With my first child, I took 12 weeks leave, and helped feed the baby using the bottle, and this arrangement worked out great. He didn't care whether it was bottle or breast, was just happy to eat, and still preferred his relationship with his mom more than with me. Oh yes, that's a thing by the way that seems to get lost in these discussions.
With my other 2 kids, they REFUSED the bottle and would ONLY breastfeed. This produced some rather complex scheduling gymnastics that favored my work time over their mother's.
I guess the problem I have with this whole subject is... we really need to restrict the scope of what we even CARE about, when talking about these things. What the Nordic countries have done for parental leave? Awesome. Give people the choice and let them make it.
What happens after that -- even if the long term result is some remaining inequality? -- is not something you or I have a right to change because the opportunity has been given, and reality took over after that. It'd be a bit like complaining about the waves on the beach. I mean sure, you can... but it won't change anything because the ocean won't listen to you. Neither will a baby satisfy the mandates of an ideology over its own wants/needs. If baby decides it only wants mama, well... you'll have to manage. And that has consequences, whether you want to accept that there are or not.
> [the baby] still preferred his relationship with his mom more than with me. Oh yes, that's a thing by the way that seems to get lost in these discussions.
It doesn't get lost. Yes, babies are closer to their mothers. But they are also closer to fathers that interact with them more often than to fathers who interact with them more briefly, all other things equal. And fathers who take more care of their babies also help the mothers not get overwhelmed while at the same time getting to spend more quality time with their babies.
It doesn't have to mean the baby will prefer the father to the mother, which like you said, is unlikely.
To sum up:
- The mom wins, by not being overwhelmed and not being relegated to a housekeeping/babysitting role (if she doesn't want it).
- The father wins, by being more involved in the raising of his kids, and enjoying more time together with them.
- The baby also wins by getting to know his/her father better at an early and fundamental stage.
With my first child, I took 12 weeks leave, and helped feed the baby using the bottle, and this arrangement worked out great. He didn't care whether it was bottle or breast, was just happy to eat, and still preferred his relationship with his mom more than with me. Oh yes, that's a thing by the way that seems to get lost in these discussions.
With my other 2 kids, they REFUSED the bottle and would ONLY breastfeed. This produced some rather complex scheduling gymnastics that favored my work time over their mother's.
I guess the problem I have with this whole subject is... we really need to restrict the scope of what we even CARE about, when talking about these things. What the Nordic countries have done for parental leave? Awesome. Give people the choice and let them make it.
What happens after that -- even if the long term result is some remaining inequality? -- is not something you or I have a right to change because the opportunity has been given, and reality took over after that. It'd be a bit like complaining about the waves on the beach. I mean sure, you can... but it won't change anything because the ocean won't listen to you. Neither will a baby satisfy the mandates of an ideology over its own wants/needs. If baby decides it only wants mama, well... you'll have to manage. And that has consequences, whether you want to accept that there are or not.