Bio
I write Stirrup Queens when I'm not reading other people's blogs, cooking, or chasing after my twins. I'm the author of two books: Life from Scratch,...
 
 
 
 

What’s Hot on BlogHer.com

Women, the Workplace, and Their Damn Internal Organs

  • Share This Post
  • submit
  • 7
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

It's amazing what people will do to get out of work. I heard tale that there are laaaaaaaaaazy women out there who love having their cervix manipulated in order to have a catheter shoved through to their uterus so an embryo that was created out of an egg that they had surgically removed from their body can be transferred back. All just to get out of that 8 a.m. staff meeting. You know that kind of woman also is the type who looooooooooooooooves to waste time with things like having mammograms or colo-rectal exams. Slackers.

The Wall Street Journal reported this week on a federal appeals court ruling protecting women who need to miss work in order to pursue fertility treatments. The case involved a secretary who missed work during an IVF cycle that was ultimately unsuccessful and asked for additional time to try again.

Here's the thing: women are going to be the ones who miss work even when it's male factor infertility because pregnancy occurs inside the woman's body. Which means that if a male employee has azoospermia, he will not need massive amounts of time away from work (at the most, he will need to provide the sperm on the day of retrieval) though his fertile wife will need to take off from work in order to conceive with him. This is why infertility is not only a condition of the person, but also a condition of the couple (when a person has a partner) since both people will be affected by the others' infertility.

Of course, there has to be a fine balance. Personal life cannot trump productivity--they need to work in a give-and-take with one another. Work places cannot function if employees are taking off continuously, leaving work unfinished. Fertility treatments can interfere with travel and meetings as well as physical labour. But where is the give when medical issues or situational conditions necessitate the utilization of reproductive assistance?

The comments on the article tell the larger story of both people who have undergone IVF and are grateful for understanding bosses as well as the anonymous commentors who say, "I don’t get this. You’re making a choice, and you expect your co-workers to simply accept it because it leads to having a child?"

At the heart of this lawsuit is the fact that personal life always negatively affects work life. Therefore, those opposing this ruling such as the anonymous poster who commented on the Wall Street Journal article, "Why should anyone from your company give you slack? Because you are infertile. This and the lawsuit that brought up this topic are a joke. Your personal defects should not allow you to screw over a private business just because you want to have kids" would also probably agree that we should simply stop having children. C-sections take around six weeks to heal and there is simply too high a risk of c-sections when you factor in about 40% of pregnancies necessitate them. Therefore, we need to do away with children. Also, fights with spouses disrupt sleep and are too big a risk when you consider the divorce rate is about 50% in the United States. Therefore, no marriage.

Or, the heart inside the heart of this is that, as this commentor points out, the problem is simply in employing women:

I can tell you this is another reason to hire less women & limit their access to promotions. It is fine if you can actually handle your job & proceed through the treatments, the possible pregnancy & then the time off you will need to take care of your sick child & all childhood emergencies. But you have to look at this realistically at all the time involved & time when you will not be able to focus on work.

Which is precisely why this court ruled to utilize the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and call out this inequality towards women. Because women should not be penalized in the workplace simply because the future of the world is directly tied to our uteruses. We can, of course, dismiss each individual woman as not important to the perpetuation of the system, but we cannot as a whole dismiss women and their necessity in bringing forth the next generation.

We've given women the right to employment but placed such heavy glass ceiling above her that she'll never be able to push through without laws in place protecting her.

The

  • 7
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
phdinparenting 5 pts

Good employers realize that work life balance is important and make provisions for that. If employees are happy, they will be more productive. I think it is usually the lack of creativity and flexibility of the boss that causes problems in those situations. 

I thought this was a great post, but I do disagree with one of your statements. You said that "there is simply too high a risk of c-sections when you factor in about 40% of pregnancies necessitate them". C-Sections are not necessitated by 40% of pregnancies. The current c-section rate in the U.S. is well over 30%, but c-sections should generally be required in only 5% to 10% of births. There are lots of factors that result in higher than necessary c-section rates, as explained in this article:

http://www.childbirthconnection.org/article.asp?ck...

