
Can you fundraise in Silicon Valley while pregnant? - drpp
https://spice.getsourcery.com/can-you-fundraise-in-silicon-valley-while-pregnant-ca0118aa959d
======
xiphias
I thought that money raising is for people who put all their effort into
making a fast-growing company and need money to make the growth even faster.
It's about choosing not having a life in return for the possibility for
creating a big company.

I have no problem with that person being a male or female. But I can't imagine
any person (mom or dad) being able to put 15 hours a day to a company with the
baby _after_ the baby is born. That's the first thing the article should deal
with.

~~~
CalRobert
A man can conceal the fact of his expecting a child soon. A woman, usually, is
unable to do so. Both will be affected by the child, but the investor may be
more likely to favour the man, which is unfair.

~~~
RyanZAG
Would I invest in a startup with the founder about to have a baby? No. Either
they will be dedicating a big part of their life in the near future to raising
that baby correctly, or they will be ignoring that baby and leaving someone
else to raise it. I find the second outcome even worse than the first, but I'm
not going to invest in either.

Now a man might be able to deceive me by simply not disclosing this while a
woman is going to have a very difficult time. But I wouldn't say this is
unfair: the man is simply easier able to pass off his awfulness than the
woman.

It's like saying a woman is more likely to be able to shoplift and get away
with it than a man and this is unfair. I don't know if that is true, but if it
is, it's certainly not 'unfair'.

~~~
rayiner
How much time does it take to "raise a baby correctly?" Parenting is heavily
driven by cargo culting, old wives' tales, and conventional wisdom; but very
little by actual data.

~~~
__abc
A metric major fuck ton.

If you truly want to be present and have an active role in your child's life,
growth, development et al it's going to force your priorities to shuffle
around.

If your "startup" is still a priority (but not above your child) you aren't
going to be in the office from sun up to sun down. Period.

You'll have to make up those hours later (when the child is sleeping) however,
in months 0-24, that's really tough as most children (at least not mine)
didn't sleep well during that phase.

During those years, and for me it spanned 5 calendar years given multiple
children, working late at night was a luxury, not an option I could plan on.

I however, disclosed that when taking a CTO position at a company that just
wrapped up a ~$20 dollar round. It was transparent to them and set the right
expectations.

I do acknowledge that a company in that stage albeit not out of the woods, is
not in the same position in the seed, Series-A phase.

If you look in my comment history I gave a "day in the life of" for my
schedule on how I manage running a startup and keeping my family, health, self
priority #1, #2, and #3. It's buried in there somewhere.

~~~
x0x0
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7779598](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7779598)

~~~
__abc
Other things I've added is putting my phone on a shelf when I come home and
only answering emails after my kids have gone to bed and my wife and I have
had some time to hang out.

I also take two lunches a week where I hit the gym and go two additional times
(in the evening and once in the morning on the weekends).

My point being, the business I help run is thriving, dates/goals are being
met, people are happy, and the world kept turning.

Making my career priority #4 has ultimately made me better at my career. No
burnout, better focus and creativity, etc.

I honestly wish I did this when I got into the startup space back in 2004
where if you didn't work ~80 hours a week you were a freak.

~~~
tedmiston
Good for you. I think more people should embrace this kind of adaptability and
prioritization as startup employees as well as founders (at least founders
beyond the early stage).

------
akud
In my experience, people tend to seriously underestimate the amount of work a
baby takes, and the strain it adds to relationships, work life, and emotional
health. I certainly did.

I think it's reasonable for investors to wonder if a person's commitment won't
change when they have a baby. I would advise the authors that they really
can't forsee what their priorities will be like when the baby comes. It sounds
trite, but a baby changes your whole life. It will add an incredible amount of
stress that will probably make you reevaluate your priorities.

If I were an investor, I would hold off until they had the baby, and it was at
least a few months old. Then both the founders could really know how committed
they still were to the company.

[edit: grammar]

~~~
ergothus
Purely for the purposes of clarity:

Is that you'd hold any founder expecting a baby to the same standard, male or
female? (though it is normally easier to recognize a pregnant woman than
someone with a pregnant partner)

