Solutions such as job sharing and partial telecommuting should also be considered. Since so much of an office workday is wasted time anyway, I think accomadating parents should be an easy decision. I'm sure child care was handled on the job for hunters and gatherers and farmers as well as modern day market sellers in developing countries. LEt's not forget that most women nowadays have two children tops, so this is probably only a short term thing for each employee.

I'm glad this solution worked for this company, but I don't see it being the wave of the future.

For one thing, I don't see how the moms could be anywhere near as productive as if the babies weren't in the office. So your colleague/mom has a meeting and you take care of two babies? How do you get any work done? This might irk me if I was a non-mom colleague, too. Presumably the moms were earning the same salary as pre-baby.

Also, going to work is a welcome break from the baby for a lot of moms. I just can't imagine doing the two jobs simultaneously.

I've long been in favor of anything allows employees to integrate their work lives and their real lives. My experience has always been that the company that is willing to work with their employees - whether it's allowing a parent to care for a newborn onsite, take time off to care for a sick child without repercussions or (and I am not drawing a parallel with babies here) bring their dog to work - are the companies that succeed beyond expectations.

If you do the minimum possible for you people, they will do the same for you; if you go the extra mile for them you will probably find that them willing to go an extra two for you.

It’s happening at my small NYC office. Not everyday, as our new mom’s (and a dad) are mostly working from home, but several times a week we’ll have an infant in the office for a few hours. It’s really not disruptive at all. I could see a child who can walk around and grab things being too much for an office – but an infant worn in a sling or spread out on a blanket on the floor or work table really isn’t a big deal.

Right now the job market in the profession I work in is really tight. Last year when we put a job listing in the Times we got thousands of responses – this year we’re lucky if we get a dozen acceptable candidates. Allowing infants in the office is helping us retain employees who might otherwise be looking for a part time job and more traditional child care arrangement. In a tight job market benefits really count and being flexible with infants makes our office look cool, relaxed and friendly – compare that to a huge cube farm and we look pretty attractive to a new employee. So, it's working well for us.

...even if it's too late for me personally.

In particular, the whole issue of breastfeeding would be much simpler, because the infant can be fed directly, eliminating most of the need for pumping, storing, etc.

On the other hand, toddlers-- even though 9 months is a bit early for that name, it's useful here-- do not belong at work-- unless there is proper day care center-- but it sounds like T3 came up with a good solution there, too.

It's difficult enough to leave a baby with even a loving caregiver, but it's so much more difficult when the baby is less than six months, and is not even eating solid food yet. Allowing six months for maternity leave probably would not fly well here, even though it would certainly make the logistics much easier for mothers and babies, but the T3 solution sounds like a good one to me.

I'd be interested in knowing if a care giver for the babies existed other than the mothers. Just this weekend, I was lamenting the fact that I just cannot get any work (I am an attorney) done at home while my nine month old is awake (and I have two older kids and a husband to help). A baby inevitably wants its mom's sole attention. So, how do moms actually get anything done while the baby is in her office? I really am curious as to strategies moms out there may have as to how to both write effectively and efficiently on a computer screen with a baby trying to crawl up you legs onto your lap demanding exclusive attention. (Excuse the spelling and gramatical errors -- I cannot see what I am typing because a United add is in the way).

I think this is a great idea. I understand a boss's reservations and the liability issues are paramount. Nevertheless, there are alternatives for small businesses. For example, in order to defray the expense of insurance and child care, small businesses in an area could band together to establish a day care facility in their neighborhood. This of course necessitates licensing etc, and would take time. But they could each subsidize this along with some arrangement with employees to help defray costs. Run as a cooperative, this would allow employees easy access to their children, including having lunch with them etc. less distraction in the workplace, and perhaps less compromised productivity. Not to mention the greater opportunity to bond with one's own children. A number of larger companies are doing this, following the example of some European firms.

Obviously, it's complicated by the need to find space, hire appropriate caregivers, deal with insurance issues and safety regulations, and finding a way to equitably share costs, but someone did once say something about taking a village...

Raising a child is not something to be done in between meetings and e-mail. Flip the coin: getting your work done is not something deserving of your attention in between diaper changes and reading "Goodnight Moon."

Choose one thing and do it well. Doing 2 things in a half-assed manner makes you a complete ass.

By the way, I'm talking about being a parent, not being a mom. And I'm talking about being an employee, not putting in time.

Children need and deserve the full care and attention of an adult in their young lives. They are not wired to wait. They are not an imposition to your schedule. They are not as 'resilient' as you want them to be when that convenient term is bandied about by preoccupied parents.

If Ms. Traister would do a teensy bit of research before skimming the net for blurbs and passing them off as journalistic inquiry, she'd see the tremendous amount of documented work already out there about how the situation she describes is rarely, if ever, beneficial for the child. Notice she measures the success of the program not in child-friendly terms by by the company's ability to keep making millions.

Children are not born to serve our narcissistic needs. Case in point: Anne Lamott.