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

421–430 of 432 posts

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

#421

Post by b800h »

cutthegrass2 wrote: post #418
b800h wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We were in exactly the same position in the UK, putting our twins into nursery from a very early age so my wife and I could continue our careers. In retrospect we regret it somewhat, as it clearly affected them negatively. But it has been positive financially downstream. At least you know you can afford to privately school them later on to make up for it.

Curious to know how you thought it effected them negatively. Wondering whether I can see any similar signs…

I was going to put it on here but thought better of it, tbh. Buzz me on Twitter? I'll leave my username in my profile for a while or until I hear from you.

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

#422

Post by Fire-Dragon-DoL »

enra wrote: post #384
dilap wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No disagreement about any of those things. I would just add: It should be easy for women who wish to be with their babies and breast-feed them to do so. It should also be easy for dads! BTW, I'm about two weeks out from becoming a father. I only get 2 months paternity leave, but if I were the mother, I'd get 4! This seems unfair to me, but it's certainly better than if the policy were reversed . It seems like there's…

Congrats! I have 2-month old and before he was born lot of people said to me that "dads can't do much in the first 6 months". I was like ok, we'll see how it goes. After he was born, I quickly realize dads can absolutely do everything except feed the baby directly from the breast. Breastfeeding itself, depends on the baby and mom, is fairly quick, maybe like takes 15mins every few hours. That leaves about ~22 hours e…

As a dad, breastfeeding was a great moment to snuggle with my wife and child and have a few minutes of rest.

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

#423

Post by maxbond »

Supermancho wrote: post #414
MisterSandman wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're seriously saying that in a forum dedicated to software engineering and technology?

I'm not sure what you're implying or maybe what you are thinking I implied. Maybe you think I have veered off topic for the forum, despite the topical article under discussion?

I think the suggestion is, humans aren't biologically disposed to fly either, but that's hasn't stopped them (that being the relationship to technology); so why should it dictate our role in society, where we collectively have even more freedom to structure things as we see fit?

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

#424

Post by smeej »

alocasia-1 wrote: post #324
lotsofpulp wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it possible the failure rates get so low with modern birth control that it is almost impossible to offset with increased amount of sex? Specifically, IUDs. https://americanpregnancy.org/unplanned-pregnancy/birth-cont... Even the pill is listed at 9%, which is low, and of course, abortion is the last resort to completely prevent a birth. For couples who are finished having children, a vasectomy also basically has a…

Those are annual rates, so 9% is not low. (Planned Parenthood puts it at 7% annually, which is still 48% failure over ten years!) https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/birth-...

This is an important point. The failure rate measures, "If 100 people otherwise capable of becoming pregnant have an average amount of otherwise potentially procreative sex for a year, how many of them will get pregnant?"

Nine out of every hundred is a LOT to start out with. And if the "average amount of otherwise potentially procreative sex" part increases by, say, 11%, you get one new pregnancy out of every hundred.

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

#426

Post by rednerrus »

thatfrenchguy wrote: post #351
rednerrus wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do the people who work in social support send their kids?

To the same daycares? Do you not live somewhere where there are daycares?

They cost $2000/month and have a 3 year waiting list.

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

#427

Post by Breza »

maxbond wrote: post #144
rajin444 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> women have stepped up for their families often to the detriment of their own careers Forcing 2 household incomes was/is awful for a healthy society. Women are the only humans that can produce children and they have to do it during a relatively short time window - especially if we want to reproduce at replacement level. Raising children should be regarded as one of the most important things a woman can do because th…

> Raising children should be regarded as one of the most important things a woman can do because they’re the only ones that can do it. This seems pretty reductionist to me. Men can absolutely raise children. Husbands in heterosexual couples should absolutely be raising their children and not leaving the entire task of raising them to their wives. Gay men can also raise children. I don't think you meant to be disrespe…

Thank you for this comment. I have a two year old daughter and a less demanding job than my wife. That might switch in the future. I love to be able to spend so much time with my little girl. The idea that my wife should somehow be doing more than me is insulting to us both.

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

#428

Post by Breza »

schredder wrote: post #405
kalleboo wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The generations who were raised in the fumes of leaded gasoline also seemed "fine" but the long term statistics after we switched to unleaded gasoline show that we're way better off now.

An equivalence that does not bear out for baby formula. Whoever wants to feed their baby breast milk or formula, do what you want. There’s enough anxiety in raising a child, we should be aware of when we might be increasing it in others for no good reason. GP could’ve supplemented their baby’s diet with formula while his wife was gone and everyone would’ve been fine.

Well said. I'm aware of one large-scale randomized control trial of breastfeeding. It found a slight reduction in ear infections and other infections early in life, and no change in IQ in the teenage years. So yes, breastfeeding has benefits, but the amount of pressure people feel to breastfeed is disproportionately high.

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

#429

Post by Breza »

enra wrote: post #384
dilap wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No disagreement about any of those things. I would just add: It should be easy for women who wish to be with their babies and breast-feed them to do so. It should also be easy for dads! BTW, I'm about two weeks out from becoming a father. I only get 2 months paternity leave, but if I were the mother, I'd get 4! This seems unfair to me, but it's certainly better than if the policy were reversed . It seems like there's…

Congrats! I have 2-month old and before he was born lot of people said to me that "dads can't do much in the first 6 months". I was like ok, we'll see how it goes. After he was born, I quickly realize dads can absolutely do everything except feed the baby directly from the breast. Breastfeeding itself, depends on the baby and mom, is fairly quick, maybe like takes 15mins every few hours. That leaves about ~22 hours e…

Congratulations to you as well! I have a two year old and I had the same realization when I was on paternity leave. You just said it better than I've been able to.

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

#430

Post by Breza »

jimbokun wrote: post #193
maxbond wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Raising children should be regarded as one of the most important things a woman can do because they’re the only ones that can do it. This seems pretty reductionist to me. Men can absolutely raise children. Husbands in heterosexual couples should absolutely be raising their children and not leaving the entire task of raising them to their wives. Gay men can also raise children. I don't think you meant to be disrespe…

Men can raise children, but cannot get pregnant or breast feed. Going through that cycle with potentially multiple children is a big time investment that cannot be delegated to men. Beyond that, yes, men are perfectly capable of performing child rearing tasks. Note, of course, this does not negate the argument against a two income family. Having a society where one income can support a family means fathers can devote…

Out of a 40-year career, how much time do you think a woman needs to physically be absent from her job due to pregnancy and breastfeeding?
Post reply on HN