Look at what this nation spends on defense and, I agree with you, maybe there’s a few places to squeeze an additional billion or so for different social needs.

As someone who grew up in Canada (health care is government-supplied cradle to grave with no link whatsoever to employment, where women have six months’ paid maternity leave), I’ve seen the benefits firsthand.

One-third of Americans now work temp, freelance, contract, perma-temp — left to their own devices to find and pay for: sick days, vacation, health insurance. I see little attention paid to our specific needs, while we individually represent millions of votes.

What seems to happen in the U.S. is a knee-jerk suspicion of any new tax and any service(s) provided by and controlled by government.

1) You called us out. No citations here. In our defense, the policy statement had to be under two pages. But I’m happy you asked! As for the studies about the benefits of involved fatherhood, here is a review of the literature from the Sloan Work and Family Network:

“Preschool children with fathers who perform 40% or more of the within-family child care show more cognitive competence, more internal locus of control, more empathy, and less gender stereotyping than preschool children with less involved fathers (Lamb et al., 1987; Pleck, 1997). Adolescents with involved fathers are more likely to have positive developmental outcomes such as self-control, self esteem, life skills, and social competence, provided that the father is not authoritarian, violent, or overly controlling (Mosley & Thomson, 1995; Pleck & Masciadrelli, 2003).”

2) As for funding of parental leave, economist Heather Boushey (who you mentioned with regard to child care, which I’ll get to next) suggests making it part of Social Security. The additional tax would be very minimal (about three-tenths of a percent! Nothing like the Swedish-like tax burden that leanneclc fears) and the infrastructure already exists. Her full report can be found in our headline grabs (the article is called “Helping Breadwinners When It Can’t Wait”).

3) Yes, we have some government supported child care, but as you mention it is only for low-income families. What we need is a universal child care system. Currently, precisely because government supported child care is only for low-income families, public child care is highly stigmatized. That really should not be the case.

Finally, I’m glad you agree that many changes are necessary. I don’t think you should underestimate the role the federal government should play, however. Frankly, the current system of work/life support in this country is piecemeal and insufficient. The federal government has the power to change that for everybody– not just a few lucky employees at a few companies or a few lucky citizens of a few states.

First, I would encourage you to say which companies/researchers did studies that show support for your arguments. It is one thing to say fathers want to be more involved and there are benefits to this, but if you can add a well-respected source to back up this thought it will add credibility.

Second, I agree with LeanneCLC’s sentiments about who will pay for the parental leave. If this were implemented at the Federal level, Congress will have to come up with a way to ensure this is funded. If you have concrete, well-researched ideas as to how this could be possible (without the taxation system of Sweden), then you should state that in your argument.

Things to think about, would this paid time off run concurrent with FMLA so that time is taken all at once or can the 6 months be taken intermittently within a specific length of time? If it is in addition to the 12 weeks (unpaid) provided by FMLA, would the employee be guaranteed their position or a similar one upon their return? Would parents be allowed leave on an annual basis or with the birth of each child? Further, would all employers be required to provide this or only those with 50+ employees? Would employers have to pay into a federal or state disability insurance plan (how would this affect many non-profits and some government employers who may not pay into this?)

Third, we do have government supported childcare…it just needs an overhaul. I encourage you to read the testimony given by Heather Boushey to the EEOC on 4/17/07 for more information on several of your points (several great testimonies given at this meeting!) Specific to childcare, she states “There are some government child care subsidies available to low-income parents but research has found that many children eligible for child care subsidies do not receive them, with only about 15 percent of children eligible for federal child care assistance actually receiving any funds (Administration for Children and Families 1999). The United States spend less than one half of one percent of its budget on child care programs.”

I believe that there are many changes that need to happen within the US and our mindset of work/life balance, but I don’t know that all of these changes at the Federal level are the best solution.

And if everyone is given 6 months parental leave paid, and businesses have to pay for the replacements for those people during that 6 months – who will pay for all of that? Will it be up to the business owner? The taxpayers? And how do you control the parents who take 6 months paid leave and then don’t return to work at all (which currently occurs with maternity leave regularly). Do you ask them to repay that money?

Subsidized childcare would be nice…but again who pays, and as childcare workers are some of our lowest paid “professionals” in this country. In fact these workers are some of the ones you speak of that cannot afford childcare for themselves…what do you do about that? Do you raise the rates they get paid and subsidize?

I think encouraging more flexibility at work so parents can come and go as needed to attend to family is a much better solution. I think “mandating” without thoughts of how to pay for those measures is doomed to fail.