15 ms·

Finland to give dads same parental leave as mums

• sudoaza 7y ago
  Germany has this and is awesome. 14 months paid leave to distribute among the two parents.
  • dudul 7y ago
    Doesn't look like the same thing though. Here it's clearly talking about non-transferable time.
    • krzyk 7y ago
      Yeah, looks different. On the other hand, Sweden has something similar. Dads get 6 month non-trasferable paid leave.
  • belinder 7y ago
    14 months or weeks?
    • epaga 7y ago
      It's months. Amazing for employees and terrifying for employers. Someone I know took a new job somewhere, only to let them know a week or so after being there that his wife was about to have their child and he was going to be gone for the next 14 months. They were not going to be able to fire him without repercussions. He was not required to let them know during the interview.
      • rglullis 7y ago
        The company is not the one paying for that, so it is not as bad for the company as you are saying. Chill.
        • gfs78 7y ago
          but they still need to get his job done
          • kraigie 7y ago
            Hence temps. Or they can redistribute the salary as overtime. If there are enough interested workers.
            • iso1631 7y ago
              They just employed someone for a full time job because they needed to spend €x on someone to do Y work Now they don't have to pay that money, which is fine, but they then need to find someone on a 14 month contract that will do it for the same salary as the person they just employed. Then at the end of it they are left with paying an overlap from the contractor to someone new
              • rglullis 7y ago
                First, a little nitpicking: one of the parents can take at most 12 months off, so there is no "14 month contract". Second, the whole thing can be way more complex. In Germany a mother has her job secured for the moment she announces to be pregnant to until the child is 3 years old. So one could decide that will take the Elterngeld for 12 months but actually just go back to work 18 months, and the employer has no way of stopping it. Third and final point: NONE OF THIS MATTERS! Trying to find the "fairness" in this is nothing but some incredibly naive exercise. Like most things in life, salaries are not determined by the amount of value produced but rather by market value of labor. Risks when dealing with labor force should be already priced in.
                • iso1631 7y ago
                  Sure, and the policy is good, but there is still an impact on the company. Most situations that will be a large company which can easily cope, but in small companies struggling to survive is can have an locally detrimental effect (despite the company benefiting from the policy as a whole)
      • aantix 7y ago
        How does anything get done? If it were a three person company, one person is now gone for 14 months and legally can’t be replaced? A nightmare for the other two employees.
        • deleted 7y ago
          [deleted]
        • michaelt 7y ago
          You can hire a replacement on a 14-month contract. If your company can deal with an employee getting hit by a bus / winning the lottery and quitting, then it can deal with an employee taking maternity/paternity leave.
          • codingmess 7y ago
            You can't assume nor demand every company can deal with an employee getting hit by a bus. Not every company is a big corporation. Example: our childcare facility employs two people, and replacements are VERY difficult to find at the moment.
            • Lev1a 7y ago
              Noone is demanding that. If the company can't get it done without the person taking parental leave they simply have to sink or swim. Like with any other law regulating worker benefits and worker safety. But companies know that starting out and have to plan and act accordingly. That's the cost of doing business.
              • codingmess 7y ago
                It's only the "cost of doing business" because of man made arbitrary laws. It doesn't have to be the cost of doing business. Why do you claim "noone is demanding that", when in the next sentence you just shrug it off as "they'll just have to sink, whatever". If the alternative for the business is to go out of business, it is "demanding". Businesses are not at fault for their employees getting pregnant, so why should they have to shoulder the risk? If society wants to protect mothers, society should pay up, not the individual businesses. Are you saying people shouldn't run childcare facilities? Or only huge childcare facilities are allowed, which certainly wasn't the intention of the laws for maternal leave?
      • muricayeah 7y ago
        >only to let them know a week or so after being there Don't these fall under "experimentation/probation" period, where you can fire without reason?
    • deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    • rglullis 7y ago
      14 months, but it is a little bit more complicated than what OP implies. The mother gets 14 weeks (6 weeks before due date, 8 after) that is the "proper" leave and is mandatory for the mother. After that, one or both parents can choose to take a leave where the government pays you 2/3 of your net salary, capped at 2000 EUR. If only one parent takes then it is limited to 12 month and it is extend to 14 months in case both parents decided to take it.
  • wincy 7y ago
    I’m curious what what happen if someone wanted to have ten kids and abused this system, and the mother didn’t work. At a gut I feel like I’d be less likely to have kids, not more, if I felt like I was burdening other people by accepting benefits like this. I have no worries as an American having as many kids as I want because I make a good salary, can afford them, and won’t take more than a weeks, maybe two weeks time off, as my wife, despite being just as qualified for software engineering as me, wants to stay at home and raise children. Heck, I won’t even be “overburdening” the school system as my wife is home schooling them, despite living in a “good” school district. Being charitable I’d hazard the point of this is to encourage population growth, but I suspect it’s playing out more like “have two kids and that’s as many as you should have”, and any more would introduce strong social pressure to stop. Maybe it’ll work out that lots more Finns will be born, I’m curious to see how it goes in twenty years.
    • oblio 7y ago
      > I’m curious what what happen if someone wanted to have ten kids and abused this system, and the mother didn’t work. The easy solution would be to have this set up for the desired number of children. 1-3 children: 100% of the benefits, >3: 20% or something similar.
    • matteuan 7y ago
      "abused the system"? Fertility rate in Germany is 1.50 at the moment. Every new child will be a precious asset to sustain the future pension system.
      • kraigie 7y ago
        Freedom of movement means you can look at the EU rate. Immigration moves people about quite well.
    • toasterlovin 7y ago
      Having both parents be economically unproductive for an extended period of time is clearly not a tenable arrangement in the long term. But the long term, in this case, is measured in tens of generations. In the short term, most developed societies are more than wealthy enough to shoulder such a burden. People would still probably get looked at weird for having tons of kids, but that already happens anyway.
  • ryanmercer 7y ago
    (edit: why is this -2? I was asking a serious question!) >14 months paid leave Certainly you meant weeks... FMLA only covers 12 weeks of unpaid leave here in the United States.
