Speaker 1: Alright, Question number one, how do you handle family responsibilities
Speaker 1: during work? Come here? What would I do if you
Speaker 1: poop your pants at school? Well, first of all, I
Speaker 1: don't move my pants because I'm a second career. But
Speaker 1: if I did, you would probably till a long and
Speaker 1: have her come to take me up. That's right. I
Speaker 1: would probably tell my wife to go pick him up.
Speaker 1: How involved are you as a father? I try to
Speaker 1: be as involved as I can. Candidly, I am as
Speaker 1: involved as work allows me to be. Well, the truth
Speaker 1: of the matter is, during the week, not a whole
Speaker 1: hell of a lot, and it's not fair to anyone. Really.
Speaker 1: What is frustrating about being a working dad pretty much everything.
Speaker 1: When we talk about the pay gap, we're talking about
Speaker 1: a ratio how much women make compared to men. We
Speaker 1: spend a lot of time talking about one side of
Speaker 1: that equation, women, But to understand why women take a
Speaker 1: pay cut when they have kids, we have to look
Speaker 1: at what happens to men when they become Dad's what's
Speaker 1: frustrating about being a working dad. It's really about, you know,
Speaker 1: the things in the middle of the day, things at school,
Speaker 1: volunteering at school that other parents are able to do
Speaker 1: that usually, I am not able to do it when
Speaker 1: you work. Yeah, I guess that's frustrating about being a
Speaker 1: working dad. He's just not seeing them as much, you know,
Speaker 1: only seeing them for maybe an hour in the morning,
Speaker 1: an hour at night, a couple of hours a day. Really,
Speaker 1: it's not much. Rebecca Glaubert is a sociologist at the
Speaker 1: University of New Hampshire who studies a phenomenon known as
Speaker 1: the fatherhood bonus. Having kids, she says, is good for
Speaker 1: men's careers. I'm not saying that suddenly with the birth
Speaker 1: of a child, you know, a man is called into
Speaker 1: a supervisor's office and immediately given a raise. It has
Speaker 1: more to do with over the course of that year
Speaker 1: and the following year's fathers tend to see their wages
Speaker 1: rise a bit more quickly relative to childless men. Men's
Speaker 1: earnings increase more than six percent when they have children,
Speaker 1: even controlling for factors like experience, education, hours worked, and
Speaker 1: spousal incomes. While employers see motherhood as something distracting, they
Speaker 1: see fatherhood as something that makes men better at their jobs.
Speaker 1: The assumption is that those men will work hard to
Speaker 1: support their families. They're more stable, more committed. But where
Speaker 1: does that leave women? Their incomes decrease four percent for
Speaker 1: each child that they have. Yes, even controlling for all
Speaker 1: of those same factors, these stats are related. Men's careers
Speaker 1: can take off because women are taking the pay hit.
Speaker 1: We've spent the first half of the season talking about women,
Speaker 1: but we can't end the motherhood penalty or close the
Speaker 1: gender pay gap without debts of men have no access
Speaker 1: to leave of any kind for the birth of a child.
Speaker 1: The gender lie helps to keep women not on a pedestal,
Speaker 1: but in a case you should never say I'm ready
Speaker 1: to have a baby. Am I ready to lose my job?
Speaker 1: There's no single industry where women aren't punished or appropriated.
Speaker 1: When men have children, they experience a pay bump. When
Speaker 1: women have children, the opposite happens. Fathers with partners who
Speaker 1: also work say they find it difficult to find a
Speaker 1: balance between home and work. Gender is no longer the
Speaker 1: factor creating the greatest way to discrepancy in this country.
Speaker 1: Motherhood is welcome to the paycheck. I'm Rebecca Greenfield. In
Speaker 1: a two parent household, it makes sense in theory that
Speaker 1: both parents would share the burdens of childcare equally. And
Speaker 1: split the professional consequences us. But it doesn't work that way.
Speaker 1: The same structures that discourage moms from working also discourage
Speaker 1: men from spending more time with their kids. Historically, it's
Speaker 1: been hard to get men in positions of power to
Speaker 1: see how these gender roles have hurt women. What's been
Speaker 1: a lot more convincing is showing how these gender roles
Speaker 1: hurt men too. One of the first people to show
Speaker 1: how effective this argument is was Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In
Speaker 1: nineteen seventy two, she took up her very first gender
Speaker 1: discrimination case. Charles Morritts was a single man who took
Speaker 1: care of his elderly mother, so when he filed his taxes,
Speaker 1: he took a deduction for money he spent on her caretakers.
Speaker 1: But the RS rejected his claim and they said, well,
Speaker 1: if we're talking about caregivers, then this must be women.
Speaker 1: That's Daniel Steepleman, who wrote the Ruth Bader Ginsberg biopic
Speaker 1: on the Basis of Sex. He also happens to be
Speaker 1: Ruth bader Ginsberg's nephew. Daniel says that the caretaker benefit
Speaker 1: was really written with women in mind. The great irony
Speaker 1: of so many of these laws. Is that it came
Speaker 1: from a place of men thinking they were being helpful,
Speaker 1: and in their mind, if you were a woman, you
Speaker 1: were the caregiver to your family. Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued
Speaker 1: the case under the Civil Rights Act, which says you
Speaker 1: can't discriminate on the basis of sex. She wasn't the
Speaker 1: first person to point out that gender discrimination is unfair
Speaker 1: and holds people back and hurts people financially, but she
Speaker 1: was the first person to do it in a way
Speaker 1: to convince a panel of men. One was that it
Speaker 1: was the first time that this argument was made on
Speaker 1: behalf of a man um This argument had been made
Speaker 1: before over the course of a hundred years arguing against
Speaker 1: gender discrimination, but always from the perspective of a woman
Speaker 1: who had been treated unfairly, and male judges just couldn't
Speaker 1: see it. They couldn't understand what the big deal was.
Speaker 1: She won the case. It was a big deal not
Speaker 1: just because men could claim in new tax deduction, but
Speaker 1: because this little provision in the tax code no longer
Speaker 1: assumed that women were the only caretakers, an assumption that
Speaker 1: hurts both men and women by keeping men out of
Speaker 1: the home and women out of the workplace. It was
Speaker 1: an even bigger deal because it opened up the door
Speaker 1: for Ruth Bader Ginsburg and others to challenge any law
Speaker 1: that viewed men and women differently, and there were a
Speaker 1: lot of them. The Charles Mart's case became Ruth Bader
Speaker 1: Ginsberg's playbook for the next decade. She argued and won
Speaker 1: dozens of cases that struck down gendered laws by showing
Speaker 1: how they hurt men, which was a shortcut to equality
Speaker 1: for women. There was a series of landmark decisions in
Speaker 1: which they basically made it harder and harder for a
Speaker 1: law that discriminates on the basis of sex to be
Speaker 1: deemed constitutional. So fast forward to the nineties, legislators were
Speaker 1: drafting the Family Medical Leave Act, and because of Ruth
Speaker 1: Bader Ginsburg's fight, they purposefully used gender neutral language. The
Speaker 1: law allows primary caregivers that can be a man, a woman,
Speaker 1: or anyone to take off twelve weeks of unpaid leave
Speaker 1: to care for a newborn or a sick family member.
Speaker 1: The idea was if men take time off, women might
Speaker 1: not take as much of a career hit when they do.
Speaker 1: They won't face the same penalties and pay our opportunities,
Speaker 1: but changing the laws is just the beginning. Kevin Knusman
Speaker 1: was one of the first men to try and take
Speaker 1: advantage of fm l A, and it didn't go well.
Speaker 1: Susan Burfield is a reporter at Bloomberg. She spoke to
Speaker 1: Kevin about what happened when he wanted to stay home
Speaker 1: to take care of his daughter. Kevin Knusman grew up
Speaker 1: with an involved dad, off work at four home by
Speaker 1: four ten. Kevin wanted to be the same kind of father.
Speaker 1: We've been married, I guess about nine or ten years,
Speaker 1: and so we were very happy to be expecting our daughter.
Speaker 1: I intended to take an extended leave following her birth.
Speaker 1: That's Kevin. He was working as a police officer in
Speaker 1: flight paramedic in Maryland and expected to be able to
Speaker 1: take time off to help his wife, Kim, care for
Speaker 1: their newborn. But near the end of her pregnancy, Kim
Speaker 1: got sick and her doctor said she would need extra
Speaker 1: rest after the birth, Kevin would have to do even
Speaker 1: more for their daughter. This was a year earlier, President
Speaker 1: Bill Clinton had signed the Family Medical Leave Act into law,
Speaker 1: the first and only federal leave law the US has
Speaker 1: entitled parents to take up to twelve weeks of unpaid
Speaker 1: time off to care for a newborn or an ill
Speaker 1: family member. This bill will strengthen our families, and I
Speaker 1: believe it will strengthen our businesses and our economy as well.
