Taxpayers also pay for child care in a number of programs nationwide, so it isn’t exactly a binary choice.
In any case, there are other alternatives to the obviously sub-standard care that was rendered in this case by a facility that cavalierly disregarded the instructions of the mother.
In any case I am somewhat surprised at the hostility directed at me for having the temerity to suggest that the mother of a premature infant with medical issues might be inclined to extend her “Maternity leave” or even become a “stay-at-home Mom” at least until the baby has gotten over those incredibly difficult first few weeks or months of life. Is ANY career worth risking the life or well-being of your baby? Seriously?
It doesn’t always mean that the Taxpayers will be paying for it.
I have taught pre-school, and some of the kids just get dumped there, at a very early age, because the moms have “better things to do”. Not all...but some. And there were a few that were there for free, even when the mothers weren’t working.
I have also taken care of nieces and nephews because my sisters in both cases HAD to work. Now I have two sisters who take care of THEIR grandsons because their kids have to work.
So I am not unaware of the situations, and certainly not insensitive to the needs of a single mom.
There are just more than two options.
I was fortunate enough to work at home as a medical transcriptionist for over 20 years. No vacations or sick days, but I got to raise my babies myself. It can be done, although not in that particular field, sad to say.