SEWER RAT 10,617 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Apple and Facebook will pay female employees up to $20,000 to help cover the cost of freezing their eggs. The idea is to enable women who want to continue focusing on their careers without sacrificing their chance to have children later on.NBC News reports that Facebook recently began its program and that Apple will start paying employees who want to freeze their eggs in January.Known as oocyte cryopreservation, egg freezing is a process by which a woman extracts and stores her eggs so that they can be reinserted into her uterus at a later date, allowing her to have children during a time when she might otherwise be infertile.Scientific advancements have made the process increasingly successful in recent years, with a 2006 study finding that fertility rates using frozen eggs were comparable to those achieved using fresh ones.Most women go through menopause in their late 40s or early 50s, and according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data, one-third of couples where the woman is 35 or older have fertility problems.The time period during which women approach declining fertility is seen as prime work years for women hoping to advance in their careers, and many professional women consider the process a means of hitting pause on their desire to have a family.According to a Businessweek cover story on the topic, a 2013 NYU study found that out of 183 women who froze their eggs, 19% said they might have had children earlier if their employer was more flexible.Given Silicon Valley's noted lack of women in power positions, offering employees money for this costly procedure — it's $10,000 for every round of frozen eggs and an additional $500 annually for storage — could help lure top female talent.NBC reports that Facebook and Apple are the first major employers to offer egg freezing coverage for non-medical reasons. source ladies of OH, if your future employer offered this initiative, would you accept it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohsogrey 474 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 I love this idea! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlayingSeohyun 6,688 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 I might do, though, I don't much like the idea of being an older parent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...... 3,962 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 yes if it meant they planned on paying me equally and offering me promotions..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joon 8,222 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Apple has great healthcare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgl 5,919 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Interesting idea, but I don't know if it will be enough to get more women into STEM and while it could help, it still doesn't solve all the issues, it just delays the inevitable. A better idea would be properly implemented paid maternity and paternity leave. This way there are more options over who stays at home during the first months, and it's not such an economical and career sacrifice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hallah 8,441 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 i guess i'm the only one who thinks there's something about this that's somehow fucked up like, isn't this putting a band-aid on the larger problem? that the work environment in the U.S. makes it difficult if nigh impossible to start a family with both parents contributing their time to the childbirth and rearing without it impacting their careers negatively? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...... 3,962 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 ^^ in the major tech/internet industries... do you know what they look like in the US? They are some of the most demanding and competitive jobs around... personally, i think there's nothing wrong with the fact that they ask you to make a choice. There are people pounding down the door to take someone's place, all equally qualified. Women who have babies.... typically want to raise their babies. What would the plan be? Give 4 years paid maternity leave, and her job is still waiting for her... or do the same with the husband... or split it... 2 years? There is no real fix.... and it will continue for well over a decade... that priority will be childrearing over work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctothekay 142 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 A couple of weeks ago, my English teacher was talking about fairness, sameness and equality and said that, what looks or is disguised as equality (like corporate businesses, equality in workplace, etc.) can turn out to be as unequal. And the two articles posted this being one and the one of women soon to not outlive men is kind of reflective of what he had said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTI-IKON 1,013 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Sound like they cover all of the expenses. I like free stuff so why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sane 16,342 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 This seems like a neat (though incredibly expensive) idea on the surface until you actually think of the implications... I was born when my parents were in their 40s. My parents were middle aged when I was growing up and although they did their best, I missed out on a lot of things because they couldn't keep up, especially from middle school onward. I'm only in my mid 20s now and my parents are senior citizens. I'm already having to pick up the slack on many things they can't do because of their age. I don't want kids until my 30s, are they gonna be able to see their grandchildren grow up? Are my kids gonna be able to have the kind of meaningful relationship with their grandparents that I wasn't able to have with mine? I was still a kid just a few years ago and now my parents are in their twilight years. I try not to think about it, but it's really hard to see this happening, especially when they talk about their will and burial plots and what various things are gonna happen after they're gone. I know I won't have nearly as much time with them as they had with their parents, and it sucks so much and I really can't handle it. STEM fields stay difficult and time consuming. If you're planning on waiting until it gets easier to have kids, you're gonna be waiting until you retire. I can't even imagine how hard it'd be for a kid born to parents around retiring age, their parents would be in a nursing home or dead while they're in college... I think facilitating maternity and paternity leave would be a vastly superior idea. Give new parents the resources to keep up to date on vital information in their field while they stay home and take care of their new baby, give them opportunities to work less hours or work from home, etc etc.. Don't encourage people to have kids in their 50s or 60s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...... 