    • codingmess 7y ago
      Nope - it really is about 20000€ the government gives to families.
      • ryanmercer 7y ago
        Wow, threads on here constantly make me wish I lived in Germany as it sounds like German has really awesome employment protection too.
        • codingmess 7y ago
          In my opinion, the best protection is to have valuable skills. I personally see no good reason for employment protection. I live in Germany, however, as a freelancer I get no protection at all. Why do some people deserve it, and others don't? What makes an "employee"? I can understand having to "insure" against the risk of becoming too specialized. Like if you work for one company for years or decades, it might be difficult to find employment elsewhere. However, that insurance should be factored into the contracts "employees" are willing to accept. Likewise as a freelancer, I have to ask for a certain minimum amount of money to cover my risks. Even for employees the protection might have downsides. They are stuck with inefficient coworkers who can't be fired.If you are young, you'll have to leave before people who are older. And employees might stick to jobs where they are not doing their best for too long. And overall, creation of business is hampered, which hurts everybody. Just some thoughts.
      • rglullis 7y ago
        "gives" after taking almost double in taxes. And I will surely have more years paying tons of taxes than paternity leaves. Forgive them, Milton, for they don't know what they are saying.
  • RookyNumbas 7y ago
    Do we know yet if it has it resulted in an decrease in the gender pay gap and other effects?
    • blub 7y ago
      It hasn't, or at least the media's whining about the gap as much as everywhere else.
• sgt 7y ago
  Seems a bit bizarre seeing that mothers in most cases will need to spend more time with their babies. After all, there are certain things like breastfeeding that only a mother can do.
  • wutwutwutwut 7y ago
    Hmm, a quick search tells me that roughly half of all babies are breastfed after 6 months in the US. Seems acceptable to cater for potential needs of half the population (assuming numbers are the same obviously). I was home with my kid when he turned 1 until he was 1.5 using this system in Sweden. Being a guy, I didn't breastfeed him. Kid still appear functional.
    • oblio 7y ago
      > Kid still appears functional. It's ok, you have more than enough time to traumatize his childhood and early adulthood :-p
      • wutwutwutwut 7y ago
        Clearly. I tried to explain binary to him this morning. It will go downhill from here.
    • trumpeta 7y ago
      > Kid still appear functional. Yeah you don't want an object oriented kid.
  • bhaak 7y ago
    But both genders can feed the baby. It is not a rare situation where a mother doesn't have enough milk to feed a baby without additional food. What other things are mother-only things in your opinion?
    • lardo 7y ago
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2939272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2939272/
• hervature 7y ago
  > Finland says it wants to "promote wellbeing and gender equality" Finally, a country that understands that one of the driving forces of gender inequality is the asymmetry of experience caused by maternal leave.
  • toasterlovin 7y ago
    > Finally, a country that understands that one of the driving forces of gender inequality is the asymmetry of experience caused by maternal leave. The asymmetry of experience is actually caused by child bearing, which can only be done by women. Maternal leave is downstream from that.
    • LatteLazy 7y ago
      Right now all an employer sees is time off. In Finland that means there is no difference to the employer.
      • zozbot234 7y ago
        I assume the health insurance costs of actually having a baby are quite non-trivial. Of course men tend to get e.g. heart attacks and the like, especially as they age, so I suppose it all balances out in the end.
        • LatteLazy 7y ago
          Yeah, plus (I think) insurers just quote a price per employee, not a price per man/woman etc. So maybe it's easier to "price" the cost of hiring a woman (maternity leave) than a man (heart attacks or whatever)...
        • frobozz 7y ago
          Fortunately Finland has a healthcare system, so there is no difference to the employer.
        • lotsofpulp 7y ago
• danilocesar 7y ago
  Another step towards equality pay (so the risk of moms and dads leaving on parental is the same). This is not obvious, but after you think about it it makes a lot of sense. Congrats Finland.
• santialbo 7y ago
  Spain is progressively doing this. Starting 2021, men and women will have the paid same parental leave of 16 + 2 weeks (non-transferable). The main reason is fight against the discrimination from employers who think hiring women is inconvenient because they can go on parental leave for very long.
  • wrdalex 7y ago
    I believe men have 4 months of parental leave in Spain already, starting 2020.
    • santialbo 7y ago
      It was 8 weeks on 2019, 12 on 2020 and 16 on 2021. Plus now men can also request "Lactancia" which adds an extra couple weeks.
• sputknick 7y ago
  I'm glad this exists. When I had my kids I worked white collar jobs for large wealthy corporations, and I got exactly zero days each time. This attitude change is a step in the right direction. The problem is the people who in my opinion who need this the most (the working classes) are the ones least likely to get it (at least here in America).
  • bnjms 7y ago
    That’s why these things should be national as far as we can support them. Healthcare being a perk of employment was a mistake from taxing only profit.
• toomuchtodo 7y ago
  But will they force Dads to take it? As a Dad who had two kids, I would much rather pay for childcare than take paternity leave. Would someone like me be held back artificially to promote equality? EDIT: Not a freak, don't care for the infant stage. Happy to dote when they start to turn into people.
  • hugg 7y ago
    Noone is forced. It's just a 'waste' if you don't :).
    • deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  • hwillis 7y ago
    It's paid leave and no you won't be forced to spend time with your infant children you freak said with love
  • brazilianabroad 7y ago
    You'd rather pay people to be with your kids than be with your kids? Wow Yeah I'd guess you'd be held back from being a crap dad
    • toomuchtodo 7y ago
      I would rather pay for someone else to do what I consider dreck work (changings, feedings, monitoring while they sleep) while still making time each evening to spend with them. Research has shown this to be optimal (time spent with your children later in life closer to adolescent years matters more than their younger years). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jomf.12170 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jomf.12170
      • brazilianabroad 7y ago
        > Research has shown this to be optimal. Hey, you can tell yourself whatever you want.