Or do you see the load you describe falling primarily upon women?

~~~
home_boi
Females have to face the physical/mental side effects of pregnancy in addition
to the complications of child care. Females become the primary care taker at
higher rates than males. Primary care takers are less productive and less
devoted.

This isn't just a coincidence. Females have the choice of having a child while
males do not. Males only have the choice to give a female the choice of having
a child with the male. Naturally, the person who makes the choice of having a
child most likely values children more, which leads to a higher chance of
becoming the primary care taker. There are also benefits that are exclusive to
female primary care takers.

If a female and a male have the same profile and they both are expecting
children, the male will have a higher expected value because of the
physical/emotional complications of a pregnancy and a lower chance of being
the primary care taker.

People are investing real money here. It is what it is.

~~~
salgernon
Then change "it". "It" is a problem, and "it" is wrong.

By your logic, before any investment is made a complete health scan of all
founders should be completed, including a mental health assay.

If a founder gets cancer, should they be fired? They're going to have to take
time off to get it removed, followed by months if not years of time lost to
chemotherapy.

If you replace tumor with baby, and chemotherapy with pediatric appointments,
is there any difference?

Anecdote: When I was 13, my father, CEO of a subsidiary of a large Japanese
conglomerate, was treated for and cleared of prostate cancer. It runs in my
family and killed his father and grandfather. When he returned to work about 4
weeks later, he was fired as the larger corporation had decided that it was
too risky to have someone that could get sick be a C level employee. It is
what it is?

~~~
LoSboccacc
It is a false comparison because having a baby is a choice and largely
avoidable.

Maybe it'd be more comparable to a chain smoker who smoked since ten and it's
in his fifties.

Getting fired for health related issues is also another false comparison. Here
we're talking getting a private investment. Difference is that the first case
is already covered by law (and those also cover hiring, as difficult to prove
discrimination can be)

------
wolfgke
Can you fundraise if you openly say that you have a time-intensive hobby that
you will under no circumstances give up for working on your company?

Thanks to modern contraceptive methods getting pregnant is a choice. The same
as doing a time-intense hobby. If you would not finance someone who openly
says that he/she will not give up his/her time-intense hobby for the company,
isn't this the same as not financing people who are pregnant?

~~~
cdmcmahon
So similarly, potential investors should screen all men to make sure they and
their partner aren't expecting children anytime soon? This would maybe be a
defensible* position if it were applied equally, but it's not.

*But actually it's not really. In today's world, with varying family types and options for care, it is possible for people to have children and give their all to a company. For many (most?) people that isn't the best option, but it is possible.

~~~
CalRobert
Not to mention that one has to wonder what the point of all this is if we're
going to deny people one of the most basic aspects of the human experience.
I'm all for family planning, smaller families for the sake of the planet, etc.
but c'mon, are we going to tell ambitious people they can pretty much _never_
have kids? Aren't these the sort of folks we should be hoping _do_ make copies
of themselves?

~~~
wolfgke
Who says that you have to found a company and found a family at the same time?
Why can't one do that at different times (e.g. some years between) when these
goals won't be in hard conflict?

~~~
CalRobert
Nobody says you have to. I am proposing an alternate value system that says we
don't need to claim these things are always absolutely mutually exclusive. I
think it depends on the company, the parent(s), the child, the culture, the
legal framework around parenting and work, and a zillion other things. Maybe
you live with your extended family and it's understood that a grandparent will
take on a lot of the work. Or an uncle. Or maybe your government provides
extensive day care and education options. Or maybe you have an office where a
child can be present.

------
mmcclure
> But just because they aren’t asking, it doesn’t mean the pregnancy isn’t
> foremost in their minds. It is almost worse left unaddressed.

> On a call last month, a male investor finally raised the issue of pregnancy

> After the call with the investor who questioned whether her pregnancy would
> affect her ability to close the round, Na’ama was stirred. She told me that
> this is the first time she felt what it is like to be a woman, rather than a
> person, in her interactions with investors.

This feels like it might be a reason (although I'm sure there are others) that
investors don't bring it up. You talk about being uncomfortable with people
not bringing it up, then someone does (in a way that didn't _seem_
inappropriate based on what you wrote, but I could be misreading), and then it
makes you uncomfortable that they asked. It feels like there's really no way
to win from the investor side.

Na'ama sounds like she handled the question really well, which seems like a
big win for her in an investor's eyes (at least the good ones). From your
perspective, if she's got a great answer to the question, wouldn't you _want_
an investor that asks you how this major, life changing event is going to
affect your team? For the sake of conversation (since this is being had in
other threads) let's assume that said investor would also ask a man that
question if they knew his partner was about to have a child.

------
ksenzee
As someone who has personally been pregnant (several times!) let me assure you
that when you see a pregnant woman, you have no idea whatsoever whether she is
feeling

\- well

\- ill

\- overwhelmed

\- confident

\- anything else

because every pregnancy is different, and every woman is different, and every
family is different. You cannot safely assume anything about a pregnant woman.
So her pregnancy can't help you reliably judge whether she can handle being
CEO.

For that matter, you can't safely assume a woman is pregnant even if it seems
obvious. I knew a woman with an abdominal tumor who kept getting asked when
the baby was due.

