Topic : 10/07 The Latest Debates

I have a feeling that my last post (if it gets posted( may be posted several times, I didn't mean to do that, I accidently hit cancel then real quickly hit post several times, don't ask me why, maybe it is becasue it is after midnight and I am turning back into the pumkin...........hehehe I guess, we will see what happens, maybe it didn't get posted..............................if so, I am sorry if it is more then once.

yes, laws can be changed but they won't be changed if people only complain and do nothing about it. I think people in this society are so self centered and I think that would include all of us to a certain degreea s we all have our issues on what we can and cannot tolerate, I guess on this issue, alot of people believe it is acceptable for young girls to reveal themselves through skimpy clothing and show the biggest part of their bodies but it isn't ok for a mother to sit and nurse her baby, it is ok for two teenagers to stand at the bus stop and practially make out (it actually happened, I drove by the bus stop and saw them today), but it isn't ok for a mother to nurse her baby in public, it is ok for a young pretty girl to be considered a sex object and to show her stuff but it isn't ok for a nursing mom to sit and feed her baby in public, doesn't make sense to me, but whatever flats your boat, dos omething about it and maybe if you had any respect at all for a nursing mom, maybe you could also suggest adding comfortable private areas in public places for them to feed their babies. Whatever, in the same way that I can walk a way froma smoker, others could walk away from a nursing mom, it's quite easy actually.

I think others have already posted this before and I have many times, but I will do it once more... 

By the way you are insisting on referring to it as exposure, not feeding, so I don't particularly understand your last two sentences from your perspective.  

"BREASTFEEDING IN PUBLIC  

Mothers have a right to breastfeed where they go with their baby, even if that is out in public. It does not matter whether the mother goes to a public or a private place, or even whether they are in a state with legislation. No one has the right to tell a mother how to feed her baby, especially a way that increases the risk of illness to both mother and baby! Legislation has been enacted in nearly one-half of the states in the U.S. because they want to clarify this right, and in some cases, provide a remedy for mothers told to stop breastfeeding. It is hoped that legislation will help to change society's attitudes that breastfeeding is something indecent and should not be done in public. Underlying this, is the goal to increase the rates and duration of breastfeeding recognizing that this is an important health choice that must be encouraged.  

Babies need to be breastfed on demand, and mothers should not feel pressured to use bottles. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, babies do not need to have bottles or pacifiers, and even if a mother wants to use these, they are contraindicated until breastfeeding is well established. Early introduction of bottles or pacifiers can put the breastfeeding relationship at risk, as the baby can develop nipple or bottle confusion, often resulting in the baby not being able to correctly nurse. If this happens, the baby may wean, or have such serious difficulties that the mother may need to seek professional help. Would we want even one mother or baby to have an increased risk of illness just because someone doesn't want to see it? Also, using bottles takes away from the convenience of breastfeeding, as the breast it is always ready and available, at the perfect temperature, with no preparation needed. No breastfeeding mother should be told that she should have to use bottles, anymore than a bottle feeding mother should be told that she should be breastfeeding. Breastfeeding is an act of nurture, not something to be hidden. Mothers should be allowed to choose for themselves how they want to feed their baby, and our society should not discourage their choice, especially when it is one that benefits all of us.  

It is important to remember that women have a right to breastfeed in public whether there is a law or not. The purpose of legislation is NOT to legalize it, but to clarify the fact the fact that women have the right to breastfeed in public, or that it is not a criminal offense, such as indecent exposure. Thus, if you are in a state that does not have legislation, you still have the right to feed your baby where you go. Breastfeeding legislation often exempts breastfeeding from any criminal statutes, such as amending an indecent exposure or nudity law. More progressive legislation creates a new law that sets forth a woman's right to breastfeed. Some of the laws provide mothers with legal recourse if they are told to stop breastfeeding, such as New York, which has the strongest law in the nation, where a right to breastfeed as one of a person's civil rights was created.  

Not only have states enacted legislation, but various cities and counties have amended ordinances, or enacted laws that protect breastfeeding. One of the most notable is the City of Philadelphia, which submitted an ordinance in 1996 that not only prohibited discriminating against breastfeeding mothers, but also prohibited segregating breastfeeding mothers. In response to other states considering allowing establishments to tell mothers where they can breastfeed, they enacted this law to make it clear that such acts are segregation. In 1999, a federal law was enacted that ensures a woman's right to breastfeed her child anywhere on federal property that she has a right to be with her child. As the legal system continues to recognize and encourage breastfeeding, a message is sent to the public at large that breastfeeding is an important issue; one that has an impact on our lives and the futures of our children. But society's views and taboos are not easily changed. Legislation that recognizes the importance of breastfeeding is just one step toward helping our society become more supportive of breastfeeding. " 

http://www.lalecheleague.org/Law/Bills4.html 

  

  

"... After reviewing LLLI's Legal Rights Packet, the St. Louis Ordinance, and the language of the Dike case in which a Florida teacher sued her employer over the right to breastfeed her child, Rep. DeGrandy proposed a new Florida law in 1993 that was much more expansive than any previous measures. The bill amended any criminal statutes that could apply hypothetically to breastfeeding, and specifically excluded the breastfeeding of a baby, even if not done discreetly. But more importantly, it created a new section of the public health laws which states:  

The breastfeeding of a baby is an important and basic act of nurture which must be encouraged in the interests of maternal and child health and family values.  

