This is going to be a complaining post.
First, let me say that I feel very lucky to have a part-time position. I love that I spend so much time with my boy, and I can’t wait to do the same when my second boy arrives in the fall. Working part time means that work is at the margins of my life, and I like that.
BUT, I’ve begun planning for my maternity leave, and it’s making me grouchy. With the Squeaker, I was fortunate to work in a place that gave new parents 6 months of leave. You applied whatever annual and sick leave you had, and if you ran out, you could use leave without pay. I had about half of my 6 months covered, so I went three months without pay, but we could afford it at the time.
This time, my workplace is also flexible about the total length of the leave period. I had hoped to take about 18 weeks; about half of that would be unpaid. However, it turns out that my workplace uses the terms of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) for health insurance purposes. After the 12 weeks of unpaid leave to which I am entitled, I would be required to pay not only my portion of my health insurance (which is about $320 per month), but also the portion covered by my employer. The grand total would be about $1500 per month for health insurance, on top of the loss of income. My extra six weeks of leave would cost me nearly $2300 in health insurance premiums.
There might be other options – maybe we can switch to my husband’s insurance, though it’s more expensive and the coverage is not only poorer, but it’s also centered in the DC area, which is and hour and a half to two hours from where we now live. Getting two bureaucratic government agencies (his and mine) to effectively handle the paperwork for the switch sounds fraught with the possibility of screw-ups that could make health care complicated for us.
But whether I can come up some convoluted solution to the dilemma isn’t really the point. The fact is, this country has parental leave policies that are just plain embarrassing. Twelve weeks of unpaid leave. I can remember when the Squeaker was 3 months old and it occurred to me that for many women, leaving a baby that age with a child care provider was the only option they felt they had. And the squeaker was still struggling to master nursing at that point! I couldn’t imagine having to leave him with someone – and pumping milk, and dealing with bottles...ugh. And yet I may have to do that this time.
I feel a little spoiled complaining about that, since I am so fortunate to have a part time position. Leaving my new baby will mean I am only away 20 hours per week, instead of 40. If I use one day of leave per pay period in the 6 weeks after I return to work, I can work 6 two-day weeks while using only 3 days of leave. Two measly days of work sound pretty painless, especially if that would allow me to avoid the $2300 health insurance cost.
But when I compare my choices with those of women in
most other industrialized countries, I feel pretty angry that I’m left trying to make the best of leaving a 3-month old baby without his mama because of (1) employment demands; and (2) the excessive cost of health insurance.