 4 months, and an unpaid 1-3 year parental leave. Iirc, the first leave is on full pay by the employer, the second on capped pay by a special state benefit (but employers can top up), and the third is unpaid though, as mentioned, other benefits exist subject to conditions. The idea being that one leave is for attending the actual birth (in France mothers are usually kept in hospital for a few days after birth in order to recover and to be taught how to look after a baby, fathers are welcome during the day), one leave is for bonding with the new born baby, and the third leave is, if needed, to look after the baby until (s)he reaches free nursery school age. French admin is always as simple as can be, not ;) In my case, at the time I worked for a company that offered a lot of annual leaves (I had about 8 weeks a year) so took normal annual leaves instead of the paternity leave after the initial 3 day "birth leave" in order not to lose money as the paternity leave cap was quite lower than most engineers earn.
• black_knight 6y ago
  Sweden used to have this really nice system where you got extra money whenever both parents took more than 30% of the days. We got several unexpected transfers of 300€ because of this, which for us at the time was a huge boon.
  • scandinavegan 6y ago
    When my daughter was young (in Sweden), this system was in effect, but was calculated per calendar year and not on the total number of days. We took around half the number of days each, but because we switched close to the new year, it looked like each year was like one week for one parent and the rest for the other, highly uneven both years. I don't know if that was a quirk of the system that they fixed or not, but we got 125 SEK or something as an equality bonus as a result.
    • rags2riches 6y ago
      Yes, though in total the split between myself and my partner was pretty much even, we got one of the "equality bonus" amounts and missed the others. It was hard to understand how it worked, we did not plan with it in mind and when it happened it seemed pretty random. I haven't kept up to date with the rules but I think they just quietly scrapped the "equality bonus" idea. I'm glad they did. While I am certainly happy I had the opportunity to be with my children because of the system, I do not miss all the hours spent trying to plan with all the rules in mind. My dream system would be a lump sum and the right to take unpaid time off work while the children are young...
• jgraham 6y ago
  > The fathers are looked at negatively if the don’t take some of this time. This isn't just an apriori fact of the culture, but an intentional result of the structure of the leave. 90 days are reserved for each parent (there's an exception for single parents) i.e. if the father doesn't take those 3 months they are lost. Apparently before this policy came into effect, fathers would typically take very little leave. But once there was an incentive to take 3 months they began to take longer periods and split the overall time more evenly. So even though it's part of the culture, it's not impossible to understand how it came to be, and therefore not impossible to replicate elsewhere.
• jasonlotito 6y ago
  80% salary, with a cap of 1006 SEK (110 USD) a day. While paid leave is great, it's not just 80% of your salary. There are a lot of maximums. This isn't to say this is bad or "I gotcha!" but rather to share a bit more information.
• Latty 6y ago
  This is very sensible to me as a way to stop discrimination. If you make it so economically the impact of a birth is similar for men and women, you reduce the incentive to discriminate.