Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Karen Yu (余宛如) said that she wants to take her child into the legislature and proposed an amendment that would allow young children into the chamber. The media then pointed to stories of an Italian member of the European Parliament who has been taking her daughter to work since 2010.
Yu said that women should have the right to take their children to work and that workplaces should be sufficiently friendly environments for parents to take their children, so that women would be able to fulfill their professional duties at the same time as satisfying their children’s needs.
However, I wonder how this would be received in Taiwan?
Would colleagues and management support the idea and be sympathetic to it, or would they disapprove?
From the way the issue is being discussed in the media, there seem to still be a lot of differing opinions on the subject.
If not in the workplace, perhaps we could think about an environment for which it would be relatively simpler to legislate. What if students were able to take their children to university with them? Is there sufficient space to set up nurseries? Would lecturers provide more comprehensive assistance because the primary caregiver brought their child to school with them? Would this promote more open debate and consensus on the issue of public breast-feeding?
Three weeks after my child was born, I started taking him with me to university in the US. My child would either sleep or lie quietly in the baby carriage during class, and when the bell rang I would take him to a nursery set up in the same building to feed him.
This went on for several months, after which he took to making all kinds of noises. I continued taking my child to school, but had family or my husband look after him in the nursery while I was in class. I would go there during breaks between classes and at lunch time and breast-feed him. This went on for another few months.
When my son was nine months old, which coincided with the start of a new term, he was far more mobile than before, but I would still often take him to school, as the nursery provided a wonderful environment for breast-feeding and a great playroom, as well as distance learning facilities for the primary caregiver, so that students could continue studying while in the nursery, in real time.
At the university you would often see women holding their kids during class or breast-feeding during breaks in chairs along corridors. Passersby would be more likely to flash a smile than proffer a quizzical look.
Legislation is very important. I was able to take my child to school without feeling like I was imposing and I could breast-feed him without concern.
In addition to policy ensuring women can breast-feed their children anywhere, the school also had favorable policies for pregnant women and working or studying mothers.
Taiwan is in need of comprehensive legislation safeguarding the rights of women, children and families.
If Yu is serious about pushing legislation on this to form a consensus and keep the issue in the spotlight, I believe that she is onto something.
Even if this all just leads to an amendment to the law for show, or to the media being able to manipulate the trajectory in which the debate develops, it would stir up debate in Taiwan, and that is positive.
Martina Tu is a doctoral student of health law at the University of Washington.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath