Colorado just raised the bar on paid leave for NICU parents—and every state should be paying attention
When your newborn is in the NICU, the rest of the world fades. Monitors beep. Nurses whisper. You count the minutes between updates. What most parents don't have, though, is the one thing they need most: time.
Now, that's starting to change. Colorado just made history as the first state in the U.S. to offer paid NICU leave. As Axios reports, Governor Jared Polis has signed a bill expanding the state's paid family and medical leave program to include an additional 12 weeks of leave for parents whose infants are hospitalized in neonatal intensive care. The new leave goes into effect on January 1, 2026.
The law builds on the state's broader paid leave benefit, which voters approved in 2020 and launched in January 2024. offering up to 12 weeks of paid time off for medical or caregiving needs.
Colorado's program is part of a growing movement among states to provide paid leave through publicly funded insurance systems—separate from the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which protects some workers' jobs but doesn't guarantee income.
Related: When the baby is in the NICU, who's caring for the mom? A new model is changing that
The bill acknowledges what science has long confirmed: babies thrive when their parents can be present in the NICU. A study published in JAMA Network Open assessed the outcomes following close collaboration with parents in NICUs. The study found that family-centered care—where parents are directly, daily involved with the hands-on care of their NICU newborns—led to better outcomes for both infants and parents. Babies gained more weight, and parents reported lower stress levels and greater satisfaction with care.
But presence comes at a cost. Without paid leave, many parents are forced to make an impossible choice: stay by their critically ill newborn's side—or hold onto their job.
One of the bill's sponsors, Colorado State Rep. Yara Zokaie, knows that struggle firsthand, She described her own experience working remotely from the hospital while her baby was in intensive care. As she told Axios, 'Having a child in the NICU is one of the most terrifying moments as a parent, and the last thing they should be worried about is having to choose between spending time with their child in the hospital and keeping their jobs.'
To be clear, Colorado's new provision makes it the only state to specifically extend paid leave for NICU hospitalization. Thirteen states and the District of Columbia have broader paid family leave laws, but they vary widely in duration, eligibility, and funding. And federally? The U.S. still offers zero weeks of guaranteed paid family leave.
That means NICU outcomes—like so much in parenting—are increasingly shaped by your zip code.
In contrast, Colorado's law recognizes that care is not a private inconvenience—it's a public good. And it builds on evidence that paid leave improves both health and economic outcomes for families. As reported by Axios, advocates see this move as proof that Colorado's family leave program is working well enough to expand.
Paid NICU leave isn't just smart public health. It's long-overdue recognition that the burden of care work—especially during medical crises—has too often fallen silently on mothers.
In most households, caregiving during a medical emergency still defaults to the mother. As we've previously covered, moms are often expected to 'make it work'—balancing crisis caregiving with professional obligations, all without the systemic support their roles demand
Colorado's new law doesn't fix all of that. But it sets a precedent. One that says parents in crisis deserve more than platitudes. They deserve policies that meet them where they are: beside a hospital bed, holding the tiniest hand they've ever seen.
Related: Moms don't need a baby bonus—they need paid leave, childcare, and real support
Sources:
SENATE BILL 25-144. Colorado Government. SENATE BILL 25-144.
NICU outcomes. JAMA Network Open. Outcomes Following Close Collaboration With Parents Intervention in Neonatal Intensive Care Units.
State Paid Family Leave Laws Across the U.S. January 202. Bipartisan Policy Centrer. State Paid Family Leave Laws Across the U.S.
Paid family and medical leave. January 2025. American Progress. The State of Paid Family and Medical Leave in the U.S. in 2025.