~~~
Lawtonfogle
>because every pregnancy is different, and every woman is different, and every
family is different. You cannot safely assume anything about a pregnant woman.
So her pregnancy can't help you reliably judge whether she can handle being
CEO.

Couldn't this logic be applied to almost anything about any person and thus
leave one saying that nothing can reliably be used to judge whether someone
can handle being a CEO?

~~~
ksenzee
No, I'm simply saying that pregnancy is a less reliable guide than you might
assume if you have a fixed idea of what it means to be a pregnant woman.

~~~
blablablame
Man here, wife went through hell in her pregnancy so I might be biased, but
talking with other pregnant women in our lives, in general, they are happy to
be pregnant, but from that, the feeling is more skewed to the
complaining/problems than the I can do this mentality. More 'I want to lay in
bed all day' vs 'things to do, lets hush hush hush, do things, build stuff'.

------
tryitnow
Really people? Remove the fact that she's pregnant from the picture, instead
focus on the fact that she's unlikely to be highly involved in the company for
approximately 6 to nine months regardless of the reason. Sometimes that
happens to founders. Then evaluate the investment opportunity conditioned on
this.

That could be fine. Or not. I may evaluate the company as simply having a
temporarily inactive co-founder. That's hardly uncommon. Not ideal, but if
everything else is in place (remaining team can meet or exceed expectations)
then, sure I'd invest.

And no, I don't expect founders to put in 15 hours days as a rule. That means
you're hardly getting adequate sleep and will end up making moronic decisions.
That's frankly idiotic. I don't care how much you work. Focus on the metrics
that matter. Some startups require 10+ days, some don't. Some require greater
time commitments in some periods and less in other periods.

There's so much rigid thinking in the comments about this story.

Learn to focus on the most relevant aspects of the problem. Namely, a major
life event is coming up - is there a reasonable plan in place to handle it? If
yes, then proceed to follow your usual path of analyzing an investment.

It's funny how men get so irrational when faced with a woman's pregnancy.

I would say this though. It's incumbent on the founders to initiate this
discussion. Just like it's important for an employee who is expecting to take
significant time off to put in a request well in advance.

tldr; I don't care if you're planning to take two months off to go surfing or
to have a kid. Just let me know how you plan to handle that and I'll evaluate
your company on its merits.

------
rsmsky1
This is a serious question as a woman who has never been pregnant and perhaps
not that knowledgable about pregnancies. Doesn't giving birth render you
incapacitated for a certain period of time even if everything goes well and
there's no guarantee after giving birth things will return to normal. Even in
cases where one's life isn't at risk, there's a high risk of postpartum
depression, etc. It seems very unfair to me that women have to deal with such
things. I hope one day women won't need to have periods without taking any
additional health risks and also that it will be easier for women to have
surrogate baby carriers.

Another serious question is wouldn't a nursery at work be disruptive if there
is a lot of crying, etc. or how will it be set up so as not to bother people
who are working.

~~~
ksenzee
It depends on the pregnancy and on the birth. Some women jump right up and get
back into the swing of things. Most of us need recovery time. There is no safe
assumption.

Speaking of assumptions, there is no reason to assume a CEO mother would have
a nursery at work. She might well have a stay-at-home spouse (I do) or a
parent or nanny or any number of things.

