Skip to main content

Apple to join Facebook in paying for female employees to freeze eggs to defer child-raising

NBC is reporting that Apple will offer female employees up to $20,000 to cover the costs of freezing their eggs if they want to defer having children until later in their career, following the example of Facebook which recently introduced the same employee benefit.

Fertility specialists advise that women who want to freeze eggs in order to have children later in life should freeze at least 20 eggs, which will typically take two rounds of treatment at a cost of $10,000 each. The $20k fertility benefit offered by both Apple and Facebook should cover this – though there can be storage costs on top amounting to several hundred dollars per month.

The move is likely to be a controversial one, seen by some as a means of supporting women who want to advance their career to a senior level before taking time off for children, and making a tech career more appealing to women, while others see it as a message that women are expected to put their career first and family life second.

Apple recently announced a range of improvements to its employee benefits program, including increased time off for parental leave, reimbursements for educational classes, a Student Loan Refinancing Program for U.S. employees and a matching program for charitable donations by employees.

Photo credit: Lex Van Lieshout/AFP/Getty Images

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel

Comments

  1. PMZanetti - 9 years ago

    Horrific psycho garbage.

    • samuelsnay - 9 years ago

      Can’t tell if joking or just fucking stupid.

      • PMZanetti - 9 years ago

        Yeah you’re right. Ignore Biology. Believe in corporate culture instead, that places career (fancy word for a Job) above family.

        Ignore the fact that women have a narrow window of their prime in which to have and rear children, and that its not simply something one can “choose” to put off until later in life.

        Ignore the fact that its not good for children to be had by 40 and 50 year olds. Parents are 70 (if still alive) when the child goes to college? Give me a break.

  2. shareef777 - 9 years ago

    Why’s it controversial when it’s a choice for women? No one is forced into delaying having a family, but if a woman has a viable career that’s very demanding it’s more reasonable to delay having children versus having them and not being able to give them the time of day.

    • standardpull - 9 years ago

      Some are much more comfortable giving women a few, specific options. Some people consider some possible options awful due to:

      (1) their religious beliefs (“only 100% natural approaches are approved by God”)
      (2) “gut feeling” (“it sounds gross and unpleasant”)
      (3) principle (“women should have children when they’re most ripe to have children”).

      In the US, we often label these options as “controversial” because arguments against them often boil down to “because that’s what I believe”, or “women have it a lot better in the US than they do in some other societies”.

    • PMZanetti - 9 years ago

      Too bad biology doesn’t actually give you such a choice, despite corporate culture making it seem OK to do so.

      • shareef777 - 9 years ago

        But biology DOES give you a choice, otherwise the eggs wouldn’t be able to survive outside a woman’s body. Would you say that IVF is also ‘controversial’ because it’s not ‘natural’.

  3. aeronperyton - 9 years ago

    “The move is likely to be a controversial one…”

    “…making a tech career more appealing to women…”

    THE HORROR!!!

    The only people who think allowing a woman to advance her career with the peace of mind that she’ll still be able to rear a child later in life are the corner-cutting, do-as-little-as-possible men who are worried that an honestly hard-working woman will breeze past them on the ladder.

    • Jesse Supaman Nichols - 9 years ago

      Just so you know, misandry is equally as unflattering as misogyny. Assuming that only misogynistic men could have a problem with something like this is both misogynistic and misandristic at the same. You are assuming that no man can have a problem with this without being afraid of women climbing the corporate ladder. But more importantly, you are discounting that men AND women can have a problem with this based on other factors (their feelings, opinions, and/or religious beliefs). All women do not have to share the same opinion. That is a very narrow minded view. Funny how your post started out sounding very open minded…

      • aeronperyton - 9 years ago

        Did… did you just accuse me of being misandrous? Wow.

        This isn’t compulsory, it’s a choice. Nor is it companies encouraging women to act on this offer. And until men start naturally giving birth, of course it’s for women only.

        Men don’t have to worry so much about being able to have children. Unless we develop a certain disfunction, we’re viril until the day we die. Women are a ticking clock. If using science (and major corporations choosing to foot the bill) to level the playing field bothers you, welcome to the frightening world of true equality.

        Your feelings and personal opinions do not and should not ever prevent certain people from being treated well and given the opportunity to succeed. Hopefully soon, the world will advance to the point where religious beliefs don’t either.

  4. I hope the time off for parental leave is no less than 12 months and can be used by a man or a woman.

    Are the also going to cover escorts, hookers or call girls for men that don’t want to settle down and instead focus on their careers? Seems like a good plan.

  5. Dario Kan (@weissblut82) - 9 years ago

    Funny enough, in the only official Apple statement it is never mentioned anything about whatever this article (or the others online, for that matter) says. Apple offers the cryotherapy together with all the other benefits for couples who struggle to have kids, together with adoption programs etc.
    It’s another incredibly good benefit for a good cause – but of course this won’t make news, so let’s say something controversial.

  6. logmouse (@logmouse) - 9 years ago

    “a message that women are expected to put their career first and family life second.”
    Being cynical because that’s me!

    If mens’ rights and womens’ rights were the same, and gender stereotypes were less rigid then we would not need this, because both partners would be legally and socially allowed to commit to and balance family life with work with supportive legislation. We would be flexible with our working hours and familiy life. Too much we see career and family as incompatible, but this is because women have born the sole responsibilty for bringing up children with men at work earning. When both sexes are brought up seeing their roles as the same we won’t have to choose.

    I admire the technology and think if somebody wants to do this then they should have the facilities. Let’s also push for men and women’s equal rights so we can have this balance.

    Kind regards.

Author

Avatar for Ben Lovejoy Ben Lovejoy

Ben Lovejoy is a British technology writer and EU Editor for 9to5Mac. He’s known for his op-eds and diary pieces, exploring his experience of Apple products over time, for a more rounded review. He also writes fiction, with two technothriller novels, a couple of SF shorts and a rom-com!


Ben Lovejoy's favorite gear