Why did Obama shift from saying "parental leave" (in the press release) to "maternity leave" (in the SOTU)?

 Asks Naomi Shavin in The New Republic. She notes that the press release says "There is a notable gap in federal benefits, and that is paid parental leave.... This can hamper federal agencies’ ability to recruit talented young people to join public service." And in the State of the Union address, Obama said: "we’re the only advanced country on Earth that doesn’t guarantee paid sick leave or paid maternity leave to our workers." Now, he also said "it’s time we stop treating childcare as a side issue, or a women’s issue," so why did he move away from the gender-neutral word "parental" and say "maternity"?

That's Shavin's question, but I think the answer is pretty obvious when you notice that there are 2 different issues: 1. The benefits package extended to federal workers, and 2. The requirements to be imposed on private employers. A really nice benefits package gives paid leave when a child is born that goes to either parent and that extends beyond the period of recovery from childbirth, which is a physical matter that is properly linked to sick leave.

It's not incoherent for the President: 1. to support that really nice benefits package for employees of the federal government but not to put such an immense burden on private employees, and 2. to want to require private employers to provide paid sick leave and the kind of maternity leave that has to do with the mother's recovery from childbirth (and is thus comparable to sick leave).

Now, I'm looking at the press release, and I see that my guess is right. Under the heading "Promoting Workplace Flexibility and Access to Paid Leave," there are 2 distinct categories: "Parental Leave for Federal Employees" and "Supporting Paid Sick Leave." Shavin is right that only the phrase "parental leave" appears in the document and not "maternity leave," but the parental leave in question is only for federal employees. Federal workers already have paid sick leave and the proposal is to give them something more, and this would extend to both fathers and mothers.

Under the heading "Supporting Paid Sick Leave," we see the proposal to be imposed on private-sector workers, 40% of whom don't get "sick pay for their own illness or injury." There's a reference to the Healthy Families Act, which would require private employers (of more than 15 workers) to give "1 hour of paid sick time for every 30 hours worked." This "sick time" then can be used to cover one's "own medical needs," and since that would include recovery from childbirth, but presumably not spending time bonding with a new baby, that's the reason to say "maternity leave" in the SOTU phrase "we’re the only advanced country on Earth that doesn’t guarantee paid sick leave or paid maternity leave to our workers."

I can see why Obama wouldn't want to get bogged down in these distinctions in the speech and also why listeners like Shavin are left to wondering why Obama sounded as though he'd fallen into old-style assumptions about childcare being women's work. Why isn't he more forward-thinking and feminist? The answer is that pregnancy and childbirth only happen to women, and there's no legislation or ideology to redistribute that burden. And that plain biological reality is why it makes sense to support imposing paid childbirth-recovery leave on private employers but making baby-bonding new-parent leave optional.