The law goes on to state that:  

A mother may breastfeed her baby in any location, public or private, where the mother is otherwise authorized to be, irrespective of whether the nipple of the mother's breast uncovered during or incidental to the breastfeeding.  

The response to Florida's legislation was not only positive, but inspiring. Other states quickly followed suit by enacting new legislation protecting the right to breastfeed in public. In the midst of this pending legislation, more and more mothers began to speak out when harassed for nursing in public. One incident helped pass New York's new legislation. A breastfeeding mother shopping at a mall asked if there was some place to go and nurse, as her baby could not wait for her to get home. When she was told that there was no place but the ladies' room, she sat down in the food court and discreetly breastfed her baby. The security guard asked her to go to the ladies' room, justifying his actions by telling her that he had asked another mother a few days earlier to leave, and she had complied. This incident caught the attention of many nursing mothers in New York, and they staged a "nurse-in" at the mall attended by over fifty nursing mothers, health professionals, and other advocates of breastfeeding. As a result, the mall changed its policy to make it perfectly clear that mothers may nurse there.  

Around the same time, a new mother in Ohio was ushered out of a museum after discreetly nursing her baby in an exhibit. Apparently mothers have nursed in that museum all along, but this mother inadvertently called attention to herself by turning the chair around and throwing a shawl over her shoulder. This museum also changed its policy and now expressly allows the nursing of children in exhibits. But another museum in Texas was more reluctant to change.  

Apparently, personnel at this museum did not think it was necessary to breastfeed in public and after asking a mother to nurse somewhere else, concocted a variety of reasons to support their request. A Texas "nurse-in" ensued, again drawing the attention of the nation to this important issue.  

As a result of the increased national publicity, North Carolina amended its indecent exposure law to exclude breastfeeding and used language similar to Florida's which stated that a mother has a right to breastfeed in any public or private location where she is otherwise authorized to be, even if not done discreetly. Virginia amended its indecent exposure statute to say that it is not a violation of the law to breastfeed a child in any public place or any place where others are present. Michigan also amended its criminal laws to exclude breastfeeding. Finally, New York enacted legislation that went further than any other state to date by creating a civil rights law guaranteeing a mother's right to breastfeed in any location. Thus, a violation of this law is a violation of a mother's civil rights. This makes New York the first state to offer legal recourse to a mother if her right to breastfeed is violated.  

The Necessity for Breastfeeding Legislation

These incidents and others (a mother in California was thrown out of a restaurant, another asked to leave a large department store) have helped many to recognize that breastfeeding legislation is necessary. Legislation is being enacted not because it is currently illegal to breastfeed in public, but because, despite the growing awareness of the advantages, there are still stumbling blocks that affect a mother's decision to breastfeed or to continue to do so. We know of no law that prohibits breastfeeding, or tells a mother how long she can nurse.  

As noted, much of the new legislation amends criminal statutes in order to ensure that breastfeeding mothers are protected from charges of indecent exposure, lewd behavior, or violation of any criminal laws. Again, this was done not because it is a crime to breastfeed in any state, but because many of these statutes are vague and could apply hypothetically to the breastfeeding situation. More importantly, this legislation also was enacted to change the public's perception of breastfeeding, since many people in our society view breastfeeding in public as obscene or indecent.  

These recent changes in the law support the growing body of evidence that demonstrates that breastfeeding is not only a lifestyle choice, but a health choice for mother and baby. As James P. Grant, the Executive Director of UNICEF, stated:  

Study after study now shows, for example, that babies who are not breastfed have higher rates of death, meningitis, childhood leukemia and other cancers, diabetes, respiratory illnesses, bacterial and viral infections, diarrhoeal diseases, otitis media, allergies, obesity, and developmental delays. Women who do not breastfeed demonstrate a higher risk for breast and ovarian cancers.  

These benefits are also recognized by US federal law in the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program, which provides food supplements to low income families. It is now mandated that breastfeeding be promoted as the best method of infant nutrition and provides funding for state-delivered breastfeeding aid, education, and promotion programs.  

