Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 432 posts

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#261

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

dilap wrote: post #243
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We breastfed our daughter. Her mother pumped to cover times when she was working, and I fed our daughter. The only time this was an issue was when her mother left for a week-long conference. Accumulating supply for that period (and her dealing with the unused supply while away) was mildly challenging but we managed just fine. I then went on to quit work and stayed home to raise our daughter (she's now nearing 28 year…

We could go even further: You don't need the mother at all; you can always just raise the baby on formula. But that doesn't change that the mother-child bond is a unique and special thing, and that there are real benefits to breast-feeding, straight from the breast. And beyond, the simple fact is that many women really want to be with their babies. It's misguided to pretend that there aren't biological realities unde…

The evidence for the benefits of breast milk is overwhelming at this point, and vastly outweighs the evidence for specifically breastfeeding-induced bonding as a factor in a child's early life. So no, there is no reason to advocate for formula and several reasons not to.

We should be adovcating for more parent-child bonding, however that happens; for more opportunities for parents to make whatever choices they wish to regarding the work/parenting issues during their child's early (entire?) life; for the normalization of public breastfeeding; for better parental leave policies; and more.

None of these things require pushing some point that raising children is naturally women's work (even if breastfeeding itself is).

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#262

Post by club_tropical »

citilife wrote: post #156
poulsbohemian wrote: post #72

It's election season and I've been out talking to voters, who share their life stories... what I would say is that there are many women who are choosing WFH because they either can't afford or can't find day care, which may lead to deciding that hey, they might as well have another baby if they are now committed to this employment model. I've spoken to several women who were over-qualified for the jobs they had taken…

> overlooking the way women have stepped up for their families often to the detriment of their own careers. My favorite question to ask is: "why you want a career?" to pretty much anyone who speaks in this manner. Serious question to people, I don't get it. I love learning, I'm highly qualified in the academic space and enjoy picking at problems. I've written papers, patents, well paid, etc. Highly successful by most…

Excepting the exceptions, only men care about legacy and purpose. Women care about a well socialized easy life. A family can provide that, but it does restrict you in significant ways. An air conditioned office where you're tippy typing on a keyboard, making calls, joking around the water cooler, and have a bunch of disposable income at the end of the month is a fantastic deal.

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#263

Post by chasd00 »

__turbobrew__ wrote: post #44
throwaway09223 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you not attended meetings with parents taking care of babies? I sure have. People do difficult things all the time. It's especially manageable if both parents are WFH.

I have attended meetings with people who had to remain muted the entire time due to their kid screaming at the top of their lungs constantly. Its not great

well, if it helps, the person with teh screaming kid in their room was suffering 10x more than you heh.

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#264

Post by bdowling »

chrisBob wrote: post #46
PaulHoule wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking care of a child takes up your time, it's a job. Most babies spend a lot of time sleeping so you can probably get some work done, but if your child needs you you are going to have to drop what you're doing. There is no problem if you are honest about this and your employer accepts it, but just as somebody can hold multiple jobs and not come clean about it, it seems like a parent could also dissemble about it.

What is the right way to discuss that at an interview? Discussing the applicant's family is typically off limits, but if the goal is to work and be a parent then you must have that conversation early.

You shouldn't discuss family obligations at a job interview, full stop.

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#265

Post by chasd00 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #61
dleslie wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a parent of, IMHO the first six months are when they need the most attention, not when they're the easiest. Infants desire constant affection, feeding, cleaning, and some never stop crying. Once they can crawl it's off to the races. Basically anything can hold their attention for half an hour while you take a short meeting. I've worked from home with two infants, then toddlers, and now kids. Infants were the harde…

In my experience, once they start crawling, they are putting things in their mouth, or falling, or getting a finger stuck, or making a mess, or wanting to feed…and confining them to a kid safe zone just makes them want to be out of the zone.

once they start walking you have about two weeks then they can run. That's when the chasing really starts!

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#266

Post by smallnix »

biomcgary wrote: post #172
underdeserver wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between having children (which only women can do) and raising them (which both parents can do).

Research has consistently shown the value of breastfeeding for development. Part of that is the biological quality of the milk, but part is also the skin-to-skin contact and emotional bonding. So, until weaning, women have a unique biological ability that men cannot quite replicate. Obviously, pumping can address some of the biology and men can cuddle their infants. However, normal emotional attachment[1] of the moth…

> Shouldn't women be allowed to take the first year of their child's life to provide for their long-term emotional development without jeopardizing their careers?

Yes. Men should be allowed the same right.

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#267

Post by club_tropical »

nineplay wrote: post #173
citilife wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> overlooking the way women have stepped up for their families often to the detriment of their own careers. My favorite question to ask is: "why you want a career?" to pretty much anyone who speaks in this manner. Serious question to people, I don't get it. I love learning, I'm highly qualified in the academic space and enjoy picking at problems. I've written papers, patents, well paid, etc. Highly successful by most…

>"why you want a career?" Financial independence. Anyone who thinks SAH parents can free themselves of this worry is naive. You never get the time back, you never get the experience back, you never get the training or the raises or the bonuses. You never get the retirement savings. If you are unfortunate enough to live in the US you are entirely dependent on your spouse for healthcare. It's an unfathomably vulnerable…

> More of an oldest child with extra responsibilities and a higher allowance.

And a disposable one at that!

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#268

Post by yamtaddle »

jimbokun wrote: post #201
black_knight wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In civilised societies, women still give birth, but after they are born both parents are given the possibility to stay at home with their child. This usually takes the form of the birth-giving woman staying at home for the first few months, while the child is dependent on frequent breastfeeding, after which the other parent stays at home with the child for a few months until they are ready to to start kindergarten ar…

This is one of those policies I believe is broadly popular with voters in both US political parties, but never gets implemented because capital has more say in our government than voters.

> This is one of those policies I believe is broadly popular with voters in both US political parties, but never gets implemented because capital has more say in our government than voters.

To be fair, we put it right in the name. It's not market-ism, or productivity-ism, or competition-ism, or higher-standard-of-living-ism. It's CAPITAL-ism.

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#269

Post by Balgair »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #102
mattkrause wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a strong (underappreciated?) interaction with parental leave too. If people got six months or a year, there would be far fewer babies in that labor-intensive category.

The fact that the US goes out of its way to legislate breast pump breaks and pumping rooms at work rather than just legislate 1 year of parental leave so a mom can properly breastfeed her child is insane.

We just had one put in. It's a fancy pod thingy with apps and lighting and a fridge. I wonder where the break even point is for such a structure relative to the number of employees using one?

Re: Remote work may have fueled a baby boom among U.S. women

#270

Post by chasd00 »

jboggan wrote: post #89
nervousvarun wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree with that but have a question...you'd think logically with children being a major expense that economic downturns != more babies. Is that not the case?

Making babies is one of the least logic-driven decisions you will make in your life.

> Making babies is one of the least logic-driven decisions you will make in your life.

or at least the process of making babies :)

Post reply on HN