3 ms·
"So it’s better to hurt children then ‘companies’?" It's your subjective opinion that not having 'dad's around 24/7 is going to 'hurt babies'. In all pragmati
by jariel 6y ago
"So it’s better to hurt children then ‘companies’?"
It's your subjective opinion that not having 'dad's around 24/7 is going to 'hurt babies'.
In all pragmatism, there's no need for 'a second parent' to take 30 days off, and I'll bet most guys, while they wouldn't mind 'some time' - probably don't need or want 30 days.
7-14 days is reasonable for second parent.
There's no optimizations here, I think we are 'mostly past' these issues, whatever tinkering we do is academic.
Subsidized childcare is a different story though, that has major impact, for better or for worse, there's still a lot of experimentation going on there.
For example, we all pretty much agree at least on 'kindergarten' before that, it's still different from place to place.
- maccard 6y agoWhy is the father the second parent in all of this? The implication in your reply is that the mother is the "primary" parent. > In all pragmatism, there's no need for 'a second parent' to take 30 days off, and I'll bet most guys, while they wouldn't mind 'some time' - probably don't need or want 30 days. Speaking of subjective opinions, here's another one. Nobody is forcing a parent to take 30 days, or 3 months off to spend with a child. If you get the time off and want to spend it golfing, go for it. But it means that the large number of fathers who _do_ want to take time off are now able to, and more importantly, a mother isn't forced to take 6-9 months out and suffer in their career for it.
- zepolen 6y agoDo you have kids?