• systemtest 7y ago
  The discussion surrounding parental leave is one of the reasons I like contracting. I get paid hourly and get to set my own working conditions and benefits. If I ever get a baby, I can take as much leave as I want to make sure my wife and baby are taken care of. I don't have to lobby the government or beg my employer in order to get time off. And to answer the question that is going to be asked: "But then you don't get paid?". Correct, but when I do work my pay is around double to triple, so I can take a whole lot of parental leave before it becomes financially irresponsible.
  • wincy 7y ago
    It’s the difference between you making good choices individually or the government forcing “good” choices that might not be best for you as an individual.
  • standardUser 7y ago
    You're projecting your personal situation on to hundreds of millions of people with dramatically different situations. Government policies should be designed to work as well as possible for as many people as possible, not for the minority who stand out because of their high incomes or high demand skills.
• socialdemocrat 7y ago
  Good job Finland! Fellow Nordic here (Norwegian) and a dad. The father quota here in Norway made a huge social change. It really helped make it socially acceptable for dads to spend more time with their children. I noticed for my two sons how much of a difference it makes being around your kids when they are young. You cannot cannot substitute short time with "quality time." The amount of time you are there matters a lot to small kids. I think it is healthy for children to have both a mother and father who is actively present in their lives. You need a gender equality oriented society for that. If women are offered poor pay and opportunities it encourages women to stay home the whole time while men do all the work. That is bad for both parties. Men see little of their kids and kids don't get the experience with dad that they benefit from. Meanwhile the mother may get a lot more time with the kids but she also suffers from having no career or independence. The relationship also suffers as one does not have a work life experience and child caring experience to share and talk about.
  • dairylee 7y ago
    This was someone we definitely noticed about Norway when we were in Oslo for a week. There was so many dads just walking around the city/parks in the middle of the day pushing prams. It was so nice to see.
    • mumblemumble 7y ago
      sigh I suppose none of them have to deal with people dismissively describing spending time with their families as "babysitting", either.
      • Pfhreak 7y ago
        I clap back hard on that when people do it to me. No, I am not babysitting, I'm parenting. Thankfully, it seems to be happening less and less over time.
      • Moru 7y ago
        Nope, never heard that.
• conanbatt 7y ago
  > 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.
• hwillis 7y ago
  Excellent- maternity leave isn't just about physically recovering, it's about the child and parent as well. It only makes sense that both parents should get the same time with their kid.
• jve 7y ago
  > Neighbouring Sweden has Europe's most generous system of parental leave with 240 days each after a baby's birth That's working days or what? In Latvia (Estonia neighbour) you may get 12 months (60% of money calculated from amount BEFORE taxes) or 18 months (43,75%). And dad can leave, too. https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/38051-on-maternity-and-sickness-insurance https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/38051-on-maternity-and-sicknes... Section 10.6. Amount of Parental Benefit
  • jacobush 7y ago
    Working days.
  • sandos 7y ago
    Also Sweden gives ~80% of normal income. If you mean 60% of [income before tax] without taxes, thats pretty good.
    • jve 7y ago
      > If you mean 60% of [income before tax] without taxes Yes. And +171 Eur no matter what.
• jupp0r 7y ago
  That’s really cool. It sets strong incentives for men to spend those 6 months with their children, but still leaves the the freedom to not take the leave (and basically forfeit 6 months of free “vacation”). I’m incredibly grateful for the combined 4 months I got to spend full time with my two children and can only recommend taking the time if you can.
• Waterluvian 7y ago
  Wow impressive. In Canada as a Dad I can get, I think, 6 months of paid leave. Although the pay is covered by Employment Insurance and it only covers so much (like 55% of your salary up to $600/wk) I ended up just taking four weeks vacation for my first kid and it made all the difference. I strongly believe that giving flexible and generous vacation time to all parents/guardians will have a positive impact on society. The challenge is that these impacts are hard to measure with a spreadsheet.
  • jkaplowitz 7y ago
    Quebec goes beyond the Canadian norm in this area, though still nowhere near some European countries: https://www.educaloi.qc.ca/en/capsules/maternity-paternity-and-parental-leave https://www.educaloi.qc.ca/en/capsules/maternity-paternity-a... (EI premiums are lower here, because a separate QPIP payroll deduction funds the more generous paid leave benefits described at this link in lieu of the corresponding federal ones.) We also have $8.25/child/day government-subsidized daycare.
  • speg 7y ago
    Eh? It's either 12/18 months of EI (split however) + 5/8 weeks reserved for the non primary caregiver.
• nisuni 7y ago
  Thanks but no thanks. When I’ll have a baby I‘ll have to breastfeed, after having carried him for nine months, and having him exit through my private parts. Give me my extended, non trasferrable maternal leave! Edit: since some people are misunderstanding my point: extending the paternal leave costs money. I would rather prefer those money being spent on more maternal leave.
  • pavlov 7y ago
    Nobody is taking that away. This is about giving the same amount of non-transferrable leave to both mothers and fathers.
    • nisuni 7y ago
      Why not increasing the maternal leave then? I would highly prefer that! Some money is spent into this, I would rather see the money being spent to increase mother’s leave.
  • gambiting 7y ago
    Mothers already have a year of maternal leave, this is about fathers getting decent amount of leave as well. No one is taking anything away from you.
    • nisuni 7y ago
      The government is putting some money in it. I would prefer that money was used to extend the mother’s leave.
      • gambiting 7y ago
        Again, no one is taking anything away from you as is. You can prefer that the money was given to mothers instead, that's fine.
        • nisuni 7y ago
• baby_wipe 7y ago
  I strongly dislike the idea of any government-mandated paternal leave. Staying home from work is not free, and the cost of it comes out of my salary. I personally want some paternal leave even with its costs, but I'd prefer that negotiation to stay between me and my employer. I don't want some bottom threshold set by a third party.
  • muricayeah 7y ago
    >and the cost of it comes out of my salary. Why should it come out of you salary? Why can't it be fully paid?
