Today I am reminded of how unfairly adoptive parents are treated with regard to time-off work. Some other adoptive friends and I have been correlating data and researching options. Not only are adoptive parents given less time worldwide, but specifically the US laws are appalling when compared to other country policy. I will have much less time to spend with my son vs. a mother who has given birth to her child biologically.
We really have no good support in the US. I think this is probably why many moms stop working, as they don’t really have a choice (and as a result, we end up losing a lot of capable workforce members.)
Adoptive parents need this time off because they need to spend time working on the attachment process with their new child. This is a critical step in ensuring the adoptive children bond with his/her new parents. This process can take 6 months or more (especially for international adoptions when you don’t get the children home until they are a toddler, which is our situation.) I would argue that for the well being of the child who is going through transition in an adoption there is a need for a "transition leave" that a parent could take. I firmly believe that this will help to ensure the success of an adopted child to become a healthy and productive member of society, and there are many studies to support this.
- The only PAID time off I am eligible for are 10 days from my employer (and that is because of my company policy, not US law.)
- And then I will have up to 12 weeks UNPAID via the Family Medical Leave Act (though I can use accrued vacation as a part of this time if I have any days available.) However this cannot be in addition to the PAID leave mentioned above, so my max is 12 weeks.
- My husband has 5 PAID days off for adoption, with the same FMLA 12 weeks (again, it cannot exceed 12 weeks.)
So we essentially only have 3 weeks PAID. We can take a total of 24 weeks between us, but will have to use our vacation days if we are to get partially paid for the balance (21 weeks) of that timeframe.
I did find out that both the California and Washington laws are structured as insurance programs so that workers pay for the costs, lessening the impact on employers, and even this could be a “start” for the rest of the states:
- Washington's new law is a partial-wage replacement insurance program. The law provides for up to five weeks of paid leave for the birth or adoption of a child. The maximum weekly benefit is $250 a week, with pro-rated benefits available for part-time employees. The law establishes a 13-member legislative task force to determine the funding mechanism for the insurance program. Benefits under the law become available effective Oct. 1, 2009.
- California's paid family leave insurance program allows workers to deduct a small premium from their paychecks to participate in the State Disability Insurance Program. Employees taking leave qualify for 55 percent of their pay, to a maximum of $882 per week, for up to six weeks.
It seems that in Canada, they have parental leave which allows 35 weeks at 55% of pay (similar to CA, but longer timeframe)… Although maternity leave is an additional 15 weeks (of which adoptive parents are not eligible for.)
So… I am frustrated.
I am sending a letter to our senators and also sent a note to HR… however I am not holding my breath for change.
