The abounding sense of entitlement does not end with "meternity," the idea of family leave for non-parents championed by author Meghann Foye. She's now joined by Lindsay Putnam with New York Post, who writes that "Pet owners deserve family leave, too." You would think that it was a parody; it's not.

"Having to go back to work days later was one of the worst [days of my life]," laments Putnam on adopting her cat. She's also frustrated that "the rest of the country is hung up on the necessity of maternity leave," which means the group of pet owners "continues to be overlooked when it comes to paid time off from work."

Much of the story details for readers how Putnam's cat, Jameson, needs her attention:

I couldn’t help but think that, just as Jameson was getting used to me, he feared I, too, was abandoning him. The guilt continues today: While my co-workers with kids walk out the door at 6 p.m., no one seems to care that I also have a child at home waiting for dinner.



Putnam does try to convince her readers that "spending time off with your fur baby" is in "your employer's [best interest,]" because "according to Psychology Today, pet owners have better self-esteem, fitness, sociability and happiness than non-pet owners. They also have lower blood pressure and cholesterol."

Since "we grant" parents "six weeks off to care for a newborn," Putnam closes her piece wondering "is it so much to ask that pet parents get a week off to do the same?"

Putnam may not be aware, but the United States is one of the few nations in the world without federally guaranteed maternity leave cash benefits. That an employee is "grant[ed] six weeks off to care for a newborn" is thus not a given.

As a young woman, Putnam may not know mothers who are transitioning from having a baby to going back to work. It's unlikely they would be sympathetic to her equating Jameson with their children.