Woman sparks debate after saying workplaces should offer 'dog moms' the same flexibility as working parents

vt-author-image

By Carina Murphy

Article saved!Article saved!

A woman has started a conversation after claiming that 'dog moms' should be offered the same flexibility as working moms by their employers.

Mary Rose Madigan from Sydney penned a personal essay for News.com.au, explaining that she struggles to leave her pooch - a black chihuahua named Frank - at home when she heads into the office.

As a result, she's had to start enrolling Frank in an expensive doggie daycare, which costs a whopping $65 a day plus an additional fee if she is late for pick up.

"I really wasn’t prepared for the Mum guilt that hits you when you have a dog," Mary explained. She went on to describe how she regularly turns down social plans and rushes out of work everyday to get back to her beloved pet."

"Yes, I can leave him all day, but I feel bloody bad doing it," she wrote.

Mary said that looking after her little dog had helped her to realize how hard it must be as a working mom. While she made it clear that she sympathizes with women who have children to care for, she also pointed out how - as a dog mom - she doesn't enjoy any of the benefits that they do.

"Even though having a dog has created an entire extra workload in my life (yes, I do it with love but it is still work; anything that involves picking up poo is work), I can’t access any of the flexibility provided to mothers with human children," she wrote.

"I watch as working mums can head off early, introduce flexible hours or work from home more often with absolute envy," Mary added.

She wrapped up her passionate op-ed by calling for employers across Australia to give 'pet-moms' the same flexible working opportunities as regular moms.

"Call me barking mad if you want, but not all of us will have kids, and I’m not ashamed to say that we also need space to dote on our dogs, cats and hell even pet lizards," she wrote.

Unsurprisingly, the article sparked a fiery debate in the comments section. Many people thought Mary was way out of line for deserving the same benefits as working moms.

"[Dogs] are NOT the same as having a child and you need to get some things into perspective if you think having a DOG is the same as having a child," one wrote.

"This is ridiculous and distracts from the real issue of the challenges mums (and working parents generally) face re-entering the work force," another commented, adding: "You are entitled to flexibility, but this just makes a mockery of what should be a serious issue."

One user argued that Mary was actually damaging her dog by being so afraid to leave him home alone. "Your behavior could potentially harm your dog. You are setting him up for problems with separation anxiety," they wrote.

wp-image-1263176926 size-full
Credit: News.com.au
wp-image-1263176927 size-full
Credit: News.com.au
wp-image-1263176928 size-full
Credit: News.com.au
wp-image-1263176929 size-full
Credit: News.com.au
wp-image-1263176930 size-full
Credit: News.com.au

However, others applauded Mary and seemed to agree with her ideas.

One person addressed her critics, writing: "Who are you to denounce someone's choice for wanting a fur child over a human one? Who are you to assume every female has a working uterus? Why should those who cannot have human children be discriminated against because they have a fur child? Why should females who cannot or do not want human children be treated any less than those who choose to be baby makers?"

Another commented that having a pet was "no difference to a kid, the same level of love and commitment and less hassle! Humans are not that special!!"

Featured Image Credit: Farlap / Alamy

Woman sparks debate after saying workplaces should offer 'dog moms' the same flexibility as working parents

vt-author-image

By Carina Murphy

Article saved!Article saved!

A woman has started a conversation after claiming that 'dog moms' should be offered the same flexibility as working moms by their employers.

Mary Rose Madigan from Sydney penned a personal essay for News.com.au, explaining that she struggles to leave her pooch - a black chihuahua named Frank - at home when she heads into the office.

As a result, she's had to start enrolling Frank in an expensive doggie daycare, which costs a whopping $65 a day plus an additional fee if she is late for pick up.

"I really wasn’t prepared for the Mum guilt that hits you when you have a dog," Mary explained. She went on to describe how she regularly turns down social plans and rushes out of work everyday to get back to her beloved pet."

"Yes, I can leave him all day, but I feel bloody bad doing it," she wrote.

Mary said that looking after her little dog had helped her to realize how hard it must be as a working mom. While she made it clear that she sympathizes with women who have children to care for, she also pointed out how - as a dog mom - she doesn't enjoy any of the benefits that they do.

"Even though having a dog has created an entire extra workload in my life (yes, I do it with love but it is still work; anything that involves picking up poo is work), I can’t access any of the flexibility provided to mothers with human children," she wrote.

"I watch as working mums can head off early, introduce flexible hours or work from home more often with absolute envy," Mary added.

She wrapped up her passionate op-ed by calling for employers across Australia to give 'pet-moms' the same flexible working opportunities as regular moms.

"Call me barking mad if you want, but not all of us will have kids, and I’m not ashamed to say that we also need space to dote on our dogs, cats and hell even pet lizards," she wrote.

Unsurprisingly, the article sparked a fiery debate in the comments section. Many people thought Mary was way out of line for deserving the same benefits as working moms.

"[Dogs] are NOT the same as having a child and you need to get some things into perspective if you think having a DOG is the same as having a child," one wrote.

"This is ridiculous and distracts from the real issue of the challenges mums (and working parents generally) face re-entering the work force," another commented, adding: "You are entitled to flexibility, but this just makes a mockery of what should be a serious issue."

One user argued that Mary was actually damaging her dog by being so afraid to leave him home alone. "Your behavior could potentially harm your dog. You are setting him up for problems with separation anxiety," they wrote.

wp-image-1263176926 size-full
Credit: News.com.au
wp-image-1263176927 size-full
Credit: News.com.au
wp-image-1263176928 size-full
Credit: News.com.au
wp-image-1263176929 size-full
Credit: News.com.au
wp-image-1263176930 size-full
Credit: News.com.au

However, others applauded Mary and seemed to agree with her ideas.

One person addressed her critics, writing: "Who are you to denounce someone's choice for wanting a fur child over a human one? Who are you to assume every female has a working uterus? Why should those who cannot have human children be discriminated against because they have a fur child? Why should females who cannot or do not want human children be treated any less than those who choose to be baby makers?"

Another commented that having a pet was "no difference to a kid, the same level of love and commitment and less hassle! Humans are not that special!!"

Featured Image Credit: Farlap / Alamy