Should the timing of a family be a purely emotional decision, rather than a financial one.
For Lauren Judge the incentive to hold off on having her next baby is financial.
The successful lawyer and mother-of one told News Limited that her husband was an accountant and he “had done the sums.”
For another successful woman though, the idea of waiting for her much longed for baby is agony.
This yet-to-be-mother can’t imagine anything or anyone holding back her dream of a baby. The idea she might leave it too late and miss out haunts her.
These are two women with very polar opposite ideas of how the timing of the paid parental leave scheme will affect them.
A Galaxy poll for The Sunday Telegraph over the weekend showed that 13% of all women aged 18-44 planned to time their pregnancy around the July 2015 launch of the scheme.
The PPL – a cornerstone of the Abbott Government’s election promises – hopes to deliver up to $50,000 payments plus superannuation for six months’ parental leave.
If the scheme passes the Senate it will kick in in just over a year’s time. The key here though is IF the scheme passes the Senate.
At this stage there is no guarantee that the scheme will pass. Some Coalition Senators have indicated that they will be willing to cross the floor to vote against it, and several key Nationals Senators have spoken out against it.
Clive Palmer, the Palmer United Party leader, has indicated he will support a compromise deal. It’s all very uncertain.
So what does this uncertainly mean to these 570 000 women who are reportedly putting their baby dreams on hold in the hopes of a financial bonanza?
Should finances be a priority in the planning of a family?
Shouldn’t the emotional costs outweigh the monetary ones?
It’s easy to think that surely the decision to have a baby should be about love rather than money but that’s impractical, isn’t it?