Speaker 1: When Kevin's wife got pregnant, he asked the state police
Speaker 1: for at least four weeks of f m l A
Speaker 1: leave under the new law. A supervisor denied his request,
Speaker 1: so then he asked for time off using Maryland state benefits.
Speaker 1: He said that he, not his wife, would be his
Speaker 1: daughter's main caregiver, and he asked for thirty days leave
Speaker 1: the amount of mother would be granted, but that request
Speaker 1: was denied too. He was told you're not entitled to
Speaker 1: be a primary care provider because you're a man, and
Speaker 1: unless your wife is dead or in a comb, or
Speaker 1: you can breastfeed, you're not and will not ever be
Speaker 1: qualified for a primary care provider. After ten days, HR
Speaker 1: ordered Kevin back to work. Well, I was dumbfounded. I
Speaker 1: was a long time state trooper, I had lots of leave,
Speaker 1: and my way of thinking I was I was entitled
Speaker 1: to use that leave. My wife needed help. It made
Speaker 1: me basically choose between my family or feeding my family
Speaker 1: with my job. Kevin was up against centuries of social norms.
Speaker 1: Mother Is are automatically assumed to be the main caregivers
Speaker 1: in the months after the birth, and all the years
Speaker 1: after that, fathers are assumed to be the providers. F
Speaker 1: m l A was supposed to be a new labor
Speaker 1: standard that applied equally to women and men, exactly what
Speaker 1: Ruth bader Ginsburg wanted. If it just applied to women,
Speaker 1: employers would have incentive not to hire them, or promote them,
Speaker 1: or pay them fairly. I immediately recognized this as a
Speaker 1: case that was firmly within the tradition of the a
Speaker 1: c l U as Ruth bader Ginsburg first envisioned it,
Speaker 1: and the fm l A had just recently passed, So, uh,
Speaker 1: this was very exciting to me. That's Sarah Mandelbaum, one
Speaker 1: of the lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union who
Speaker 1: worked on Kevin's case. After the Charles Mooretts case, Ruth
Speaker 1: bader Ginsburg co founded the Women's Rights Project at the
Speaker 1: a c l U, which is where she worked to
Speaker 1: keep striking down laws that treated men and women differently.
Speaker 1: The f m l A should have been the perfect
Speaker 1: example of the law that met Ginsburg's standard. According to
Speaker 1: fm l A, Kevin should have been entitled to the
Speaker 1: time off. He'd been on the police force for eighteen years.
Speaker 1: F m l A kicks in after one year. So
Speaker 1: Kevin sued and he got lots of recognition from it.
Speaker 1: He spoke to Congress, he was in Hillary Clinton's book,
Speaker 1: he met the President. Kevin became Trooper Dad. His lawyers
Speaker 1: expected the state to quickly settle the case. These rights
Speaker 1: were not abstractions. This is bedrock stuff, family values, equal treatment,
Speaker 1: that should you cut across gender lines. That was Robin Cocky,
Speaker 1: another of Kevin's lawyers. They all thought Kevin was the
Speaker 1: perfect plaintiff. One of the cool aspects of the case
Speaker 1: was that Kevin was not a granola crunching hippie. Kevin was,
Speaker 1: you know, just a classic state trooper straight out of
Speaker 1: Central Casting. He was a lifelong Republican n R A
Speaker 1: member Aboard Again Christian, a rock solid Eastern Shore Conservative,
Speaker 1: and that made the sort of personal dynamics of the
Speaker 1: case fascinating. Robin was surprised that the police and the
Speaker 1: state dug in, but most state troopers were mail What
Speaker 1: if others wanted to take print to leave that could
Speaker 1: be disruptive not just to the agency's work, but to
Speaker 1: how the agency saw itself. They had a force of
Speaker 1: twelve or fift troopers, probably ninety seven are men, and
Speaker 1: they probably didn't want all these men Willy Nilly taken
Speaker 1: the leave following the birth of their child. Kevin was
Speaker 1: taking a stand against his employer, and not just any employer,
Speaker 1: but the Maryland State Police. He was threatening how the
Speaker 1: mostly male organization functioned. It would have to take account
Speaker 1: of its employees home lives. It would have to become
Speaker 1: more flexible. They were going to have to give male
Speaker 1: employees the same leave benefits as the women were entitled to.