3,962 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 This seems like a neat (though incredibly expensive) idea on the surface until you actually think of the implications... I was born when my parents were in their 40s. My parents were middle aged when I was growing up and although they did their best, I missed out on a lot of things because they couldn't keep up, especially from middle school onward. I'm only in my mid 20s now and my parents are senior citizens. I'm already having to pick up the slack on many things they can't do because of their age. I don't want kids until my 30s, are they gonna be able to see their grandchildren grow up? Are my kids gonna be able to have the kind of meaningful relationship with their grandparents that I wasn't able to have with mine? I was still a kid just a few years ago and now my parents are in their twilight years. I try not to think about it, but it's really hard to see this happening, especially when they talk about their will and burial plots and what various things are gonna happen after they're gone. I know I won't have nearly as much time with them as they had with their parents, and it sucks so much and I really can't handle it. STEM fields stay difficult and time consuming. If you're planning on waiting until it gets easier to have kids, you're gonna be waiting until you retire. I can't even imagine how hard it'd be for a kid born to parents around retiring age, their parents would be in a nursing home or dead while they're in college... I think facilitating maternity and paternity leave would be a vastly superior idea. Give new parents the resources to keep up to date on vital information in their field while they stay home and take care of their new baby, give them opportunities to work less hours or work from home, etc etc.. Don't encourage people to have kids in their 50s or 60s. but we're talking about Apple and FB ... not Home Depot.... 99% of the employees will not be working there into their 50's and 60's... nor could most of them the juggle their work load from home whilst simultaneously diapering their child. I have an acquaintance from Uni who works for Apple. I have another at Google (although i don't know what she does). I went to Uni in silicon valley... a lot of kids were getting into tech. The guy that works at Apple has zero life, works ridiculously long hours, and occasionally talks about the stress and pressure of the competitive environment... on FB. This guy will burn out before he's 30 probably. This coincides with every GlassDoor review and editorial piece i've ever read about Apple, Google, Facebook...etc. Tbh... to give a woman job stability and less exacting workload...as result of a personal choice she made....would be the opposite of gender equality in the workplace.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symphonyâ„¢ 11,329 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midnightdreams 810 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 i guess i'm the only one who thinks there's something about this that's somehow fucked up like, isn't this putting a band-aid on the larger problem? that the work environment in the U.S. makes it difficult if nigh impossible to start a family with both parents contributing their time to the childbirth and rearing without it impacting their careers negatively? eh at this level I don't think it is. If you're working at a company willing to help you freeze your eggs, you're definitely making at least a 6 figured salary. Yeah it sucks that they have to choose between family or career but I wouldn't call it fucked up. They could easily save money, quit and work at a smaller company with less hours when they want to start a family. It's not like they can't get jobs if their previous work was a fortune 500 company. What's fucked up are the adults who are scraping by with 2 jobs and barely any time for their family. I was born when my parents were in their 40s. My parents were middle aged when I was growing up and although they did their best, I missed out on a lot of things because they couldn't keep up, especially from middle school onward. I'm only in my mid 20s now and my parents are senior citizens. I'm already having to pick up the slack on many things they can't do because of their age. I don't want kids until my 30s, are they gonna be able to see their grandchildren grow up? Are my kids gonna be able to have the kind of meaningful relationship with their grandparents that I wasn't able to have with mine? I was still a kid just a few years ago and now my parents are in their twilight years. I try not to think about it, but it's really hard to see this happening, especially when they talk about their will and burial plots and what various things are gonna happen after they're gone. I know I won't have nearly as much time with them as they had with their parents, and it sucks so much and I really can't handle it. STEM fields stay difficult and time consuming. If you're planning on waiting until it gets easier to have kids, you're gonna be waiting until you retire. I can't even imagine how hard it'd be for a kid born to parents around retiring age, their parents would be in a nursing home or dead while they're in college... I think facilitating maternity and paternity leave would be a vastly superior idea. Give new parents the resources to keep up to date on vital information in their field while they stay home and take care of their new baby, give them opportunities to work less hours or work from home, etc etc.. Don't encourage people to have kids in their 50s or 60s. I have to agree with