  • mrlala 7y ago
    >Staying home from work is not free, and the cost of it comes out of my salary So does every other aspect of caring for people (police, fire, education). >but I'd prefer that negotiation to stay between me and my employer Hey that works great if you are one of those people that is invaluable to your company, or can easily negotiate and move into a better job. Do you know how that would go for 99.9% of people? "Hey boss, I'm pregnant, isn't that great! Can I have 12 months paid off so I can take care of my family?" "Erm, how about 3 days?" "Ok I see how this goes, fine how about 2 weeks?" "No forget it, you're fired. I'll just hire someone who isn't having a baby to replace you. Good luck!"
  • socialdemocrat 7y ago
    You are paid in Nordic countries during the leave, so that is a non-issue. Sure indirectly you are paying through your taxes. But for society as a whole this makes financial sense. In Nordic countries we have the worlds highest female labour participation rate. That is a lot of extra tax dollars. It also means higher birth rate which benefits the economy. Look at asian countries with birth rates around 1.2 which where slow at adopting these kinds of systems. Nordic countries are more like 1.8. Over time such a low birth rate will be a huge financial burden for a country. Any taxes you saved from not having paternal leave will be lost in taxes to pay for caring for a huge elderly population.
  • kraigie 7y ago
    How do you feel about the US' government mandated overtime laws? The government mandated exempt employees? Just curious.
• weinzierl 7y ago
  In Germany it is the parents who get the leave and they can freely decide who takes the 12 months of it. Even better yet: If they decide to split they get an extra of two months, so 14 in total.
  • kaybe 7y ago
    And it usually ends with the mother taking 12 and the dad taking 2, and these 2 being spent on a longer vacation somewhere. There are many reasons, it seems to me that external circumstances are shaping a lot of them.
    • codingmess 7y ago
      Finances.
    • rtkwe 7y ago
      Yeah that's a pattern you see in most places with any kind of shared pool. The father takes a small, frequently the legal minimum time, and the mother takes the rest. Ultimately it kind of makes the most sense because it is the woman that's gone through the most work of giving birth and is a natural food source for the kid but it does perpetuate the issue of women's careers being set back by having a kid.
      • lopmotr 7y ago
        When they have that much freedom, can you really call it "perpetuating the issue" instead of "doing what they want"? It's not an issue for the women who prefer to do it, or they wouldn't be doing it.
        • rtkwe 7y ago
          It's not entirely a choice it's socially usually seen as weird for the guy to take more than the minimum or some small portion above that in many of these places. And even if it is a completely free choice (when do those ever exist?) the impact to women's careers extend beyond the setback from leaving the workforce for several months because they're still expected to do more of the labor of child rearing. edit: To expand ultimately societies and governments need women to have kids, as of now they're the only ones who can after all so I think eliminating as many downsides as possible to that is something that should be done.
• nautilus12 7y ago
  USA will never do this :( Plus my kids are already born. I got two weeks and it wasn't nearly enough.
  • dec0dedab0de 7y ago
    New Jersey already does this.
  • Phillips126 7y ago
    When my 1st daughter was born, I got exactly 2 days off using my own vacation days. We were a small team at a printing company and each person had a "specialization". If I wasn't there, it was a large part of the company effectively shut down until I returned (it was a lot of pressure and I am glad to not be there anymore). At a different company (much much larger) I was able to take 2 weeks (out of 3 the company provides) of vacation when my son was born and I am two months away from my third and final child where I expect to do the same. I wish I was able to spend more time with them (and my recovering Wife from the caesarean) but as the primary income for our household we wouldn't be able to survive on things like FMLA. It is very disappointing seeing how modern the rest of the world is in terms of healthcare, maternity/paternity leave, education, etc...
• europe-romania 7y ago
  2 years in Romania. Can be either mom or dad
• kmlx 7y ago
  an interesting story from japan: they have 1 year parental leave for men and women. but just 8% of men actually took it compared with 82% for women. the reason is the same across the planet: they would be left behind at work. compare this with the former communist country of Romania, today an EU country: 126 days for women, 5 days for men. income during those times is payed for by the state (80%). societal discrimination against women is deep, and the law can certainly help, but it's only part of the problem. in some places a huge overhaul of society needs to happen. my fear is that the forces that want to keep society as-is are usually much stronger than the ones that want change.
  • europe-romania 7y ago
    > compare this with the former communist country of Romania, today an EU country: 126 days for women, 5 days for men. income during those times is payed for by the state (80%). Not true
    • kmlx 7y ago
      sorry, that was "maternity leave", not "raising a child leave". for "raising a child" it's a maximum of 2 years, granted you've worked for 12 full months before, right?
• willis936 7y ago
  Many comments laud this as a step towards gender equality, which is a noble goal. However, I do wonder about the unforeseen consequences. All mammals (afaik) are raised by mothers. Humans are mammals. Humans do a good job of making changes to our nature, and for the most part those changes have resulted in better lives. However we still have things like nuclear families. Children aren't taken away from parents and raised by communities instead. So we don't throw everything out from nature, because some of it works well and reliably. Is there any science to suggest that there are no adverse effects on an infant from having an absent mother? To move back up: I'm saying there might be a good reason mothers should be given maternal leave and that there might not be as good of a reason for men to be given paternal leave. Gender equality doesn't mean both genders are the same.
  • hugg 7y ago
    What kind of good reason would you be looking for? I mean for most just spending time with their small children and forming good relationships with them is 'good enough' And yes, gender equality has not been tried fully in a society yet so it's hard to know.
  • blub 7y ago
    Under Finland's system mother are still given maternal leave, but the fathers now get mandatory leave too. That's how I understood it, no country would forbid the mother maternal leave, except maybe the US.
    • willis936 7y ago
      So then why would men be entitled to paternal leave? Because another sex is given leave?
      • socialdemocrat 7y ago
        If would be say the first 6 months the mother takes leave while the next 6 months the father takes leave, for a total of 12 months. It just means they share the burden and benefits. What exactly is wrong with that? I cannot say I understand your "entitled" question. Is anyone in principle entitled to anything? Does it matter? Why not simply do what works great? Does doing something need to have any other reason than that it works great and everybody is happy about the result?
