
Work-Life. Balance: America Needs Paid Family Leave. Fathers Need to Use It - rafaelc
https://medium.com/initialized-capital/work-life-balance-2163f7cedcc8
======
mindslight
There is this thing called _money_ , that _iff_ you're able to _save_ it, can
enable one to do many things - take leave for a newborn, work less longer term
to spend consistent time with a growing child, bootstrap a business, explore a
completely different field, and many other innumerable things that can matter
to a person but don't necessarily fit into top-down policy.

So the real question is why are people unable to just rely on saved wealth to
take whatever leave they would like? And the answer is that the
financialization of everything has left most everyone essentially living
paycheck to paycheck - even the upper middle class! Yet we continue to be
distracted by feel good narratives proposing to throw a bone to one popular
group or another, rather than pushing to directly reform the economy away from
being a treadmill for "full time" work.

It's not a foregone conclusion that things have to be this way. The present
conditions are _explicit government policy_ \- any time anything would give
individuals more economic power (eg technology, productivity increases, women
entering the workforce, offshoring, etc), prices are deliberately increased by
printing enough new money to erode any gains! It's no secret why "the rent is
too damn high", it's just politically inconvenient to bring it up.

------
sombremesa
An anecdotal argument like this is generally unconvincing. I have a myriad of
personal problems, but I can't go to a senator and say "America needs a
solution to <the problem I had>", no matter how many other people have had the
same problem. Where the latter fact becomes real leverage is in the data - but
without the data my argument would not amount to much more than whining.
Furthermore, the data needs to prove not that such leave prevents personal
distress, but that it's good for America's bottom line. Unfortunately for
fathers, the objective fact might be that such leave is worse for the bottom
line. There's a reason workaholic cultures like Japan's bring about economic
miracles, albeit along with a plethora of social issues. Economics is a huge
focus of policies, for better or for worse.

~~~
yladiz
Obviously having parents leave a company for any length of time is bad for the
"bottom line". This is an objective fact, because the company must fill in the
role somehow and wait for an amount of time before that person, who will be
guaranteed their job when they return, can work again (assuming that the way
it would work now is extended to fathers, where the job is guaranteed). If the
government also subsidizes the family then it also costs the government money
as well, which also affects the "bottom line".

However there have been numerous psychological studies that look at the
outcome of the baby and the parents when allowed to take m/paternity leave and
it's hugely beneficial for all involved. So if you look solely at money then
the argument for family leave is "don't do it" but money is not the only
important thing when looking at topics like this.

~~~
Trilkhai
The studies I've seen showed correlative links between m/paternity leave
itself with improved psychological results, not necessarily ones that are
specific to reproductive rather than personal leave or aren't also tied to the
workplace/society having better social support. Somebody with an employer or
in a society that allows people X weeks/months off for personal reasons --
whether it's a matter of choosing to reproduce, finish a degree, caring for an
ailing loved one/pet, or combating burnout -- is likely to fare much better
psychologically than somebody required to work continuously regardless of
their personal circumstances.

An interesting parallel occurred a while back when there was sudden widespread
adoption of Finland's "baby box" of supplies for new parents after the BBC
noticed that Finland's infant mortality rate plummeted after their
introduction. The results have been lackluster, however, because people had
overlooked that the improvement in Finland had been tied to a whole bunch of
policies & healthcare changes, with the box being only a tiny part of the
result.

------
esotericn
It's more that we need people to live in such a way that they're not paycheck
to paycheck.

If everyone spends up to their limit on rent/food/cars/etc then you end up
with whole swathes of individuals who "need" concessions from their employer
because they have no leverage.

It's not solely an individual decision, of course, because if other people
outbid you for housing then your choices can be limited.

The American model seems to be that most people just work for 40 years with a
few weeks off per year and that's their entire adult life.

The above is completely stark raving bonkers to me. Economic cogs.