~~~
rsmsky1
How long is the recovery time usually, I mean typically for the average woman?
Also, I mentioned the nursery because in the post it said she would have a
nursery at work.

~~~
ksenzee
It's a pretty wide distribution, which is my whole point. Also, "recovery" can
be defined in a lot of different ways. A lot of people feel pretty decent at
their six-week checkup, if they're not too sleep-deprived.

------
eob
I asked this question of the Boston VC community as a soon-to-be father, and
the resounding advice was: "wait until the baby is at least a few months old"

There are a lot of logical reasons for this that you already know, so I'll
just vouch for the emotional one, which is a style of thinking that's going to
become more prominent in you as soon as you hold your child. I'm really glad I
waited. Unless fundraising now is life-or-death for your company, I think
you'll both be really glad if you wait, too.

------
drpp
I wrote an article about how my co-founder is pregnant and raising funding for
our company, Sourcery. Investors are hesitant to bring up the issue in
conversation for fear of coming off as an insensitive brute who questions a
women's commitment to her company, but this is an important issue to address
upfront. I try to lay out how we are preparing for this moment together.

~~~
joshAg
Do you bring up the pregnancy when you meet with investors? I wonder if that
would help or hurt compared to not mentioning it at all.

~~~
drpp
Some have tried to hide this, and there are links to such accounts. But,
"Na’ama is direct. She’s not the kind of person to pretend about anything. In
the third trimester, her condition is nearly impossible to hide anyway. And
yet surprisingly, most investors have scrupulously avoided discussing the
fact."

~~~
web007
They may have avoided any mention for legal reasons.

Pregnancy is one of the protected classes. If they talk about it and then
don't give you funding, there are potential repercussions, just as if they
discussed religion, race, etc.

~~~
Alex3917
> Pregnancy is one of the protected classes.

AFAIK protected classes don't apply to investors.

------
mgrennan
This is a great question. It forces the greater question: Can you "Be
Dedicated" and be more than one thing. Silicon valley seems to believe:

You can't be a CEO and pregnant.

You can't be a lead programmer and old (> 30).

You can't love both Linux and Windows.

You can't be Democrat and vote for a Republican.

How did we become so decided.

~~~
dekhn
I've seen counter examples- plenty- for all of these- in Silicon Valley.
Marissa was a pregnant CEO as was Anne Wojicicki. There are plenty more, as
well. I'm > 30 and most of the lead programmers at my company are > 30 (I was
a lead, then stepped down to IC role) with families. I love Linux and Windows
and love both; I know other people who are happy with both OSes. And while
democrats can't vote in republican primaries, they can vote in elections for
members of either party.

------
zxcvvcxz
The better question is: should you?

It's bad from the child: stress on the mother can be transferred to the
development of the child.

It's bad for the investor: this founder won't be able to dedicate the
requisite amount of time to the venture as another unpregnant founder would.

------
xchip
Any stress the mother suffers will be passed down to the baby...

"There are some data to show that higher chronic stressors in women and poor
coping skills to deal with those stressors may be associated with lower birth
weight and with delivering earlier," says Ann Borders, MD, MPH, MSc. She is an
OB/GYN in the obstetrics and gynecology department, Division of Maternal-Fetal
Medicine, at Evanston Hospital, NorthShore University HealthSystem. (source
[http://www.webmd.com/baby/features/stress-
marks](http://www.webmd.com/baby/features/stress-marks))

~~~
rayiner
What's the actual long-term impact on the child?

~~~
xchip
I suggest you should do some research. I wouldn't take risks/ try any
experiments though :)

------
jstoiko
If you have the "balls" to fundraise despite the fact that it shows you're
pregnant, isn't that a good sign?

------
mboer
This is a thread of generalizations heaped upon already heavily beleaguered
minorities, given that most people who suffer from these generalizations are
women and trans men.

