A careful reader graciously reached out after Parsons Behle & Latimer’s April Legal Briefings newsletter was published and reminded me of the risk of assuming too much or saying too little in my Q&A columns. I have been writing a Q&A column for the “HRLaws/HRhero” Idaho Employment Law Letter since February 2013. Since becoming part of the Parsons Behle & Latimer team last summer, our editors have shared a selection of the column each month for our Legal Briefings newsletter. I have attempted to be precise in these short answers, trying to avoid answering with a legalese “maybe” or “it depends” to each question. Last month’s “FMLA” question was an example of one which I should have answered “it depends” or explained my presumption of what was being asked. As the reader pointed out, there was more of a concern of what qualifies for FMLA leave rather than the definition of son or daughter under the Act. I should have addressed the former more directly. That said, the complications from childbirth, if truly an impairment limiting a major life activity as I indistinctly presumed, would qualify under the heightened requirement for care of an adult child under the FMLA if she is incapable of self-care due to a mental or physical disability. The original Q&A can be read here.
Jason R. Mau is an attorney in the Boise office of Parsons Behle & Latimer. He is an co-editor of the HR Hero Idaho Employment Law Letter, and writes his Question Corner column monthly, a selection of which is regularly included in the Legal Briefings. He can be reached at 208-562-4898 or jmau@parsonsbehle.com.