Speaker 1: That was pure and simple. From the time he folowed
Speaker 1: the lawsuit to the trial in Kevin showed up for work.
Speaker 1: He flew in the helicopter. He gave medical assistance, He
Speaker 1: dealt with criminals at home. He helped care for his daughter,
Speaker 1: Page and a second daughter, Hope. Some troopers were supportive,
Speaker 1: others stand offish. Some of the I guess more traditional
Speaker 1: state Police employees were pretty reserved or maybe puzzled by
Speaker 1: the whole stay at home dad kind of thing. But uh,
Speaker 1: there were lots of severe employees in the state Police.
Speaker 1: There were a lot of young troopers that were absolutely supportive.
Speaker 1: But suing your employer is stressful. You're hyper vigilant, is
Speaker 1: I guess the word that the professionals might use you
Speaker 1: just you just want to be on your game and
Speaker 1: not give any room for disciplinary action to be to
Speaker 1: be taken. So it was pretty difficult. Kevin became depressed
Speaker 1: and sought psychiatric treatment. The state would later use that
Speaker 1: against him, and then finally in January, after four years
Speaker 1: of waiting, Kevin's trial began. The law was pretty clear.
Speaker 1: Men are entitled to use fm l A too. It
Speaker 1: doesn't matter if their wives are healthy or sick. The
Speaker 1: trial lasted two weeks. The jury deliberated for only two hours.
Speaker 1: It awarded Kevin three hundred and seventy five thousand dollars
Speaker 1: for emotional damages in the first ever sex discrimination verdict
Speaker 1: in conjunction with the Family and Medical Leave Act. There
Speaker 1: were several times the jury gasped at revelations in the
Speaker 1: in the process of the trial from the people that
Speaker 1: were testifying on behalf of the State Police, and so,
Speaker 1: you know, we felt that there was an emotional impact.
Speaker 1: The state appealed the verdict eventually that three seventy five
Speaker 1: thousand dollars. It was reduced to about forty There were
Speaker 1: also repercussions against Kevin because he broke this code of manhood.
Speaker 1: When he returned to work after the trial, he was grounded.
Speaker 1: The police insisted he undergo a psychiatric evaluation before he
Speaker 1: could rejoin the flight paramedics. The Baltimore Sun said using
Speaker 1: his past mental health issues against him was an old
Speaker 1: ruse of dictators. Kevin calls it retaliation. They never came
Speaker 1: and got my police car, my gun, or my badge.
Speaker 1: They never suspended my arrest powers, but they did not
Speaker 1: let me fly. Six months after the verdict, in July,
Speaker 1: Kevin retired from the Maryland Police Force. He didn't get
Speaker 1: a party or a parting gift. He was forty two.
Speaker 1: Kevin became a stay at home dad, and when his
Speaker 1: daughters were older, he returned to being a paramedic, but
Speaker 1: not for the state. Kevin's case set the legal precedent
Speaker 1: for more men to take time off when their kids
Speaker 1: are born, but the stigma remains, and many of the
Speaker 1: men we spoke to say they still find it hard
Speaker 1: to break the gender norms. I'm expected to handle one
Speaker 1: of what happens with work and generating income. Right, I
Speaker 1: am the only person that generates an income at my house,
Speaker 1: and so I'm a percent responsible for that and sort
Speaker 1: of the pressure is on to make sure that I'm
Speaker 1: performing at a high level at work so that that
Speaker 1: income can be there to support our family. That I
Speaker 1: feel my guilt is that I'm actually going to work
Speaker 1: and not able to spend time with her. It's not
Speaker 1: the other way around. It's not like work is I
Speaker 1: feel bad for leaving. It's feel bad for not being
Speaker 1: with her and going to work. But for now, Yeah,
Speaker 1: there's these sometimes these moments when you just watch opportunities
Speaker 1: have to float away. I've never been penalized for leaving
Speaker 1: work to go and be with the kids, but they'll
Speaker 1: say things like, oh, you're going home to babysit yor
Speaker 1: time is the most precious and valuable commodity that we have.