• gylterud 7y ago
  When we had our first child (in Sweden), we could divide the time (13 months total) freely between the two of us. Then we got some extra money if each of us took more than 30% of that time. I think they stopped with the money bonus, but it was really great for us. We are now having our second child (now in Norway), and while the father quota is great, they now require the mother to be "in activity" (i.e. working) if the father is to have anything more than his quota. This feels like an unnecessary restriction, which we didn't have in Sweden.
  • radicalbyte 7y ago
    This should be the norm in all of the developed world! As a freelancer I took a self-funded three-month break (it just finished) when our third child was born and it has been amazing. I wish that I'd been in a position to do the same for my other two children too. Firstly, we're trying hard to close the gender pay gap. Giving fathers the same amount of free time as the mothers goes a long way here. Secondly, it's fantastic for the father-baby bond and it makes both life and work as a young parent so much easier. Thirdly, the cost is not large. Businesses are already absorbing the lost productivity caused by the fathers being exhausted. This formalizes it.
    • carierx1 7y ago
      Excellent point. I've noticed significant cognitive performance drop in new dads as the tremendous stress of your first child drains you. Its important for businesses to incorporate this reality into their planning.
    • gylterud 7y ago
      > Thirdly, the cost is not large. Businesses are already absorbing the lost productivity caused by the fathers being exhausted. This formalizes it. Exactly! And in both Norway and Sweden you can be part time on leave. For some time I had 25% leave, which meant that I was working, but could go early when tired from a long night of baby cries or stay at home one day when my wife needed to get something else done. And this time I will be on 80–90% leave, which means I am at home, but can pass by the office once a week to catch up with my students.
• dragonwriter 7y ago
  The US, federally, already gives dads he same parental leave as moms. (It's crap, but it's the same crap.)
  • arbitrage 7y ago
    In letter, yes. Try claiming it and see what happens.
    • dragonwriter 7y ago
      I have. Twice.
  • ipnon 7y ago
    Do you mean employees of the federal government? How long is the leave? Is it paid?
    • dragonwriter 7y ago
      > Do you mean employees of the federal government? No, I mean most workers, under FMLA. > How long is the leave? 12 weeks. > Is it paid? No.
• dadarepublic 7y ago
  This is great news! With the current direction of US politics, as a US citizen, I find myself increasingly entertaining the thought of becoming an ex-pat. Top countries I've thought about have been the Nordic countries - Finland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Greenland, Iceland and have considered the Netherlands as well. They seem to have reasonable blended economies with social policies that make (more) sense. No country/systems is perfect and I'm always willing to try something new for a time.
  • ipnon 7y ago
    I am in the same boat (pun intended). Just the cost of delivery without complications (>$10,000 on average in the US [0]) makes the prospect of having a child in a country with socialized healthcare economically sensible. Think of how much that $10,000 could be worth if invested in the stock market instead of in a healthcare plan's yearly revenue. [0] https://www.businessinsider.com/how-much-does-it-cost-to-have-a-baby-2018-4 https://www.businessinsider.com/how-much-does-it-cost-to-hav...
    • SJSque 7y ago
      Submitter here. I'm a British chap living in the Netherlands. You might want to read my comment [1] about what happens after you have a baby over here; it triggered quite a lot of discussion... [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20884787 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20884787
• ryanmercer 7y ago
  I know I'm going to be downvoted and already regret deciding to share this but... I've never understood parental leave. If I want to go on a vacation, I have to plan for that and save time to use for it. If you want to have a child, you should have to plan to save your time to take and spend with the child or be in a financial place where one parent can quit their job to stay with the child. It's not like you go to sleep one night and wake up to find a baby next to you that was delivered by a stork. My fiance and I plan to try to have a child once we're married in May but it's something we will save our time off for during the early days of its life because we are choosing to try and have a child. If a company wants to offer this as a benefit, that's awesome, but I don't understand why governments need to create law to make it a mandatory thing. Having a child is a choice.
  • swozey 7y ago
    Because most people can't go on a 6 month vacation no matter what the circumstance. And this is a much more critical event to another persons development than going to see Macchu Picchu. And I'm saying this as someone with no kids, but I did have the displeasure of growing up with my family overseas at various wars throughout my childhood.
    • lightgreen 7y ago
      Government could give a credit for that 6 months paternity vacation to be paid from future income. Not saying it is a great idea, but it’s possible to make paternity leave self paid.
  • bluGill 7y ago
    Governments have an interest in how the children grow up. Now there is some "whatever that means" encoded in the above. However it is generally noted that children with a good relationship with both parents tend to do better in life than those with only one parent. Thus there is an interest in ensuring that relationship exists if possible.
    • lotsofpulp 7y ago
• aetimmes 7y ago
  I'm a US male who's 1 month into my 6 months fully-paid paternity leave with our first child. My wife has roughly 4.5 months between banked PTO and FMLA/disability leave. I'm sitting at home right now watching/changing/feeding our baby while my wife is out at doctor's appointments taking care of her health. Having the flexibility to practice a modicum of self-care without neglecting the health and happiness of our child has been such a huge boon to our family. If anyone has any questions about the experience, feel free to ask.
  • 0xcafecafe 7y ago
    What happens to your responsibilities at work while you are out? And are you totally cut off from work while you are out or are you occasionally responding to mails? Also are you more of an individual contributor or have a leadership role?
    • aetimmes 7y ago
      I was/am an IC on a medium-sized team. I had a project I was the primary contributor for within that team that I've handed off to my teammates to continue (after writing up documentation and doing some knowledge transfer). I occasionally log in to read my email to keep up-to-date with happenings among the team, but I haven't needed to respond to anything since I went out. Our team made an effort in the last year to reduce some of the silo-ization of knowledge and increase our 'lottery factor', and I think those efforts have helped make sure that the team was prepared for one of us going out on leave. At the very least, nobody has called me up saying "hey, your systems are on fire!", so that's been nice.
