Earlier this week, Donald Trump unveiled his plan for six weeks of paid maternityleave. Given the GOP’s avoidance of the issue, it seemed likethe right step forward for the candidate, who hasn’t done favorablywith female voters.

Soon after, Trump’s daughter hit the campaign trail to make herfather’s case for the new child-care and maternity leave policies.In an interview with Cosmopolitan, Ivanka shared some furtherdetails of the plan, including:

• “So [the maternity leave policy] is meant to benefit … themother who has given birth to the child if they have legal marriedstatus under the tax code.”

• “The original intention of the plan is to help mothers inrecovery in the immediate aftermath of childbirth.”

• “The plan, right now, is focusing on mothers, whether they be insame-sex marriages or not.”

Ivanka cut the interview short after saying the reporter’s lineof questioning was filled with “negativity.” Given her statements,I have a few questions myself for Ivanka and Mr. Trump.

First, let me cut to the chase and say what so many were and arethinking: Paid maternity leave is nolonger novel — paid parental leave is.

As of 2014, the International Labour Organization said 185countries and territories have parental leave policies.

The hold outs? Papua New Guinea has no laws mandating any typeof parental leave — including maternity. Two countries do notrequire employers to provide paid time off for new parents:Lesotho, a southern country in Africa where 40 percentof the population lives under the international poverty line of$1.25 a day, and the United States.

If that alone doesn’t illustrate the abysmal state of parentalleave in our country, let me put it like this:

• Burkina Faso offers fully paid maternity leave for 14 weeks, and fully paidpaternity leave for two.

• Venezuela offers 26 weeks of fully paid maternity leave and twoweeks of fully paid paternity leave.

• Iran gives 24 weeks of fully paid maternity leave and two weeksfully paid paternity leave.

• Slovenia — the home country of Melania Trump — offers 15 weeksof fully paid maternity leave and 12 weeks of partially paid (80percent) paternity leave.

From Ivanka’s statements, one can deduce that unmarried motherswon’t benefit from Donald Trump’s maternity policy, a fact thatmarginalizes millions of mothers across the country.

In 1960, Trump’s plan may have been welcomed by women, a yearwhen only 5 percent were unmarried mothers, but it’s not 1960.

According to 2014 data from the CDC, 40.2 percent of allchildren were born to unmarried women. That’s 1,604,870 childrenthat would’ve been disallowed the benefit of the “critical bonding”between mother and child Ivanka says is the impetus behind herfather’s maternity leave policy.

Moreover, the idea that women have to be wives before they canbe mothers further reinforces antiquated gender roles and valuesthat are not indicative of today’s family model.

In an article about the growing use of artificial insemination,Mercury News reports that an estimated 50,000women a year start families on their own (take this number with agrain of salt; the fertility industry isn’t obligated to keepstatistics on this kind of stuff). Between 10,000 and 12,000 singlewomen visit sperm banks each year, disavowing the concept of ahusband-wife dynamic for childrearing. Although these women wouldcarry and give birth to a child, without a spouse, they aren’texempt mothers under Trump’s new policy.

If a person decides to take a different route — adoption — toexpand their family, Trump’s plan is making a hardline statementagainst those folks, too: You’re not real parents.

While his website includes adoptive parents in his child-carepolicy, they aren’t accounted for in his maternity leave clause. AsIvanka said, the six weeks is exclusively for “mothers in recoveryin the immediate aftermath of childbirth.”

Trump and his surrogates might tout this plan as unprecedented,but it’s actually retrogressive. It’s not even in line with the1993 Family and Medical Leave Act. Yes, FMLA only provides unpaidleave, but it is available for mothers of both biological andadopted children. Trump’s plan forgets the latter.

In 2008, the total number of adoptions exceeded 135,000. But it’s not justheterosexual parents that are adopting.

Because of the restrictive nature of Trump’s paid leave policy,LGBT couples — specifically same-sex male couples — would mostlikely get the shaft if Trump’s plan becomes law.

First off, LGBT adults — both men and women — don’t see marriageas a necessity for childrearing, so says data from Pew Research. Only 28 percent of all LGBTadults say raising a child is a good enough reason to get married.But for the Trumps, that slip of paper is essential if you want sixweeks of paid leave.

Same-sex couples are four times more likely than heterosexualcouples to raise an adopted child, and six times as likely to raisea foster child. According to a 2013 study from the Williams Institute on LGBTparenting in the U.S., more than 16,000 same-sex couples areraising an estimated 22,000 adopted children in America. Again, theTrump plan doesn’t see this as “good enough” for his leavebenefit.

While same-sex female couples can carry a child (biologicallyspeaking, I’m not presuming to know about issues with infertility,personal objections to pregnancy and/or childbirth, or othervarious reasons women chose alternative family methods), that isn’tan option for men, regardless of sexual orientation. Thisbiological void alone disqualifies them from Trump’s leave policy.

Pew Research says 23 percent of LGBT men arealready fathers. Gary Gates, an expert on LGBT demographics atthe Williams Institute, says there is an estimated 40,000 gay malecouples in the U.S. raising children. But under Trump’s policy,they aren’t parental enough to enjoy much-needed time with theirnew addition following adoption or surrogacy.

To those that make the argument that Trump’s plan is “betterthan nothing” — a statement made by Ivanka and a sentiment sharedon Trump’s website — that’s simply not true. Plenty of employers,states, and cities have taken paid parental leave into their ownhands.

Need proof? Here are a few articles BenefitsPRO has written onentities that have implemented their own policies for workingparents, whether they be female, male, adoptive, biological,heterosexual, or homosexual. (Let me know if you notice atrend.)

• 10 countries with the most parentalleave

• Paid family leave neglected in severalregions, industries

• Parental guidance

• San Francisco now requires fully paidparental leave

• New York passes family leavemandate

• Family leave policies: Etsy and Fidelityexpand benefits

• Zuckerberg leads by example, takes parentalleave

• These employers give moms and dads equalparental leave

• Damone to provide workers six months paidparental leave

• Generous family leave law proposed forWashington, D.C. residents

• Why paid parental leave is picking upsteam

• Microsoft, Adobe boost parental leavepolicies

• Netflix to offer unlimited parental leavein child’s first year

This plan doesn’t empower women; it pigeonholes them into anoutdated idea of what they should be, both at work and at home, allwhile disenfranchising the millions of others who work hard toprovide for their family regardless of how they came to beone.

Trump can say his plan is innovative and contemporary, but nomatter how hard his modern-age daughter peddles it, Trump’smaternity leave policy is archaic. Parental leave is the way of thefuture, and Trump’s plan is just a watered-down consolation prizefor working, married, fertile women.

Being in this exclusive group, I should be excited, but all Ican think about is how so many great parents won’t fall in linewith Trump’s definition of "parent." If this plan becomes law,these people won’t get what I’ll get — and that’s not right.Benefits shouldn’t just be for a lucky few; any benefits managerknows that.

My question to you all — the brokers, HR managers, employers,benefits professionals, and readers of BPro — is what parentalleave should look like in this country. I sincerely want to know,so tell me. Sound off in the comments below.