Speaker 1: If there were more Kevin's and from day one, more
Speaker 1: men were involved at home, women wouldn't be the only
Speaker 1: ones taking time away from work and taking that pay
Speaker 1: hin But getting them to actually be involved parents is
Speaker 1: a whole other challenge. Keith Parmenter, who's a law professor
Speaker 1: at will lamb At University says that partly they're worried
Speaker 1: about the professional consequences. He studied paternity leave patterns over
Speaker 1: the past several decades and what happens to the men
Speaker 1: who take it. Those fathers are more likely to be
Speaker 1: punished at work, to be viewed as less committed to work,
Speaker 1: to be viewed as frankly less masculine. And so the
Speaker 1: code and the pressure coming cultural and from employers specifically
Speaker 1: is loud and clear to men that if you dare
Speaker 1: sort of break that gender norm and and actually engaging caregiving,
Speaker 1: you're going to be punished. But another part of it
Speaker 1: is that we still don't expect much of men. We
Speaker 1: still live in a world where celebrity men are championed
Speaker 1: for acknowledging they have a kid. How that is the
Speaker 1: bar that low are these guys that week and that
Speaker 1: cowardly that we're golf clapping him for being like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I have a child, Like really, really, it's sad. That's
Speaker 1: Alexis Ohanion a k A. Mr. Serena Williams. Alexis is
Speaker 1: married to one of the greatest and most successful athletes
Speaker 1: of all time, but he's also successful in his own right.
Speaker 1: He founded Reddit and now runs his own venture capital firm.
Speaker 1: In the last year and a half since his daughter,
Speaker 1: Alexis Olympia o'hannian Jr. Was born, Alexis has cultivated a
Speaker 1: pub like image of himself as a woke, involved dad.
Speaker 1: All you have to do is look at his Instagram.
Speaker 1: Where's your belly? I have eaten it. Alexis is on
Speaker 1: a mission to get more guys to act like him. Recently,
Speaker 1: he did the media around talking all about how important
Speaker 1: it is to take paternity leave. Of all the things
Speaker 1: we are asking men to do, spending some time with
Speaker 1: their newborn and their partners not I mean not the
Speaker 1: hardest thing we've been asked to do. When his daughter
Speaker 1: was born, he took all of the paid paternity leave
Speaker 1: his venture capital firm offers, sixteen weeks in total. I
Speaker 1: think more and more men need to hear from other dads,
Speaker 1: are expecting dads that they took the time and how
Speaker 1: great it was, and also how awful it was, and
Speaker 1: how because it was so awful sometimes made it so
Speaker 1: great when it wasn't like it's not like it's it
Speaker 1: is not all roses, but as a time you will
Speaker 1: never get it back. And yeah, even the three a
Speaker 1: m where you're just like praying that she's going to
Speaker 1: go back to sleep. To be fair, Alexis and Serena
Speaker 1: are wealthy and privileged. Most men in the US don't
Speaker 1: get any paid paternity leave at all, but most companies
Speaker 1: in Silicon Valley, where Alexis is based do offer paid
Speaker 1: parental leave that's for both moms and dads to take
Speaker 1: time off to care for a newborn, and California, where
Speaker 1: Alexis lives, also has a paid family leave law on
Speaker 1: the books, but men still generally don't take it. Three
Speaker 1: quarters of the people who take paid leave in California
Speaker 1: are women, and fathers who do take paid leave aren't
Speaker 1: taking very much, just around two weeks. So even with
Speaker 1: generous laws and policies, women are still the one staying
Speaker 1: at home. Alexis says he wants to change that first
Speaker 1: by normalizing paternity leave. If other men see him taking
Speaker 1: the leave, they all think it's okay to take time
Speaker 1: off too. And I heard from a lot of founders
Speaker 1: in the valley. I heard from a lot of employees
Speaker 1: in the valley how important it was that they saw
Speaker 1: me taking my full sixteen weeks and being really outspoken
Speaker 1: about it. Once the stigma washes away, it'll be pretty
Speaker 1: quick to adapt. And and if Sweden is any indication,
Speaker 1: I don't know if you've seen the latte papas. The
Speaker 1: latte papa trend is fascinating in Sweden. It's just all
Speaker 1: these rugged Swedish dudes going out with their baby bjorns.