Colorado expands paid leave for NICU parents. June 2025. Axios. Colorado expands paid leave for NICU parents.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
10 hours ago
- The Hill
3 in 4 want legally required, publicly disclosed presidential health tests: Survey
Three in four Americans want health test requirements for presidents that would be released to the public, a new survey released on Friday found. Seventy-four percent of respondents agreed there should be legal requirements for the sitting president to share health records, in an Axios/Ipsos poll, and 72 percent of respondents thought most elected officials aren't honest about their own health. Additionally, 81 percent of respondents said there should be age limits in place for federal officials, including presidents, Supreme Court justices and members of Congress. Only 40 percent of respondents said former presidents should legally have to share health records. The issue of health and cognitive abilities of sitting presidents has been in the spotlight since former President Biden's disastrous debate in June and eventual decision not to run for reelection. He was 82 when he left office and recently announced he was diagnosed with prostate cancer. Earlier this week, Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans accused former Biden Cabinet officials, Democratic members of Congress and the media of participating in a massive 'cover-up' to hide what they claim was the former president's obvious and alarming cognitive decline during his final two years in office. President Trump, who just turned 79 last week, is the oldest president to be inaugurated. He underwent an annual physical exam in April and his physician wrote in a memo that he was in 'excellent health.' The memo confirmed that Trump took the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, a test commonly used to detect memory issues or cognitive impairment, and scored a 30 out of 30. Since he first left office in 2020, Trump had released limited information about his physical health. His campaign released a letter in November 2023 from his personal physician, with little specifics. Nikki Haley, Trump's former U.N. ambassador who challenged him in the 2024 GOP primary, called for cognitive tests for politicians over 75. 'To most Americans, this is common sense. But many political and media elites scoff at these ideas,' she wrote in May 2023. The survey was conducted June 13 to 16 and included 1,104 U.S. adults. It has a margin of error of +/-3.3 percentage points.
Medscape
13 hours ago
- Medscape
Oseltamivir Decreases Hospital Mortality Risk of Influenza
Treating patients with severe influenza with oseltamivir in the first 2 days after hospital admission was associated with a lower in-hospital mortality risk, earlier discharge, and lower readmission rate compared with supportive care, new data indicated. The additional evidence supports current guideline recommendations to treat all people hospitalized with influenza with an antiviral agent, regardless of how long they have been ill. The study, led by Anthony D. Bai, MD, assistant professor of infectious diseases at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario, was published on June 10 in JAMA Network Open. Reduced Mortality Risk Each year, influenza causes 12,200 hospitalizations and 3500 deaths in Canada. It causes between 140,000 and 810,000 hospitalizations and 12,000 to 61,000 deaths in the United States. And despite guidelines in both countries that recommend treatment for all entering the hospital with influenza, clinical practice varies widely, Bai told Medscape Medical News . The researchers' study found that in Ontario, 30% of clinicians were not treating this population with oseltamivir. Researchers examined data from the General Medicine Inpatient Initiative database, which includes internal medicine and intensive care unit (ICU) patients admitted to participating hospitals in Ontario. Data included demographics, diagnoses, interventions, discharge, readmission, medication orders, and bloodwork results. The cohort study included 11,073 patients (average age, 72.6 years). Researchers found an adjusted risk reduction of 1.8% for in-hospital mortality when oseltamivir was given, compared with supportive care median length of stay was 4.4 days and 4.9 days in the oseltamivir and supportive care groups, respectively. After discharge, 645 patients (8.5%) in the oseltamivir group and 336 patients (9.8%) in the supportive care group were readmitted, with an adjusted risk difference of -1.5%. 'Some clinicians believe there won't be much benefit to treatment with oseltamivir,' said Bai, likely because of the dearth of evidence supporting the guidelines. 'There's been a lot of controversy about the benefit of oseltamivir in the outpatient population, where a recent meta-analysis showed it didn't really prevent hospitalizations. But there is a signal that it decreased in-hospital mortality. If a similar benefit is proven in a future randomized, controlled trial, it would add a lot of convincing evidence that there's a significant benefit to oseltamivir treatment.' The expanded version of the large RECOVERY randomized, controlled trial in the United Kingdom looks at that question, he noted. But until results are available, 'we should go by the current guideline recommendations.' Remaining Questions Wendy Sligl, MD, professor of critical care medicine and infectious diseases at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, told Medscape Medical News that the 1.8% in-hospital mortality reduction may seem small. 'Keep in mind, this is in all hospitalized patients, which includes a spectrum of disease severity from those not needing supplemental oxygen to those on a ventilator.' She pointed out that less than 10% of the patients in this study were admitted to the ICU. The number needed to treat is an important consideration with these results, she pointed out. 'Given this mortality reduction, you would need to treat approximately 55 patients to prevent one death. When the outcome is as devastating as death, and the drug is relatively safe and inexpensive, treatment seems reasonable, given even a small reduction in mortality.' Sligl also noted the need for high-quality evidence from randomized, controlled trials, including RECOVERY, in hospitalized patients with influenza. 'In addition, the most severe patients, those in the ICU with respiratory failure requiring high-flow oxygen or mechanical ventilation, should be specifically studied.' Beyond whether antiviral therapy is beneficial, she said, other questions remain, such as which antiviral is best and at what dose and duration. Other questions include whether an antiviral therapy should be used alone or in combination with another antiviral therapy and at what time in which patients. 'The best quality data we have for the treatment of influenza are in healthy outpatients, where treatment has been shown to reduce symptom severity and duration. Data for antiviral use in hospitalized patients with influenza are largely observational, suggesting a small mortality benefit with treatment,' Sligl explained. In the current study, she noted, 'target trial emulation with propensity scoring helped to minimize bias, which is a methodologic strength.' No funding source for this study was reported. Bai and Sligl reported having no relevant financial relationships.