you. At the latest have kids by your late thirties. My parents were in their mid forties when I was born. Earlier years my mom was more fit. We used to go to amusement parks and stuff. These days they're not much interested in the world anymore? My dad likes to watch tv on his recliner and my mom likes to read/write. Their world consists of Each other, Netflix, and books. Great for them but not really for me who wants to see the world and do active shit. My mom always insists on taking care of my little nieces and nephews but I seem to be the most active with them. She tries her best but she'd be really overwhelmed and I don't think my neplings would have as much fun without me helping her. My dad just seems disinterested in life beyond my mom. maybe the family? If you're thinking of having kids, try to stay physically fit and interested in the outside world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgl 5,919 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Now I noticed... why are they using a Jurassic Park stock photo? ^^ in the major tech/internet industries... do you know what they look like in the US? They are some of the most demanding and competitive jobs around... personally, i think there's nothing wrong with the fact that they ask you to make a choice. There are people pounding down the door to take someone's place, all equally qualified. Women who have babies.... typically want to raise their babies. What would the plan be? Give 4 years paid maternity leave, and her job is still waiting for her... or do the same with the husband... or split it... 2 years? There is no real fix.... and it will continue for well over a decade... that priority will be childrearing over work. If the job is fast paced and demanding and with huge financial investment.... i'm not here for bending over backwards for women who choose to start families.... personally. Here's a reasonable alternative... choose your path. It's a different country, but I'm studying computer sciences/engineering, with a lot of friends already working in the area here and in other countries, so I know how competitive it gets. Sure, some got a cozy 9 to 5 job just doing simple tech support stuff, but most work for international corporations, and they literally work from 9am until midnight every day (including weekends) if it's needed to finish a project. Sometimes they just go home to shower and change. The problem I see is that these generations were brought up thinking they could have everything. Personally I agree that sacrifices are needed, but we've reached a point where if someone says women have to chose between having a career or a family, they'll be called misogynist and berated until no end. So everyone is bending over backwards to find a solution, because suddenly equality might not be enough if it means sacrificing something. I suggested better maternity/paternity leave, since it would at least allow for a choice. Namely having the father stay with the baby for half or even the full leave. It's true that some women that have children want to raise them, but I think if given a viable choice, they might just be content with having the father do most of the child raising work. It worked in the past the other way around, I don't see why it can't be done this way. In Europe some women with demanding high paying jobs already do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkilene 5,738 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 I don't see why you can't have this and you can't have the other option of parental leave and accommodations for good child care at the workplace. The ironic thing is that these types of jobs usually advertise perks like unlimited vacation time yet they also know that the expectation is that no one would actually choose to take an extended leave of absence when push comes to shove. Also I don't see how freezing eggs solves anything. You're still going to have a pregnant worker or spouse (and is Apple/Facebook offering to pay for IVF or just the egg freezing), just later on. So...how is this cost effective. Are they hoping people freeze their eggs and forget about them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sane 16,342 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 but we're talking about Apple and FB ... not Home Depot.... 99% of the employees will not be working there into their 50's and 60's... nor could most of them the juggle their work load from home whilst simultaneously diapering their child. I have an acquaintance from Uni who works for Apple. I have another at Google (although i don't know what she does). I went to Uni in silicon valley... a lot of kids were getting into tech. The guy that works at Apple has zero life, works ridiculously long hours, and occasionally talks about the stress and pressure of the competitive environment... on FB. This guy will burn out before he's 30 probably. This coincides with every GlassDoor review and editorial piece i've ever read about Apple, Google, Facebook...etc. Tbh... to give a woman job stability and less exacting workload...as result of a personal choice she made....would be the opposite of gender equality in the workplace.... I can't find anything that says that STEM field workers retire significantly younger than those in other fields of work... Anectodally speaking I know many people in their 30s-40s in STEM fields who certainly don't intend on retiring before their 50s. I agree that nobody could juggle a full workload while taking care of a child, which is why I suggested a lighter workload or resources to at least keep up to date on knowledge so they could jump back in more easily later on. It'd be difficult, but it wouldn't be impossible. I definitely don't think they should be paid the same for the lighter workload though. You should be paid what you earn, and if you go the study resources only route then you should be paid for maternity/paternity leave only and not beyond that. If you want to raise kids while you're young enough to do it properly you're gonna have to make sacrifices somewhere in your career, it's just how things work. I think it's important to give options to new mothers and fathers, but they're gonna have to work hard if they want to maintain their career options. That's life, nobody can have everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...... 