"John D. Giorgis" schreef:
> At 09:01 AM 1/30/01 +0100, Sonja wrote:
> >The more I think about it, the more I think that this legal mother protection
> >thing turns into quite the opposite. Without maternal protection I would have
> >been happily working right now just up until birth and then been fired just
> >before it. But at least I would have had a well paid job until then. But
> alas no
> >deal.
>
> <JDG drops to the floor>
>
> Wow! Sonja just had a Libertarian thought!
> Pretty soon, she'll be reading "How Poor Government Policy Hurts the Poor."
> Now, if only you could work on Jeroen. ;-)
I'm not against legal protection for pregnant women (In case you might have read
that into my statement). But in my special case it hurt more then it saved. So in
fact it didn't do what it was supposed to do. Then again I also know how it used
to be in the sixties. When a woman married she was supposed to stay at home for
the rest of her life look after the kids and the house. And in the seventies and
part of the eighties the same happened to woman who were stupid enough to get
pregnant. So there the legal protection did what it was supposed to do. So while
in my case it did more harm then good, in other cases it might very well work and
in general force employers to work out better social policies with regard to
pregnancy and work. It is possible I just didn't get that lucky.
Sonja
