[To THR EDITOR Or THE "SPECTATOR."] am very glad to
see that you have opened your columns to correspondence on the Insurance Bill, and although your article and Mr. Braithwaite's reply do not touch on the subject women are primarily interested in, I trust you will allow me to raise the following objections to the Bill as now drawn, as it is of the greatest importance that
Members of Parliament should know the woman's point of view. (1) The maternity benefit. It seems grossly unfair that an unmarried insured woman should receive a benefit of 30s. on the birth of her child out of the woman's fund, whilst an insured married woman only receives a like benefit, which conies out of the husband's fund. Is it not elementary justice that in the latter case the benefit should be 60s., as both husband and wife are paying into the fund ? (2) Very many women feel that the unmarried women's benefit should come out of the men's fund, as it seems that the Bill as drawn is a direct incentive to immorality. Hitherto experienced women workers have found that in the majority of cases of illegitimate birth the man has been ready to help financially, but in the future, not only will women have to bear the shame, but their fund has to bear the cost. May I venture to hope that the above important questions may receive full and adequate discussion when Parliament meets, and thereby a great injustice to women be obviated P—I am, Sir, &c.,
B. D. M. [We feel the strongest sympathy for the view expressed by our correspondent. We go further and say that it is only bare justice that when an insured unmarried woman marries, a dower-benefit to the full value of her contributions should be paid to her.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