3,962 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 I can't find anything that says that STEM field workers retire significantly younger than those in other fields of work... Anectodally speaking I know many people in their 30s-40s in STEM fields who certainly don't intend on retiring before their 50s. I agree that nobody could juggle a full workload while taking care of a child, which is why I suggested a lighter workload or resources to at least keep up to date on knowledge so they could jump back in more easily later on. It'd be difficult, but it wouldn't be impossible. I definitely don't think they should be paid the same for the lighter workload though. You should be paid what you earn, and if you go the study resources only route then you should be paid for maternity/paternity leave only and not beyond that. If you want to raise kids while you're young enough to do it properly you're gonna have to make sacrifices somewhere in your career, it's just how things work. I think it's important to give options to new mothers and fathers, but they're gonna have to work hard if they want to maintain their career options. That's life, nobody can have everything. but we're not talking broad term STEM jobs... we're talking specifically, FB and Apple.... but regardless...i'm surprised.... major tech industries are notorious for ... age.... "discrimination"... outside of the business sector of the industry, older workers (unless they really irreplaceable) are slowly made redundant... many people who work at a place like Apple or say Google, burn out before then anyway...and find new less demanding work elsewhere. They have massive revolving doors in those companies. The work load is too demanding, but the money, benefits, and name on the resume make it worth it. Check out linkedin... at the amount of 30/early 40 somethings who worked at these companies for a handful of years, made the money, and then went to get a more reasonable jobs...any job they wanted in the field really, because they were coming from Apple or Google or FB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sane 16,342 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 but we're not talking broad term STEM jobs... we're talking specifically, FB and Apple.... but regardless...i'm surprised.... major tech industries are notorious for ... age.... "discrimination"... outside of the business sector of the industry, older workers (unless they really irreplaceable) are slowly made redundant... many people who work at a place like Apple or say Google, burn out before then anyway...and find new less demanding work elsewhere. They have massive revolving doors in those companies. The work load is too demanding, but the money, benefits, and name on the resume make it worth it. Check out linkedin... at the amount of 30/early 40 somethings who worked at these companies for a handful of years, made the money, and then went to get a more reasonable jobs...any job they wanted in the field really, because they were coming from Apple or Google or FB. Ah, I was speaking generally. People usually do move on to slightly less demanding work as they age, but it's still demanding enough that it'd be nearly impossible to juggle raising a kid while working full time unless you could work from home, and even then it'd be difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pizza 519 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 what a time to be alive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...... 3,962 Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Also I don't see how freezing eggs solves anything. You're still going to have a pregnant worker or spouse (and is Apple/Facebook offering to pay for IVF or just the egg freezing), just later on. So...how is this cost effective. Are they hoping people freeze their eggs and forget about them? i think people are under the impression that Apple and Facebook are forcing women to freeze their eggs. They are giving the choice to women...as a form of insurance. Likely the women who choose to go through this process (egg harvesting isn't a cakewalk btw), are women who already intended upon making fast tracking their careers a priority. At least now, these women, once they are ready to put their careers on hold, w/e the age, and start a family... will be able to. And it's not as if a woman who does decide to freeze her eggs, has contractually committed to not having kids while she's working. If she wants to get pregnant w/e...she can. Apple and FB are offering a service... that's really it. An optional service that removes some of the fear and guilt from the minds of business minded women, who, w/out the service, do indeed feel as if, they are making a choice, 'work or kids' ... An offer like this removes the "gotta have kids while i still can" motivation....and perhaps the companies will indeed see less women getting pregnant around the same time when they hit their 30s.... the 'cost effectivness' also comes into play, when you think about, as the article mentioned, how it will likely lure very brilliant women to work for the company. Society is changing. Not every 30 year old is focused on getting pregnant... not every 35 year old, not even every 40 year old. Women are increasingly climbing ranks in businesses, but not in tech, because maternity leave diminishes their work load...tech being so demanding and fast paced....it allows men the upper-hand when they can stay fully committed to the exorbitant workload. These days, not every woman dreams of being a young mother any more...they want to put in the hours, they want to compete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midna 2,032 Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 i'd totally do this i always said that i want to focus on career first, baby later...and the pressure of having a child early scares me, especially when I know it'll take me several years to reach the financial stability after graduation. This is an awesome option for women who want to put their careers first :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taro 383 Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 No my parents are getting so old already because they had me late... I don't want to put my future children through that :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.