      • 0xcafecafe 7y ago
        Thanks for the reply!
      • scruple 7y ago
        First time I'd seen it called the "lottery factor." I like that much more than the "hit by a bus factor."
• codingmess 7y ago
  "to get fathers to spend time with their children" I'm all for fathers spending time with their children, but this kind of framing annoys me. The feminist narrative, which governments seem to swallow, is that fathers don't want to spend time with their children, and force mothers out of their careers. The reality is probably that it is primarily a financial issue. Fathers spending more time with their children means less money for the family, in most cases. Not only is the compensation usually lower than the salary, many dads also fear disadvantages in the job when they stay away for too long, which would also result in less money for the family. And yes, there are also reasons why it is expected primarily of fathers to provide for the family. It is not just an arbitrary social construct.
  • socialdemocrat 7y ago
    > The feminist narrative, which governments seem to swallow, is that fathers don't want to spend time with their children, and force mothers out of their careers. I think that is all in your head because you are so anti feminism. Look we have been through this in Norway for years now. Reality is that many men felt uncomfortable making that choice because there was an expectation in society that staying home with your child was a mothers job and a silly indulgence for men. Once we made part of the leave reserved for men, they suddenly had a simply argument for the boss "sorry man, we got to take it or we loose it." It reduced the stigma for men to stay home with the child. It also changed how bosses viewed it. You could say it was a bit of clever social engineering. > The reality is probably that it is primarily a financial issue. Fathers spending more time with their children means less money for the family, in most cases. When you get full pay during leave as in most Nordic countries, that is not the issue. The issue was the stigma attached to men being home.
    • kraigie 7y ago
      I do wonder if Norway has a different Pension/benefit scheme. Or if they need ever greater numbers to keep the benefits paying out like UK/US.
    • codingmess 7y ago
      There are not many countries where you get full pay. Full pay makes it a different matter. And again, I am all for fathers taking time off to spend with their kids. I just think the narrative is harmful. Harmful to women, actually, who tend to be forced out of their motherhood privileges by well-meaning laws. As for "fathers feeling uncomfortable", I am not buying it. That is just in people's head and could be remedied with a little propaganda (some TV shows telling people it's fine to take time off as a father). Finances on the other hand are a real world issue. Seriously, you would forego spending time with your children because it makes you uncomfortable that society might frown upon it? There are no real repercussions, just a mild feeling of uneasiness?
• romaaeterna 7y ago
  My family is of Norwegian extraction and I'm a dad too. My wife has a completely different relationship with my kids than I do. She also had to go through a great deal more to birth them than I did. Her parental leave was as much about medical recovery as it was bonding time with the kids. And, to put this delicately, but as something that needs to be stated because it's true and important for the discussion: she has a different relationship with our children precisely because she is their mother. The two of us are not interchangeable. There are a million ways this is true. I'm an attentive and a loving father, but the sound of a crying baby is something that I can compartmentalize when I need to. On my wife, though, it is an unbearable sound with physiological effects even. (One that she uses when pumping milk, for example.) If you are not emotionally autistic, one of the most striking things that you notice about other people is how startingly different men and women are in a myriad ways, many of them related to the care of other people (big or little). Personally, I find that this "gender equality" push winds up being extraordinarily anti-woman in effect, and whenever I see a man preaching it, I assume that he is likely a broken individual in his relationship with the fairer sex, certainly someone that I would care to keep far away from my daughters.
  • CydeWeys 7y ago
    You're projecting your own experience as if it's a universal truth for other fathers, but it simply isn't. You may even be an outlier amongst new fathers in developed nations.
  • bantunes 7y ago
    > Personally, I find that this "gender equality" push winds up being extraordinarily anti-woman in effect, and whenever I see a man preaching it, I assume that he is likely a broken individual in his relationship with the fairer sex, certainly someone that I would care to keep far away from my daughters. You could try getting to know people, instead of making broad assumptions. They might surprise you, and you might start wondering why you're in such a rush to assume things about them anyway.
  • ceilingcorner 7y ago
    The problem in contemporary culture is that we are not even allowed to have this conversation. To state the obvious fact that men and women are different and have different strengths and weaknesses (in general, as a sex) is tantamount to heresy, I guess because gender roles are associated with perceived past injustices. > Personally, I find that this "gender equality" push winds up being extraordinarily anti-woman in effect, and whenever I see a man preaching it, I assume that he is likely a broken individual in his relationship with the fairer sex, certainly someone that I would care to keep far away from my daughters. It is still unclear to me how forcing both parents to work full-time jobs is beneficial for anyone other than corporations. Parents today work more and spend less time with their kids than probably any period of time other than the early Industrial Revolution. This was not the case prior to opening up the work force en masse for women.
• astannard 7y ago
  Finland Finland Finland, the place I want to be...
• lotsofpulp 7y ago
  As an American, I find it hard to be patriotic about my country when my fellow citizens can’t muster up the political will to ensure any paid parental leave for most people. Edit: changed parental leave to paid parental leave
  • dfxm12 7y ago
    Well, there is a big election coming up. You can find out who is on the ballot, where they stand on this issue and pass the info along to the people in your area. If someone isn't planning on having kids, they might not think it affects them, so be prepared to convince them otherwise, too.
    • lotsofpulp 7y ago
      I do all of that, and will continue to do so. I can't even convince people that have been negatively impacted by the lack of parental leave to go out and vote. I also only live in states that mandate at least some parental leave.
    • leetcrew 7y ago
      when you say "increased parental leave", childfree people tend to hear "more money out of my pocket". I'm not sure how you would go about convincing them this is a good thing.
      • SuperFerret 7y ago
        Make billionaires pay for it.
      • ahoy 7y ago
        I think you vastly overestimate the power of the r/childfree subreddit as a voting bloc
        • leetcrew 7y ago
          why would you say that? I'm directly responding to a comment that suggests persuading childfree people that they should care about parental leave.
