Maternity leave: My company’s policy was 6 weeks after vaginal birth, 8 after C-section, of paid sick leave. Time off before birth could come out of sick leave also if the doctor medically mandated it. Anything beyond that came out of either saved-up vacation, or unpaid leave. Total time on regular sick leave, before / after was up to 13 weeks. If you had a medical reason to be out of work even longer than that, it went into long-term disability which was at reduced pay. Iin my son’s case, the doc wrote a note saying I needed to be off starting at 38 weeks; in my daughter’s case, I was on medically-mandated bedrest beforehand for 5 weeks then had a C-section, so that pretty much used up the 13 weeks. I will say, my company was more generous with paid sick leave than most - no need to “save up”.
We had enough money saved up for me to take some months unpaid (in both cases I returned to work when baby was 4-5 months old).
Anyway - 6-8 weeks after birth seems to be the most standard time employers expect from a medical standpoint; if it’s a large enough employer and you’ve been there long enough, the family / medical leave act kicks in and they have to hold your job for you for up to 12 weeks (not all of which are paid time).l
I have heard of people interviewing for jobs while visibly pregnant (someone I knew slightly did that). She changed jobs, and I think the downside was she had to go back to work after 6 weeks.
In your situation, I’d be tempted to consider trying to time baby’s arrival for during grad school - as it’s easier to take a semester off during grad school, than to ask a brand-new employer for a couple of months off. It may also be easier to interview for a new job when you’re fresh out of grad school, as opposed to graduated, then 6 months later you’re job-hunting (if baby arrives right after you graduate).
Childcare will always be nutso - even if you go with the old reliable daycare center, there will be times when you have to scramble because baby is too sick to go. A private sitter (nanny, or a small in-home daycare) can be more flexible but then you’re at the mercy of one person. Obviously if you and hubby can manage to work part-time that can reduce or perhaps even eliminate the daycare reliance. Dunno if hubby has any family within reach (from things you’ve said, you wouldn’t want to rely on your family even if they were nearby), but that can help with filling in childcare gaps and even the occasional evening out without baby.
Good for you. Just as no one dies wishing they’d worked more, I’m not sure any kids who can connect working to money to goods would choose less time with their parents but more presents (even if they won’t admit to it, and assuming their parents aren’t abusive and all that). But of course you’re fighting a behemoth of marketing and peer pressure.
Olives, you’re at Columbia, right? As it turns out, one of the most qualified people to answer that question is in your department. Check out Jane Waldfogel’s research. Basically, there are small negative effects of maternal employment during the first year of a child’s life on a handful of indicators. (There are no studies that I know of that look at the effects of paternal employment, because there just aren’t enough non-employed fathers to get statistically significant results.) The way that this sort of research gets misinterpreted drives me crazy, though. When you look at the big picture, there’s no compelling evidence that working mothers are bad for kids.
I have a friend who changed jobs while very pregnant. I didn’t tell the story here earlier because it’s not really applicable to an entry-level person, but maybe it is sort of illuminating. She was a firm lawyer interviewing for an in-house position where she knew she was very well (almost uniquely) qualified for the open position. At the interviews, she pointed out what no one could miss, that she was quite pregnant, and told the HR interviewer that she would only consider a position that would offer her the same maternity leave that she would have gotten as a long-term employee (no, “you’ve only been here for a month so we don’t have to offer you any leave”). She also offered a reasonable plan for what she would be able to accomplish before maternity leave and how she would transition back in afterward. And she flatly refused (before anyone could suggest it, even) to consider waiting out maternity leave at her firm and then resigning. She said, “That’s a crappy thing to do. I won’t take advantage of them now while I’m working for them, and I won’t take advantage of you when I’m working for you, either.”
She got the job, and by all accounts, everyone involved is very happy about it. (Well, I think the firm was sorry to lose her, but lots of senior associates end up going in-house, so it wasn’t exactly a big surprise.)