We have a "free at the point of delivery" National Health Service and for good reason - a healthy population is a productive population, and that reaps benefits for all. That does not however extend to an area of our health that influences our ability to eat and drink and that when not maintained adequately can lead to cancer. Care of the mouth and teeth should be brought fully under the National Health Service and free at the point of delivery, sweeping away the often prohibitive costs for the poorest in society and ensuring that our world class health care system continues to beat it's international counterparts in keeping the nation in good health.
In order to encourage higher rates of breast feeding, longer term breast feeding and better long term health outcomes for the general population, mothers will be able to take full pay maternity leave for one year. Fathers will also be able to take one years full leave following the cessation of the mother's leave. Alternatively families can choose to share the leave so the mother has a higher proportion over the two years. This policy will improve the health and well-being of children, and the provision of early years care.
Would it be more equitable to allocate two years of leave, and allow the parents to split however they want? I admit this wouldn't necessarily hit the breastfeeding aim you want here, though.
@PaulJRobinson - about 10 years ago
There's a strong argument for suggesting that allowing fathers and mothers to split/share all parental leave exactly as they prefer to suit their own needs, would be hugely beneficial to women in the workplace. Managers making promotional/appointment decisions will no longer have a 'good reason' [as they see it] for choosing a man over a woman as the 'risk' of losing them to parental leave would be the same either way.
@lynnjbird - about 10 years ago
I think families should be able to allocate the leave between them how best suits them. To ensure fairness in the workplace, even if the mother takes the majority of the leave, the father's employer would be responsible for the employee contribution for the year for paternity leave regardless of whether he takes the whole year off. The breastfeeding issue is one of choice, I think mothers are more likely to make the decision to breast feed and for longer if they had longer paid maternity leave. At present maternity leave in its unpaid form is something that many families can't afford to take, even if they wanted to. I think there is a correlation between higher numbers of women returning to work after paid leave finishes and increasingly low breast feeding rates.
I think there should be stricter regulation on formula milk companies and how they promote their products. Formula milk even in the 21st century is vastly inferior in its benefits to babies compared to breast milk. Just comparing nappy deposits is proof enough of how unsuitable formula cow milk is for babies. I don't think they should be able to show babes in arms in their adverts and should be restricted to promoting to over 1's which is the national health guideline on when to introduce cow's milk to infants. It is time formula milk improved into something that was healthier and not cow based. The industry has been lazy and focussed their attention on undermining breast feeding rather than developing a better product.
@frankieroberto - about 10 years ago
I agree that couples should be able to split maternity/paternity leave however they like (with both parents being able to take time off in the first few weeks).
I'm going to take this change and try to adapt it slightly to see if we can get consensus. @lynnjbird, I'll have to open another pull request when I do that, but I'll link it from here and make sure I let you know.
@lynnjbird - about 10 years ago
Thanks James, I look forward to reading. It will be interesting to find out what people think about the issue. It is a worrying trend that the mainstream parties are more focused on incentives to get mothers with young babies back to work and leave fathers out of the picture. There is no incentive for either parent to actually stay at home and be a proper parent. If the state can afford to pay for widescale nursery childcare then it is also possible to afford a more substantial maternity and paternity leave where the interests of the child would be paramount; something the state doesn't consider in its initiatives to subsidise non-parent childcare.
@PaulJRobinson - about 10 years ago
Item 4 on the 'Society' page details a proposal that would solve this problem: by allowing a full transfer of personal income tax allowance from one partner to another, it encourages stay-at-home parents of either sex; is financially worth far more than Statutory Maternity Pay, and is not time restricted to just x months/years after birth.
@frankieroberto - about 10 years ago
@PaulJRobinson transferring personal income tax doesn't give you the right to take leave from your job and return to the same job later though.
I think there's the need for both.
@PaulJRobinson - about 10 years ago
good point!
with kind regards, Paul Robinson
about.me/pauljrobinson
On 3 April 2014 23:14, Frankie Roberto [email protected] wrote:
@PaulJRobinson https://github.com/PaulJRobinson transferring personal income tax doesn't give you the right to take leave from your job and return to the same job later though.
I think there's the need for both.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/openpolitics/manifesto/pull/83#issuecomment-39511732 .
@philipjohn - about 10 years ago
Keen to vote for this if we can simplify the wording based on the comments.
The OpenPolitics Manifesto
@lynnjbird - about 10 years ago
maternity and paternity leave