• keanzu 7y ago
  > noticed about Norway when we were in Oslo A lot can be achieved when your country floats on oil. The Government Pension Fund Global, aka the Oil Fund, was worth about $195,000 per Norwegian citizen in 2018. If others had this kind of safety net they might behave in a similar manner. Petrostates can afford a lot of leisure time for their citizens.
  • socialdemocrat 7y ago
    The stupidity of people these days. This was literally an article about Finland and paternal leave. A country which has no oil. Literally EVERY single Nordic country has this kind of system. Not just Norway. And Norway had this BEFORE we had any oil. Never mind the whole inconsistency in your rant. Why do you think the oil fund is so F...ing huge? Because we DON'T spend a lot of oil money. We save it.
    • dang 7y ago
      Please don't respond to a bad comment with a worse one. It helps nothing—it only makes the thread worse yet. The last thing we need here is nationalistic flamewar, and when it comes to flamewar, the second escalation is often the turning point and therefore the thing most to be avoided. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      • socialdemocrat 7y ago
        Sorry, but unless it was clear I was not attacking any country. I was trying to stand up for fellow Finland, not attacking it . But I should not have suggested there are stupid people. One should stick to arguing the case.
  • Pfhreak 7y ago
    Is there evidence this isn't true for other states? I think we just prioritize differently.
  • vertex-four 7y ago
• netcan 7y ago
  Who pays? Employer/Government? Can anyone chime in on the basic setup... eligibility, amounts, etc?
• tunnuz 7y ago
  Dad living in Austria. Here parents share the parental leave, and it's amazing.
• petercooper 7y ago
  I'm a dad (of three) and I am not convinced that time spent at the very start of their lives is as significant as that later in their lives (note the "as", I am not saying it has no value!) when you can really nurture their passions, knowledge, etc. I did spend a lot of time with my children in their earliest days because it was the right thing to do, but I don't feel either they or I particularly gained from it (than if I'd spent a bit less, say). Do I feel the time I spend with them now they're older pays serious dividend for their futures? Absolutely. I own a company and can spend an above average amount of time with my children.. but are companies or the government going to support the majority of parents spending prolonged periods of times with older children? Sadly I can't see it happening, but I think that's a more important task than having two parents on tap for a newborn. All purely IMHO, of course.
  • Jolter 7y ago
    Swedish parental leave can be saved until the kid turns 12. Not that the 480 days will last that long, of course!
    • petercooper 7y ago
      That sounds like a good idea and what I think would be better for everyone. Of course, then it's a case of avoiding the temptation of taking it too early(!) :)
      • Moru 7y ago
        If you wait too long, it's hard to find time that isn't taken by school already :-)
    • scruple 7y ago
      Is that per parent or is it shared between parents? That really sounds incredible, going to have to remember to look this up.
      • Moru 7y ago
• tonyga 7y ago
  France: both parents can be on paternity/maternity leave up to the age of 3 for the child.
• duxup 7y ago
  I worked for a company based in the valley a while back. They announced their paid parental leave policy one year to much fanfare. That was handy as we were having my second child. I filled out the paperwork for the parental leave and .... they told me I didn't qualify because I didn't live in California... so unpaid leave for me it was. Government policy is the only way to go with this stuff. Otherwise it will be a benefit only available to a few.
• nickbauman 7y ago
  I don't know what it's like in the Nordic countries but here in the US I walk down the street with a 4 year old on my shoulders to work every day to drop her off at school. The women I pass on the street and in the halls beam at her when she greets them and sometimes they exchange a few words. The men? They don't notice her: she's edited out of their minds eye like she doesn't exist, even if she cries "HULLOOO! My name is ___ what's yours?" to them except on rare occasions. Men who don't have the experience of caring for a child even for a short while cannot make good decisions about what's normative of a civilization. Good policies will not be enacted if men do not "see" children.
  • OCASM 7y ago
    Maybe they want to avoid the risk of being labelled predators.
  • jawns 7y ago
    I'm a dad of 3, and I do acknowledge other people's children with a wave or hello. But prior to becoming a father, I felt very nervous about doing so, because so few men do give children attention (outside of family members) that I worried that parents would wonder if I had bad intentions. But hey, fellow men, guess how we break down that stigma? It's by having a lot of normal, everyday guys acknowledge children's existence in friendly, wholesome ways -- even if it's just a wave or a quick greeting. If a greater percentage of men would do this, then there would be far less nervousness about undeserved, incorrect assumptions.
  • opportune 7y ago
    You’re saying you’re bothered by men not smiling at your kid as they walk past? Hardly think that has anything to do with making good decisions about civilization
  • tylermw 7y ago
    Replace your child with a full grown adult and you BET I'm ignoring someone trying to chat me up while I'm hustling to work in the morning :) Just saying, don't take other adults not interacting with your child as some overarching statement about gender in society.
• bunchOfCucks 7y ago
  Sweet paid vacay! I love modern equality.
• KillerRAK 7y ago
  I love a good, "X Nordic Country provides Y for FREE -- so should the United States!" Where Y is some socialized benefit. Let's put this in perspective: Finland's population is around 5.5 million people. That's somewhere between the populations of South Carolina and Minnesota. Get a grip people -- The United States is not even remotely equivalent to Finland in terms of demographics and population. Find a nice U.S. State that doles out great Parental benefits, and move.
  • psychometry 7y ago
    Among the things you fail to understand is that GDP will generally scale with the population. You wouldn't be trying to pay for U.S. parents' leave with Finnish tax revenue.
  • stevekemp 7y ago
    Yes, Finland is small. Yes the cost of covering these benefits is smaller than it would be in America, but the people who pay taxes are also fewer. If all of America paid the same %-taxes as Finnish people do the system would absolutely work. It isn't magic. It's just that your country has decided, over a number of years, that health-care should be covered by insurance, and employment, rather than taxes. If your politicians want to make a change, and get the appropriate votes, you absolutely could do the same thing as is done here.
