More time off for parents?

[Angus]

Saw this on the news this afternoon; basically it looks like the minister concerned is trying to win the votes of new parents.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3756883.stm

My view is; if you can't afford to have a child (either time or money), then you shouldn't have kids - why should the state (or your employer - I'm not sure who pays who where maternity leave is concerned) support you.

Just interested in what evrybody else's views are.

[GreenPiggy]

I definitely agree with the need to give more paternity leave. 2 weeks is woefully inadequate and puts too much early pressure on the mother.

[Paul Adams]

Ah, I had the Swedish system described to me last year, they don't mention the details in that report, but as I understand it there is an 18-month paid leave allowance to be apportioned between the mother and father, if they both work.

That's the reality of sexual equality.

I believe it's the employer that forks out for this, not the state btw.

Whatever system is used, it should take into account the length of service of the parents - it isn't quite so "fair" to expect full paid leave for that length of time if you've only worked for, say, 6 months...

[petrefax]

Whatever system is used, it should take into account the length of service of the parents - it isn't quite so "fair" to expect full paid leave for that length of time if you've only worked for, say, 6 months...

iirc the current UK system is such that employers are only obligated to pay maternity pay to staff who have worked for the company for 2 years or more

i fully agree that paternity leave is woefully inadequate as it stands, 2 weeks is no time at all and (again iirc) employers are only obligated to pay for 1 weeks leave so the 2nd one is unpaid...also, my sister's b/f had a lot of hassle taking his paternity leave because the company he works for were insisting he provide them with specific dates when he wished to be off.....like he's gonna know exaclty when the baby's gona be born!!