Isn't the issue here really simply that, generally, (I realize there are same sex couples and single parents but lets set that aside for now) one man and one woman choose to have children. The woman should not have a disproportionately more negative effect on her career than the man. This gets away from singles vs married and kids vs no kids. Whether, in general, people with children should be expected to perform at the same level as people without children is a different topic. This is about making sure women are not left behind because of the physical demands of pregnancy and breast feeding etc. There will never be equality in academia without addressing this unavoidable reality.
Cara Joos PhD University of Missouri Biological Sciences 105 Tucker Hall Columbia, MO 65211 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> On Jul 6, 2013, at 2:40 PM, David L. McNeely <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I assume you are not serious. What people who find fault with NSF doing this fail to acknowledge is that NSF is responsible for the furtherance of science. Projects suffer when participants must be away for family matters. So science suffers, and NSF money goes to waste. By providing PIs small grants to temporarily replace workers who must be away for family reasons, NSF is salvaging its projects. I assume that PIs have hiring and firing authority. Being absent for recreational reasons and letting the project suffer would in my mind justify replacement of such personnel. That shouldn't be hard to do in today's employment climate. PIs may be faced with an institutional family leave policy that requires that they provide time off for family reasons (which is a legitimate institutional policy -- it helps retain employees in which the institution may have valuable training invested). This policy provides for PIs to work around the difficulty to projects that that might cause. NSF seems to be responding to a need among grantees. David McNeely ---- "David M. Lawrence" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: What other choices that might "compete with their professional career," would warrant such an opportunity, Michael? The proposal here looks a bit half (if that) baked. Few other "choices" invoke such a huge emotional, financial -- and LEGAL -- burden as parenthood. Being a caregiver for old or ailing relatives might certainly warrant such treatment, but let's say your choice is scuba diving (a choice I am afflicted with). It is a personal choice, it involves costs in terms of money and time -- and if done enough, could interfere with my professional career. So should I be eligible for NSF help to help with my recreational diving habit? [For the sake of argument, let's ignore the fact that my dissertation is focusing on coral reefs and will involve some diving.] Dave On 7/4/2013 10:47 PM, Michael Clary wrote: We are all much too busy managing our work and families, parents no longer own that distinction. To the degree that parenthood has been an informed choice for the average postdoc for some time, my modest proposal would be to make this opportunity available to any early career scientist who has made a personal decision that was reasonably certain to compete with their professional career. Michael -- ------------------------------------------------------ David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 6467 Hanna Drive | Cell: (804) 305-5234 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> USA | http: http://fuzzo.com ------------------------------------------------------ "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo "No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan -- David McNeely
