Julia Hartley-Brewer v Stella Creasy

I was a solicitor when I had my baby. I had to work full time to keep a roof over our heads and put food on the table. My mother was a wonderful support with childcare but I worked very close to home, in a lesser position than I could have achieved. I was headhunted by a big City firm but declined the offer and didn't move to a partnership with a City firm until my son had left home for university. I tailored my work as far as I possibly could to my responsibilities as a mother. I have never whinged about the very real fact that I could not combine my family responsibilities with the sort of career that I managed to achieve later on. That is not regressing to the 1950s or living in the dark ages. It's being realistic and doing your best to be a good mother whist not letting other women down by making employers less likely to want to give them a chance. I have no regrets whatsoever. I would do the same in a heartbeat.

I do understand the difficulties faced by a parent whose OH is away with work as she says hers is (she says he is in the military).

Some parents struggle on and end up stressed and exhausted but compromises do have to be made, careers adjusted as parents decide between them who should be the main carer.

I agree that Parliamentary hours are difficult but in crises such as we have had lately, that is the nature of the job, she knew that and she has to accept that. She could pay a nanny as young members of my family did, or her husband could apply for a desk job instead.

So wouldn't it have been better if employers were made to provide appropriate child friendly policies such as subsidised nurseries, flexible working, job sharing, and didn't expect people to work a full day then hang around till 1am to walk through a lobby?

I have never considered that women who wanted children and to have jobs that suited their talents were letting me down.

She does not have to accept anything. She's an MP. She's trying to change it. We should be thanking her on behalf of future generations, not accusing her of whinging.

volver

I do wonder how people think the laws get changed, things about employment for instance. I'm no expert, but I imagine its through MPs like Ms Creasey seeing that things need to change and actually doing something about it.

Then all the paramedics, doctors and Sainsbury's workers will find it easier in the future.

So she's not whinging, she's showing what things are like now and actively doing something about it, which is what we pay her the £80k+ a year for.

Do you honestly expect a paramedic to turn up at a RTA or when someone is having a heart attack with their baby in a sling suckling away?

Or a nurse in ICU attending a Covid patient on a ventilator, baby getting in between them, screeching because it needs its nappy changed?

No, I couldn't have taken mine into work.
We'll have a poster along in a minute to say she took her babies into work from the start and then they used to help stick the stamps on the post etc. Well, not all of us had that kind of job.
The workplace is no place for a baby.

She's lucky that she has a job that allows her to take her baby to work and breastfeed it, imagine if she was a bus driver or working on the tills in a supermarket.
I agree we should all be allowed to breastfeed our children when we feel they need to but as a woman, we have to accept that we can't.
To me, I can imagine an episode on "This is going to hurt", where the gynaecologist stops in the middle of an emergency C section and brings the baby out from under the table and breastfeeds it.
I worked in a school where we were allowed to take our young children into school on Inset days and they all played together supervised by the nursery nurses on a rota.
.Then a new head banned it and we all had to find childminders. Until a new deputy head arrived and a few months later appeared at an inset day baby in tow and fed /nappy changed during meetings. The head never said a thing. One rule for all not at all, the plebs had to get child minders.

We have had a ^relaxation room / kitchen / diner at our premises for 29 years. Staff who have problems with childcare are welcome to bring in their child/children on these occasions. (Computer points and TV, video player)

We cannot have toddlers ( Health and Safety) but do allow babies.

Then again we are not open at 1 am in the morning.

Women will normally have to make the decisions regarding careers and children as they are the ones who give birth.

Babies and toddlers are not always quiet, compliant little beings, volver, who will sleep happily whilst Mummy or Daddy is working.
They demand attention and quite rightly so as their needs are immediate and paramount.

imagine if she was a bus driver

Yammy !

She's trying to make things better for everyone.

Presenting daft straw man arguments about bus drivers and medics doesn't really enhance the conversation, does it?

Yes.

What a lot of judgemental and condemnatory posts. It's her baby. It's her job. It's her choice. And other women should support her when she makes that choice. Of course it's unreasonable to have voting at 1am. The H of C still operates on the same timetable it did when men with business in the City only arrived for debates after their club closed. It's still male dominated. And if one women MP taking a baby into work with her draws attention to that well "good for her". 100 years after we got the vote men MPs outnumber women 2:1. 5050parliament.co.uk

They are relevant examples.

I wonder if SC has tried expressing milk and freezing it in batches for when she needs to be at HoC at ridiculous hours? Perhaps she can't do that. I used to and any that wasn't used for the baby got used in cheese sauce, etc.

It does mean you can be out of an evening, which I needed to be a couple of times a week, teaching. Does SC have a partner/husband? I suppose if she's a single mum that complicates things. I'm not sure I could concentrate sufficiently on deep political matters if I had a baby strapped to me. Doing practical things is different and I often had a baby or young child on my back, e.g. when mopping the kitchen floor that they'd just spilled something messy on.

I'm not sure bringing up the supermarkets and other places that could (should?) provide crèche facilities is a bad thing.

As usual, nothing's simple.

I don't think

Waste not, want not ???

No trisher

Yes, it is her job, her voice.
If it is so important to her and to the country and her husband's jo is too they need to get a nanny as they can afford it.

Other women on salaries like hers employ nannies so that they can go to work and concentrate fully on their job while they are there.

What about children's rights?
Children deserve better than this.

What we want is more flexibility - just because a bus driver can't do it no reason why someone trooping through voting lobby shouldn't. But surely the answer is not to have voting at 1 am or allow remote voting at all times. Half the time when you see parliamentary debate theres no-one there, its not like. workplace you have to be there all the time. It seems like some on here want to make it more difficult for working mums just because it was difficult for them. Or maybe we shouldn't allow women MPs?

Nobody wants to make it difficult for any women to work, but realities have to be faced.

If there are votes at unsociable hours is it fair on the child to be there? We have all had to make life choices, as do my four DiL’s regarding work / life balance.

I really can't understand why anyone has a problem with this. The baby didn't cause any disruption , it is a baby, not a noisy toddler. It was in the House of Commons, not on a bus.
These objections do just sound like jealousy.

I think 1am would make little difference to a newborn. Surely the thing is not to allow voting at unsociable hours or allow new mum MPs to vote remotely, or even have proper maternity cover.

She could have agreed to pair in that instance.

Whitewavemark2

As my mother used to say - JHB. - “terribly common” ?

I wouldn’t say that but I can’t say she is one of my favourite people.

I think JHB is incredibly right-wing and has some exceedingly old fashioned views as is often the case Whitewave. She also has an entitled view of life but then she is not the only one. I can't bear listening to her so I rarely do.

Women are, quite rightly, choosing either to have no children or have fewer much later. If you think that's okay for our country then complain on Chestnut, et al. Why would anyone have children when it deminishes you to a second class citizen?

So there's a nursery but it isn't free so still her problem rather than one for all of us.

Why do women attack women who want equality?

‘^She’s trying to make things better for everyone ^.
It doesn’t work like that. Employers are less likely to take on women with, or who they perceive are likely to have, children if they are forced into providing flexible hours and crèches. Women who quietly get on with things and prove their reliability do a much greater service to other women than those who kick up a fuss and demand change. The one thing they will never change, unless they are brilliant scientists, is the fact that women get pregnant and have babies. Men don’t.

Why do women attack women who want equality?

I did suggest that her husband could gt a desk job with better hours.

Parents need to compromise if they want to have children.
Children deserve better.

Very true Callistemon.