To freeze or not to freeze in Silicon Valley

Google has its ball pits and nap pods, but Apple and Facebook may have taken the lead when it comes to perks — if you’re a woman, that is. On Tuesday, NBC News reported that the two companies now offer coverage for their female employees to have their eggs frozen. The move seems a direct response to the heavily debated work-life balance concerns of professional women. With that balance proving to be more of a doomed juggling act for women who are equally devoted to career and family within today’s inflexible work culture, the new benefit could be a welcome alternative to these concurrent pressures. Young women will now have the opportunity to postpone pregnancy in order to focus exclusively on establishing their careers without the increased risk of infertility later on— a measure that was certainly out of reach for some, if not most, as the procedure can cost upwards of $10,000, according to NBC News.

While I commend these technology giants for making this unprecedented move, the coverage has some, including Lauren Barbato of the news site Bustle, asking that hotly contested question, “Can women have it all?” At best, the offer suggests that women can indeed have it all — meaning career and family — just not all at once. Put less generously, however, the answer is a more simple “no.” The suggestion here is that a childless young woman is a more valuable asset to a company. One can certainly be a mother, the policy seems to suggest, but only after she spends her 20s and 30s focused on her career, and her career alone.

Anne-Marie Slaughter ’80 argues, in her now famous — or infamous, depending who you speak with, — article in The Atlantic, that a woman should be able to have a family and a career simultaneously if she so desires, but that the current reality is not conducive to such a balance. In fact, Slaughter explicitly suggests that a woman navigating today’s deeply flawed workplace is best off establishing herself in her career first and foremost, but still planning to have kids prior to 35, “or else freeze [her] eggs, whether [she is] married or not.”

Nonetheless, this advice to freeze one’s eggs is limited to a minority of women due to the economic constraints of such a costly procedure. In this light, Facebook and Apple have now made Slaughter’s recommendation far more accessible. Thus, I would posit that Slaughter might appreciate the policy. However, like myself, she might ask, “Can’t they do more?” Freezing one’s eggs is a fine option within the context of today’s work culture, but it does not actually change that culture, which should be the ultimate goal. Greater stepsmust be made by influential companies to create environments that allow for career advancement in conjunction with motherhood.

Barbato noted that Facebook and Apple both have generous paid maternity leave policies, but neither grants its employees subsidized day care plans or onsite day care programs. Thus, if an older woman were to then use her previously-frozen eggs while still an employee, she faces the same concerns as a young working mother. The work-life tension has not been solved, only postponed. Even more concerning might be the implicit notion that these older women will leave the company once they have children. As most leadership roles within a company are attained in one’s 40s or 50s, after a number of working years, this could greatly affect the already low number of women in positions of corporate power.

NBC News ended its article with Christy Jones, the founder of Extend Fertility, saying, “Offering this benefit ‘can help women be more productive human beings.’ ” It is this exact misconception that perpetuates an unfair perception of the working mother and makes Facebook and Apple’s policy inadequate. Productivity is far more subjective than a calculation of hours or output. A productive woman can certainly be a childless woman that arrives early to the office and then stays late.However, a productive woman can also be one that is given a schedule that allows her to sit down to dinner with her children and work from home after they’ve gone to bed. A productive woman can be one that raises her children to be thoughtful, kind-hearted, engaged individuals while holding a leadership role within her workplace. The idea that postponing motherhood increases productivity is short-sighted and regressive.

Facebook and Apple have given women greater control over the trajectory of their careers and family life, and this should most certainly be applauded. Nonetheless, I worry that their efforts are misguided. I do not suggest that the policy be revoked, but rather that it be compounded, with greater benefits for current mothers or those hoping to have children while relatively young as well. By offering subsidized or onsite day care services, flexible hours and the possibility to work from home more often, these women could be equally accommodated, and their unique talents and perspectives encouraged rather than lost. My concern is that, in offering only the option to freeze one’s eggs, these companies will begin to unconsciously favor those women willing to do so, as if postponing motherhood is indicative of greater work ethic or dedication rather than a personal preference. This policy threatens to engender a subtle implication that a young woman cannot be successful in her career with a child at home, and those trying to strike the balance nonetheless are not serious about their careers. If the counterpoint is that these companies are simply trying to account for the difficulties of work-life balance, then the answer is not to separate the two or place them in succession, but rather to empower the working mother by offering programs that cultivate real change within today’s work culture.

Chelsea Jones is an English major fromRidgefield, Conn. She can be reached at chelseaj@princeton.edu.