  • kickopotomus 7y ago
    The Finnish GDP per capita is $45,700. For the US, it's $59,500. Please explain why social programs are so impossible for one of the wealthiest countries in the world.
  • KillerRAK 7y ago
    Wow, you all are really taking this fact hard. It's ok -- I know was shocked when I first heard this back in high school. Reading thru the comments, it sounds like New Jersey has great parental benefits, but you will be sharing them with a few more million people than Denmark, so ymmv. It comes down to this: you sound like a complete idiot comparing social programs of these small Countries to <any> large Country. Stop.
• OCASM 7y ago
  Modern mainstream feminism is based on the ideas of tomboy lesbians. Until that's corrected any attempts to promote motherhood as equal or better than careerism will be considered misogyny.
• jredwards 7y ago
  In the tech worker's paradise that is California, I'm preparing for my generous two weeks of paternity leave. My co-worker, having not been employed at the company for a year yet, is preparing to burn all four days of his vacation time because he's not entitled to paternity leave yet. This is broken.
  • ipnon 7y ago
    It's hard to be enthusiastic about American labor practices hearing anecdotes like this. I think my quality of life would improve by immigrating to a country that provides the benefits like healthcare and childcare as a right. This is because even though I would likely take a salary cut of over 50%, I would have access to the sorts of intangible life experiences that are difficult or impossible to price. For example, raising my child for the first year of their life, living for another decade.
  • systemtest 7y ago
    As a tech worker in California, your income is triple to that of a Finnish tech worker. You can easily take unpaid time off for your paternity leave, perhaps even quit your job for a year, and still get out ahead.
    • ve7cxz 7y ago
      ...and his living costs are probably way higher too, so it's not a fair comparison.
      • yellowarchangel 7y ago
        I think it's fair to say even if we adjusted for lower US taxes, higher livings costs, that the Californian worker would be far better ahead still. There is a reason the entire Silicon Valley doesn't pack up and move to Finland. The money is in California right now.
      • lightgreen 7y ago
        There are cheaper places to live if someone wants to take a year off. I guess even in California some not too distant downs are much cheaper than SV.
• DocEasyE 7y ago
  so is this implying they deserve the same time off? let's be honest the Mums did all the heavy lifting here, i'm ok with them having more time off their body did go through a massive change.
• 627467 7y ago
  I'm among the ones who think that the most efficient way to lower gender pay gap is to promote longer leaves (parental or not) among men. 'favouring' one gender with 'benefits' for things like caring for family is only reinforcing established roles.
• tartoran 7y ago
  Great job Finland! This is very important for strengthening the family. As a dad, if I were to choose, I'd rather spend a larger chunk of time with my kid from 2 and up. That is a very good period of time when the kid forms important habits and through games lots of things can be taught. This is actually a goal of mine, I want to save enough and take a few years off from work (or maybe find a part-time gig) and spend some good quality time with my kid.
• JackFr 7y ago
  Where does the money come from? I'm an American and so I'm less familiar with other countries policies. I get that mandating a very generous family leave policy is wonderful for parents and good for society. To me it seems it's gotta be tough for small business owners though. A business of lets say 8 employees simply cannot afford a paid six month leave without it impacting its performance. How is that handled in those countries? That being said, I'm inclined to proposals here which fund it through Social Security or a Social Security like system, which would level the playing field between small and large businesses.
  • zackmorris 7y ago
    Without knowing anything about it, I'm inclined to think that it's a combination of Finland's offshore oil drilling income of at least $5.23 billion and their tax rate of 51.6%: https://oec.world/en/profile/country/fin/ https://oec.world/en/profile/country/fin/ https://tradingeconomics.com/finland/personal-income-tax-rate https://tradingeconomics.com/finland/personal-income-tax-rat... The US has a lower top income tax rate of 37%: https://www.debt.org/tax/brackets/ https://www.debt.org/tax/brackets/ Other more democratic socialism leaning countries redistribute income tax from the wealthy to fund the needs of the general population, but the US just gives that money to people who are already rich. Supposedly this raises all incomes, but incomes have not risen appreciably since the mid 1970s: https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/15558/productivity-vs-real-earnings-in-the-us-what-happened-ca-1974 https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/15558/producti...
    • Ndymium 7y ago
      > Finland's offshore oil drilling income of at least $5.23 billion Huh? We don't have any sources of oil. We do have oil refineries but not any wells or drilling. You may be thinking of Norway.
      • deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      • zackmorris 7y ago
• alexnewman 7y ago
  What are the negative impacts?
  • Ndymium 7y ago
    Cost. It costs a lot of money.
• chriselles 7y ago
  New Zealand is currently at 22, but moving to 26 weeks paid parental leave for babies born from July 1, 2020. The paid parental leave is up to the parents to decide the split between them. I think it is a great idea for fathers to be encouraged more to take a share of the paid parental leave. This could go some small way in helping remedy income disparity between genders. I was deployed and/or travelling a lot when our boys were young. Another poster questioned the value of time with infants as opposed to when they are older. I do think bonding with infants and toddlers is super important for both parent and child. But it can also feel like a robotic and laborious grind. As my boys enter high school, I most enjoy our ritualised time together during daily school drop offs and pick ups. Engaging with them, guiding them on their own journey, and observing how far they have come. I have few regrets, but one of them is not spending more time wth my kids when they were younger, which probably feeds the extra effort in recent years to spend more time with them as they grow into young men. You can’t get time back. Make the most of every minute.
• ykevinator 7y ago
  Men can love their kids without becoming co-moms. You cannot will biology.
• mto 7y ago
  Well, in Austria you can get up to three years paid leave and freely choose between parents, so not sure if the article is correct. Question is how much the payment is, we get less the longer we take it. Alternatively you can also take a year (also with +2 months if both parents use it) and get 80% of your previous salary.
• DaniFong 7y ago
  we did this at LightSail Energy and while it was a little awkward sometimes it was an overall beloved policy.
• Grue3 7y ago
  Laughable. None of the suffering, equal benefits. Being a man is a cheat code.