Here are some links, to pieces regarding people who have had kids and
startups, really the _only_ people who're qualified to comment on the subject,
and you can choose to educate yourselves (or, you know, not):

[http://www.californiababy.com/meet-
jessica.html](http://www.californiababy.com/meet-jessica.html)

[http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/10/business/nurturing-a-
baby-...](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/10/business/nurturing-a-baby-and-a-
start-up-business.html)

[http://mamalode.com/story/detail/an-interview-with-
michelle-...](http://mamalode.com/story/detail/an-interview-with-michelle-
vick-co-founder-of-the-baby-box-co)

[http://fortune.com/2015/06/22/founder-startup-hidden-
pregnan...](http://fortune.com/2015/06/22/founder-startup-hidden-pregnancy/)

[http://thenextweb.com/insider/2016/02/05/tinsel-founder-
aniy...](http://thenextweb.com/insider/2016/02/05/tinsel-founder-aniyia-
williams-on-building-a-hardware-startup-from-scratch-while-pregnant/#gref)

This is your bonus piece: [http://madamenoire.com/599068/pregnant-woman-
finishes-psych-...](http://madamenoire.com/599068/pregnant-woman-finishes-
psych-exam-during-active-labor/)

Finally, I'm going share a story about my friend from grad school who wrote
her thesis while 7-9 months pregnant, landed a tenure track faculty position
in the physics department of the university where she teaches straight out of
grad school, gave birth, returned to successfully defend her thesis, and she
currently has 2 incredible children and a 25-person lab. Her partner is a very
talented chef. So, you know, two demanding careers.

I honestly don't even know what else to say, other than suggest that a better
more fruitful question would be, "What can be done to help technical founders
who are pregnant and/or have families?"

------
NTDF9
I recently discussed this with my girlfriend. I can only conclude that there
are 2 sides to the story, let's call them 2 truths:

Truth 1: No individual (regardless of sex) can run a startup as a CEO if they
are incapacitated somehow

Truth 2: Individuals (regardless of sex) need to prioritize. NOBODY can have
it all.

With that in mind, women need to understand that: 1\. They will be
incapacitated if they get pregnant 2\. They need to choose if they want to be
CEO or a nurturing mother. Both cannot happen concurrently because the woman
will be overwhelmed and do worse in both roles.

It is also unfair on both the child and investors to give only half of
yourself. So choose one.

This also applies to men. A man cannot go become a CEO if he's broke and needs
to feed his family. Go get a job and get rid of immediate concerns first so
that you can give your best to both your family and investors.

~~~
mentat
> A man cannot go become a CEO if he's broke and needs to feed his family

Your biases are showing. But really, I'm not sure what you're saying here.
People living in partnership with others can raise children AND do other
things. This is not "having it all", this is working hard to make your life
what you want it to be.

~~~
NTDF9
> Your biases are showing.

\- As much as we want it, a man can never become pregnant. The woman will have
to do the pregnancy part.

\- As much as we want it, a pregnant woman can never work at her optimal. The
man will have to do the optimal working part.

So, if the partnership desires a kid, it means pregnancy for the woman and for
the man to provide stability in those times.

Is this a personal bias or reality?

~~~
jackweirdy
What is "Optimal Working" and why should we believe that anyone is doing it at
the moment? I think you're chasing some fantasy perfection state that isn't
really achievable

~~~
NTDF9
Here's an experiment:

Person A: A 6 ft man

Person B: A 5 ft man

In basketball, even if person B trains for 23 hours/day more than person A, he
is impeded because of his height.

Is there a guarantee that person A will do better JUST because of his height?
No

Is there a guarantee that person B will do better JUST because of more hours
invested in training? No

But person A can train and become better whereas person B cannot change
anything.

Such is the nature of physical differences.

Person B would be better served playing a sport that doesn't require
height...aka, Basketball is not "Optimal" for person B.

------
dluan
Kudos to Naama! Would love to see some data eventually for interactions, to at
least try to have a quantitative side to this too. Would be really interesting
and could help guide other founders in a similar position.

------
melindajb
This thinking in this thread is the reason women are leaving tech in droves.

------
odinduty
The question is not whether you can fundraise, the question is whether you are
physically and mentally fit during and after the birth to run a company with
the level of stress, anxiety, etc. it will mean and the huge amount of time
you will have to dedicate to it.

------
chumbucket
This thread is what it would be like if "The Vagina Monologues" were performed
by an all-male cast in front of an all-male audience.