Axios
14 hours ago
- Axios
Axios-Ipsos poll: Americans want to force presidents to share health records
Eight in 10 Americans want legally required and publicly released cognitive tests and disease screenings for U.S. presidents — and age limits on the presidency, according to the latest Axios-Ipsos American Health Index. About 3 in 4 say politicians aren't honest about their health, and that presidents should be legally required to share their medical records with the public. Why it matters: The issue of presidents' health has become particularly poignant in light of the decline of Joe Biden, who was 82 when he left office, and the return of Donald Trump, who's now 79 and was the oldest president to be inaugurated in U.S. history. Trump rarely has offered glimpses into his health records. His team released a memo after his physical in April that pronounced him in "excellent health," but political foes such as California Gov. Gavin Newsom have questioned Trump's mental fitness and whether he's up to the job. Biden's White House physician had claimed that Biden was in great shape for a man of his age. But during his presidency, Biden's staff tried to conceal his declining health. Biden's recent cancer diagnosis has drawn new attention to the lack of legal requirements for public officials to disclose their medical status. What we're watching: Democrats surveyed in the poll appear to favor such disclosures slightly more than Republicans — and, overall, Americans are less interested in forcing past presidents to share their records than requiring current ones to do so. What they're saying:"The American public is sending a very clear signal that they don't trust the information they're receiving, that it's not sufficient, and that public officials should be held to a higher standard when it comes to being forthcoming about their health," said Mallory Newall, Ipsos vice president for U.S. public affairs. "Americans want more transparency about their elected officials' health. They're looking for a younger generation to serve." The big picture: The balance between public officials' medical privacy and the public's right to know has swung sharply toward more disclosure, the poll showed. It found strong bipartisan appetite for increased transparency about public officials' health, and for a maximum age at which officeholders and Supreme Court justices can serve. (Respondents were not asked what age the maximum age should be.) By the numbers: 72% of Americans strongly or somewhat disagree with the idea that most elected officials are honest with the American public about their health. 74% overall agree that there should be a legal requirement for any current president to share their health records. The public is much more divided on former presidents' health, with just 40% agreeing there should be a legal requirement to share their health records and 57% opposed. About 8 in 10 Americans broadly favor age limits for Supreme Court justices and members of Congress, as well as for presidents. More Democrats (83%) favor a legal requirement that the current president share health records than Republicans (70%) or independents (72%). The same goes for age limits and for mandatory cognitive screening and disease testing with sharable results. But in each case, more than three-quarters of Republicans, Democrats and independents support those requirements. Between the lines: Public officials aren't held to any legal standards for disclosing their medical status. While America is getting older and life expectancies generally have increased, questions about aging politicians' fitness to serve and their ability to make critical judgements have moved to the forefront. That's partly driven by a nonstop news cycle that keeps many in the limelight and can expose frailties. But the rules for talking about their health are mostly rooted in traditions like the president's annual physical. Former White House physician Jeffrey Kuhlman has argued for a battery of cognitive tests, rather than a screening exam, to assess presidents' memory, language and problem-solving skills. Methodology: This Axios/Ipsos Poll was conducted June 13-16, 2025, by Ipsos' KnowledgePanel®. This poll is based on a nationally representative probability sample of 1,104 general population adults age 18 or older.