Speaker 1: That's right, he said, the latte papa's. So in Sweden,
Speaker 1: new parents get more than a year of paid time off,
Speaker 1: and dads are required to take three months of that leave.
Speaker 1: That's where the latte papa's come in. Their new dads
Speaker 1: who congregate in cafes with their babies strapped to their chest.
Speaker 1: They're even trend stories about them. So how much fun
Speaker 1: when you're taking six months? I'm taking six months to
Speaker 1: I'm having months this moment. By the way, the pay
Speaker 1: gap there is smaller, it's less than according to the
Speaker 1: European Commission, compared to a round in the US. But
Speaker 1: the reason men in Sweden take leave isn't just because
Speaker 1: other men do it. It's because there are incentives. Sweden
Speaker 1: introduced what was called a daddy quota. Fathers there were
Speaker 1: given thirty days of paid leave, but if they didn't
Speaker 1: use it, they lost the paid time off. After that,
Speaker 1: the proportion of men taking leave almost doubled since Sweden
Speaker 1: has up that quota to ninety days, and now even
Speaker 1: more men take the leave. In the US, men don't
Speaker 1: have much of an incentive to take time off at all.
Speaker 1: Most men only get leave through fm l A, which
Speaker 1: means months without a paycheck, something most people can't afford.
Speaker 1: They also face high workplace penalties if they do anything
Speaker 1: more than bare minimum parenting. Of course, paternity leave is
Speaker 1: just the beginning. Like Keith said, things get worse for
Speaker 1: men at work the more they tried to be involved
Speaker 1: at home. Experts call this the fatherhood cliff. Men who
Speaker 1: take on more childcare responsibilities lose status in the workplace,
Speaker 1: their careers can take a dive. If we want to
Speaker 1: help women, we have to make it normal for men
Speaker 1: to be involved, not just when their kids are infants.
Speaker 1: So how can we change that? Alexis thinks we can
Speaker 1: start by adding some incentives. He recently started a million
Speaker 1: dollar fund with DOV to pay new dads five thousand
Speaker 1: dollars each to take time off. Two dads will essentially
Speaker 1: be paid to stay home, which isn't very many. It's
Speaker 1: a very small start, and even Alexis knows that it's
Speaker 1: not the be all, end all solution. Here he is
Speaker 1: talking about his initiative on the Today Show. I'm still
Speaker 1: actively campaigning for a federal law to pass. We're the
Speaker 1: only industrialized nation that does not have any kind of
Speaker 1: paid family leave, and it's something that that I think
Speaker 1: we deserve for nation that really believes in family values
Speaker 1: like I know we do. I want to give eric
Speaker 1: cover to the guy who doesn't have the economic peace
Speaker 1: of mind that I know that we have, because he
Speaker 1: he should have that chance to be with his partner,
Speaker 1: to be with his child. You don't get that time back.
Speaker 1: Making parentally normal for men won't solve the pay gap
Speaker 1: on its own. There's eighteen years of a kid's life
Speaker 1: at home after that. But if motherhood makes the pay
Speaker 1: gap so much worse, maybe those first few months of
Speaker 1: fatherhood is one place to start looking for how to
Speaker 1: fix it. Next week on the paycheck. What happens to
Speaker 1: the global economy when women stop having kids. We are
Speaker 1: all going to eventually face slower population growth or shrinking populations,
Speaker 1: and that is going to have to change if people
Speaker 1: want to see the kind of growth that previous generations
Speaker 1: have enjoyed. Thanks for listening to the Paycheck. If you
Speaker 1: like the show, please head on over to Apple Podcasts
Speaker 1: or wherever you listen to rate, review, and subscribe. This
Speaker 1: show was hosted and reported by me Rebecca Greenfield and
Speaker 1: reported by Susan Burfield, Jillian Goodman, and Alexis ben Venisti.
Speaker 1: This episode was edited by Jillian Goodman and produced by
Speaker 1: Samantha Gatzick. We also had production help from Francesca Levie,
Speaker 1: Janet Patkin, and Liz Smith. Our original music is by
Speaker 1: Leo Sidron and thanks to all the dads we spoke
Speaker 1: to for this episode. Francesca Levi is Bloomberg's head of Podcasts.