Paid Leave for American Workers Could Soon Catch Up to Other Developed Countries

Six years ago, I gave birth to my first child, a beautiful (but extremely late) baby girl who stole my heart and stayed in the level two nursery at the hospital for almost two weeks due to an infection.

Unlike many mothers in the United States, I had a somewhat generous paid maternity leave from my employer that allowed me to spend those two weeks with her, followed by another two weeks paid at home. I then used disability leave due to my emergency c-section to obtain an additional month of leave at partial pay. When those two months were over, I went back to work. As someone in a virtual office I was able to work from home, a convenience many are denied, but found my full-time schedule sandwiched between feedings, spit-ups, diaper changes, rockings and all of the usual infant care a new parent would expect. The hours were long, broken, and by the time she turned one I gave in and sent her to daycare rather than continue to work two jobs at once.

I was the lucky one.

As I swapped notes with other parents during that first year, and with other parents during my subsequent two births, both of which arrived at a time when I no longer had a job that even offered me that minor amount of paid leave, my friends who lived in Canada or England would react with amazement as they leisurely watched the weeks of their 6 month and 12 month long maternity leaves tick away. We all recognized the advantage the parents in other countries had when it came to child bonding, early development and interaction, and of course breast feeding. However, we also all knew that financially, without any form of support, parents just simply didn’t have the ability to stay home with a new baby, a choice that leaves many mothers especially returning to work even before their bodies have had a chance to recover from giving birth.

New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand and Connecticut Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro hope to change that. The two Democrats have introduced the The Family and Medical Insurance Leave Act (FAMILY Act), which unlike the traditional Family Medical Leave Act (FLMA) would not only provide a guaranteed 12 weeks of leave to a worker who requires it due to a medical need from a family member or the worker him or herself, but would make that leave a paid one.

Having job protection when an emergency arrives is a valuable workplace benefit on its own, but for many workers in today’s economy who are already struggling to make ends meet, and who often live paycheck to paycheck, unpaid time off is simply not feasible. FAMILY Act would instead put caring for one’s family in the reach of every worker, not just those with a hefty savings account or another way to pay the bills.

“Motherhood should not lead to poverty. Caring for a loved one should not mean insurmountable debt and bankruptcy,” writes Gaylynn Burroughs of the Feminist Majority Foundation. “Lost income combined with new medical costs can be financially devastating to a family at a time when they may be most vulnerable and unable to recover. It’s time for a change.”

According to the Center for American Progress, FAMILY Act, “would provide up to 12 weeks of paid leave each year to qualifying workers for the birth or adoption of a new child, the serious illness of an immediate family member, or a worker’s own medical condition. Workers would be eligible to collect benefits equal to 66 percent of their typical monthly wages, with a capped monthly maximum amount of $1,000 per week.”

Plus, as Bryce Covert writes, the Act would help far more than just women. It would also assist men who need to care for families, the children being better attended and nursed back to health, seniors who would see their children able to take paid time off to help them in their own times of need, and a stable economy of workers who aren’t in danger of losing work, or unable to purchase the things they need due to lost wages or financial insecurity.

“When any one of us — man or woman — needs time to care for a dying parent, we should not have to sacrifice our job and risk our future to do the right thing for our family,” said Sen. Gillibrand in a statement. “Choosing between your loved ones and your career and your future is a choice no one should have to make.”

Photo credit: Thinkstock


Jerome S
Jerome Sabout a year ago


Jim Ven
Jim Venabout a year ago

thanks for sharing.

Mary B.
Mary B4 years ago

I don't think that anyone can ever really get it across to 1st time mothers how totally time and energy consuming a new babe is. Your life is not your own for at least 3 months, and the stuff you must haul with you when you leave the house with your infant is amazing, even with the advent of disposable diapers. Women really do need at least a year off from regular work to do this incredable important work. And by 'old time standards' we have it easy.

Bente S.
Bente S4 years ago

You are so right! I am very lucky, I live in Norway. We have 47 weeks of paid leave. 14 of these weeks must be taken by the father/co-mother.

Patricia H.
Patricia H.4 years ago

thanks for sharing

Nils Anders Lunde
PlsNoMessage se4 years ago


Danuta Watola
Danuta Watola4 years ago

Thank you for this information

Anne F.
Anne F4 years ago

paid leave would help us give all children a wonderful start in life

Winn Adams
Winn Adams4 years ago


Hugh W.
.4 years ago

Sad, we are so behind other developed nations. Aren't we supposed to be the unrivaled "superpower"? I'm still trying to find the "super" part? I guess it's super for the top 10%, just not the rest of us.