Annie - PhD in Parenting - http://phdinparenting.wordpress.com ( http://phdinparenting.wordpress.com/ )

Trisha 5 pts

 If  you don't legally have to tell them why you're taking off, then I think its best not to.  Its none of their business. 

They should make it easier for people to get time off without pay too.

from my blog:
12 Things You Can Do To Set a Healthy Example for Your Kids ( http://www.ideasforwomen.com/news/parenting/2008/0... ) - can you think of any others to add to the list?

--Shelly-- 5 pts

I think if you need sick or vacation time for any reason, it isn't really anyone's business why are you are gone.  If you didn't need IVF, but were trying to conceive, would you tell your boss you had to go home to have nookie?  It's too personal to share I think.  Bosses are more understanding these days than years ago, but I think employees get too personal with their employers.  If you've racked up paid time off on the books, then use it at your discretion.  They more they know, the more they can use against you.  If you don't have enough paid time off, would your doctor consider medical leave?  The Pregnancy Disability Leave Act protects employees for being sick during pregnancy and the employer can't come down on you for being pregnant or recovery... so until we have laws that protect us during fertility or "infertility treatments", I say keep it hush hush. 

Have I been burned by sharing too much information with a boss?  YES!  Can you tell?  Probably :)

Arpee 5 pts

I read that article along with the comments. I was indignant specially of the ones you mentioned in this article as well.

Technically, we are not required to tell our boss why we we are taking a "vacation". But sometimes we feel we have to explain ourselves to them - I know I do. The last time I said something to my boss in this situation, I turned a bit teary-eyed. Perhaps because I was not prepared to do say anything about it but felt had to - without having rehearsed how much I would like to tell and how to say it. He was sympathetic.

Right now, we have some extra funds from our relocation that we "can afford" me not being back to the corporate setting as we continue our journey towards fertility. If I'm still in that journey when I go back to the workplace, I'll probably will let my boss in only if I am asked for specifics when asking for paid-time off. And I will have to prepare what I will say and how to say it, just in case I am asked and I feel like telling.

I favor the ruling, of course. But like anything else, it needs to be used and evaluated in a case to case basis. It can easily get exploited.

In Ms Hall's case, her company cited "absenteeism for infertility treatments" as the reason for being layed off. Do you think if her company cited "inability to deliver results" (assuming that is true) that she would have a case?

Thanks!
Arpee @ The Saga of Becoming Fruitful ( http://befruitfulsaga.com )

Pamela Jeanne 5 pts

If the WSJ commenter wants a closer look or understanding of "personal defects" all that's required is a look in the mirror. This individual has more than most and could seriously benefit from some personal evolution...

Pamela Jeanne

http://www.Coming2Terms.com

geekgirl 5 pts

How dare we leave the kitchen, put on shoes and go to work.  Isn't that what those commentors are saying?  That if women cannot fit into an inflexible male designed work model that we should just stay home?

This is very disturbing to me.  I blogged just yesterday, and regularly, about how it is a huge drama for me to leave on time, or even within an hour of on time, to pick up my child.  I am penalized and screamed at by my female boss for having a life and committments outside work.  The sheer horror a person in my office faces when confronted with a medical problem is crazy.

The emotions of infertility treatment combined with an already hostile work environment would be too much to take.

It isn't right that my career has had to take such a huge hit because I want to have a family, and to love and take care of my family.  

Christine

http://froginnorthgeorgia.com/

Suzanne 5 pts

I'm glad that women are protected by this ruling. The bitterness with which people responded to it, though, is terrifying. The solution never seems to be to find newer, better, more flexible ways to work, but rather how to punish women for daring to have children and then caring for them. Of course, if men and women were expected to share parenting duties more equally, moms would not be the only ones to leave work when a child is sick. However, with our current social attitudes, a dad would probably be penalized even worse than a mom for taking time off to be with children. It's pathetic.

Suzanne Reisman ( http://www.blogher.com/member/suzanne-reisman ), Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender ( http://blogher.org/topic/feminism-gender )
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants ( http://cussandotherrants.com/ )