News

Care share

UK policymakers need to look not only at another country's parental allowance, but at the reasons why it matters, says Peter Moss We hear a lot today about early childhood services in Sweden. But Sweden is also a world leader in another area affecting young children and their families: parental leave. At a time when how to care for very young children is at the top of the discussion agenda, it is worth paying attention to how this Nordic society handles the matter.
UK policymakers need to look not only at another country's parental allowance, but at the reasons why it matters, says Peter Moss

We hear a lot today about early childhood services in Sweden. But Sweden is also a world leader in another area affecting young children and their families: parental leave. At a time when how to care for very young children is at the top of the discussion agenda, it is worth paying attention to how this Nordic society handles the matter.

There is a distinct difference between parental leave and maternity leave.

Maternity leave, as its name suggests, is for women only; it is a health and welfare measure before and after birth to protect the health of the mother and newborn child. Parental leave, by contrast, must be equally available to both parents; it is a social measure to enable parents to spend more time with their young children.

The Swedes have decided to do away with post-natal maternity leave, confining maternity leave to the period before birth; any leave after birth is parental leave. But the great majority of other countries have a period of post-natal maternity leave (normally between two and four months), followed by parental leave.

All European countries now offer parental leave, so what is so special about Sweden's?

Sweden offers, as a legal entitlement, 480 days of paid parental leave for each child. This converts to about 18 months. There are four features that, taken together, make Sweden the benchmark for parental leave: First, leave is paid, and for most of the period well-paid. Parents get 80 per cent of their earnings (up to a maximum level) for the first 390 days, after which there is a low flat-rate payment for the remaining time. All research points to the obvious conclusion: unless it is paid, leave will be under-used.

Second, the leave is very flexible. It can be taken in one block of time or several, and it can be used any time until a child reaches eight years old (most is actually taken when children are under two). It can be taken either full-time or in various part-time options: half-time, quarter-time or one-eighth time. If taken part-time, the length of leave increases accordingly - for example, three months of full-time leave can convert to six months of half-time leave, 12 months of quarter-time leave or 24 months of one-eighth time leave. A parent can draw paid leave by the day, deciding, for example, to take four or five days paid leave per seven-day week.

Third, the parental leave scheme has a built-in incentive for fathers to use it. Two months' paid parental leave is for fathers only - the principle is 'use it or lose it'. This is in addition to ten days of paternity leave paid at 80 per cent of earnings (note: parental and paternity leave are different). A similar period of parental leave for two months is for mothers only, and the rest of the entitlement can be divided between parents as they choose. Most fathers take some parental leave, even though overall, mothers take the greater part of the entitlement.

Fourth, parental leave joins up with other policies to support parents. All children are entitled to a place at a publicly-funded centre or family day carer from 12 months of age, whether or not their parents are employed. In the 1970s Sweden had 3,000 children under 12 months in publicly-funded services, today only a handful.

Throughout childhood

The assumption behind Swedish policy is that children are at home with parents on leave during their first year. After that they enter early childhood services in increasing numbers, a pattern of shared caring which most Swedish families now see as offering a good upbringing.

In the words of a recent UNESCO report on Sweden, 'Enrolling children from age one in full-day pre-schools has become generally acceptable. What was once viewed as either a privilege of the wealthy for a few hours a day, or an institution for needy children and single mothers, has become, after 70 years of political vision and policy-making, an unquestionable right of children and families.'

Nor do leave policies end once a child starts in a service. Until they reach 12 years of age, parents are entitled to 120 days of leave per year if the child is ill, again paid at 80 per cent of earnings. Swedes take far less than the full entitlement - about seven days a year on average - but the longer period is there in case of a serious health problem. Last but not least, Swedish parents are entitled to work reduced hours (six hours a day) until their child is eight, although without financial compensation.

Catching up

The UK has a lot of catching up to do. The Swedes introduced parental leave in 1974, replacing 'mother only' post-natal maternity leave. At the time, the UK had not even introduced maternity leave (that came in a year later).

While the Swedes were developing parental leave, UK Conservative Governments were threatening the maternity leave that we did have, then vetoing European Commission proposals, first made in 1983, for a parental leave entitlement in all member states.

Only when the Labour Government signed up to the Social Chapter did the UK adopt parental leave, introducing it in 1999, 25 years after the Swedes. By this time, we were one of the last countries in Europe with no parental leave entitlement. But the parental leave we did introduce was the weakest in Europe, set at the lowest level allowed by the EU. Today our parental leave is unpaid, with no flexibility, and it contains no incentive to encourage use by both parents. Worst of all, the 13 weeks available per parent cannot be taken in one block of time, but only spread over three years at a maximum of four weeks a year.

Since 1999, UK policy has got stranger still by European standards. Instead of developing and improving parental leave, the Government has opted to extend maternity leave. Our maternity leave was already far longer than anywhere else in Europe, while unpaid or paid at only a low flat rate for most of its duration. Since its extension in 2003, maternity leave now runs to 52 weeks, 41 of which can be taken after birth, but only half the period is paid, then mostly at a low flat rate, leaving only six weeks paid at an earnings-related level. More recently there has been talk of building up maternity leave even further. Earlier this month, trade and industry secretary Patricia Hewitt proposed an extension of the period of paid leave.

This neglect of parental leave while extending maternity leave shows a fundamental failure to understand the difference between the two. There is an important discussion to be had about the length of maternity leave and when it should give way to parental leave. But it is unlikely to run beyond around six months after birth.

Real choice

The Government is promising to review leave policy in 2006. In my view, this would mean a period of post-natal maternity leave of between four and six months, followed by a period of parental leave of between six and 12 months but available for use in a flexible way so that parents really do have some choice. Choice, if it is to mean anything, means payment, and not just at a low flat rate. The leave policy would recognise that men and women share responsibility for children. This would result in some part of parental leave for fathers only, some for mothers only and the rest to be shared.

If all that sounds like Sweden, it is not surprising - you don't ignore the experience of countries that have got things pretty well right. There is one other lesson to learn from Sweden. They have a world-class leave policy because they know why it matters. A strong leave policy is in the interests of children, who benefit from being with both parents in the early months of life. It is in the interests of women, supporting their employment and economic independence, so they do not have to choose between a job or being at home with their baby. And it is in the interests of men, supporting their involvement in childcare and family life.

Peter Moss is Professor of Early Childhood Provision at the Institute of Education, University of London

Further information

* For more on Swedish policy on leave and early childhood services see A New Deal for Children? by Bronwen Cohen, Peter Moss, Pat Petrie and Jennifer Wallace, published by Policy Press, 19.95