Encouraging and protecting breastfeeding benefits not only the individuals involved, but society in general. The US federal government, and many states have supported breastfeeding programs partly because hundreds of millions of tax dollars continue to be used to purchase artificial baby milk. With health care reform currently on the national agenda in the United States, legislators are beginning to realize that there are economic and medical benefits to society if breastfeeding is promoted. According to one study, if women breastfed their children until two years of age, the incidence of breast cancer could decrease by twenty-five percent. Considering the cost of caring for the victims of that disease and other serious illnesses against which breastfeeding offers protection to mother and baby, the lost productivity, and the emotional trauma for families, there are certainly no good reasons not to promote breastfeeding.  

Both Florida and New York stated the reasons for encouraging breastfeeding in their bills. These included the US Surgeon General's recommendation that babies be breastfed at least one year, the health and psychological benefits to mother and baby, and the goals of the World Health Organization. They concluded that "hostility to mothers and babies in our culture based on archaic and outdated moral taboos" can seriously deter a mother from breastfeeding. They hoped that enacting this legislation would help put an end to the vicious cycle of embarrassment and ignorance about breastfeeding so that mothers would be encouraged to continue to breastfeed without feeling discriminated against or ostracized.  

What the Future Holds

Since Barbara Damon and Marlene Pennekamp began calling attention to this issue in the early 80s, breastfeeding legislation has gained momentum. Not only have other states submitted bills on breastfeeding (Arizona, Illinois, New Jersey, and Wisconsin), but some have also taken breastfeeding legislation one step beyond nursing in public. For instance, Iowa recently amended its jury duty statute to exclude mothers of breastfed children who are responsible for the daily care of the child and not regularly employed outside the home. Florida, though, leads the way this year with its newest legislation that creates a breastfeeding project to determine the benefits, barriers, and costs of implementing worksite breastfeeding support policies for state employees. Policies supporting the practice of worksite breastfeeding will be formulated for the entire state. These policies will address issues such as work schedule flexibility, accessible locations and privacy to pump or nurse, and access to clean, safe water sources for cleaning breast pump equipment. Florida's newest law also revises various laws governing services for WIC recipients by requiring an emphasis on breastfeeding. The law also takes a small step toward encouraging hospitals to become more baby-friendly.  

New legislation affecting the health laws, family law, civil rights, employment law, and criminal law will be submitted next year in Texas. These laws, if passed, will be the most expansive and thorough legislation to date that affects breastfeeding mothers.  

Conclusion

As the legal system continues to recognize and encourage breastfeeding, a message is sent to the public at large that breastfeeding is an important issue, one that has an impact on our lives and futures of our children. But society's views and taboos are not easily changed. Legislation that recognizes the importance of breastfeeding is just one step toward helping our society become more supportive of breastfeeding.  

We'd like to hear from you. If you live in the US, let us know of other pending breastfeeding legislation. If you live outside of the US, what are the laws that affect a woman's right to nurse her baby in your country? Write to: LLLI, 1400 N. Meacham Rd., Schaumburg, IL 60173-4840 USA.  

ENACTED BREASTFEEDlNG LEGISLATION

[Ed. note: the file Breastfeeding Legislation in the United States has a more up-to-date listing.]  

Florida Statutes, section 383.015 (1993) contains Florida's law which states that breastfeeding must be encouraged and gives a mother a right to breastfeed anywhere she has the right to be.  

Florida Statutes, section 383.018 (6) (1994); Florida Senate Bill No. 1668, Florida 13th Legislature, Second Regular Session (1994) Chapter 94-217, Florida Advance Legislative Service contains the full text of Florida's new law implementing breastfeeding worksite policies, baby-friendly hospital incentive, and encouragement of breastfeeding in the nutrition programs.  

Iowa House File 2350, Seventy-Fifth General Assembly 1994, Iowa Advance Legislative Service contains the new law regarding jury duty and breastfeeding mothers.  

Michigan Senate Bills 107,108, and 109 (Acts 313, 314, 315, Public Acts of 1994), Michigan 87th Legislature, 1994 Regular Session, Michigan Advance Legislative Service.  

New York Senate Bill No. 3999-A, 1994 Regular Session, Chapter 98, New York Advance Legislative Service contains the full text of the bill which lays out the health benefits for breastfeeding and why it should be encouraged. The text of this bill is virtually identical to the Florida bill that resulted in FL stature 383.015.  

North Carolina General Statutes, section 14-190.9 (1993). Virginia Code Annotated section 18.2-387 (1994)  

PENDING LEGISLATION

Arizona Senate Bill 1510, 41st Legislature, 1994 Regular Session, Arizona Bill Tracking Statenet, introduced February 8, 1994.  

Illinois Senate Bill 1501, 88th General Assembly, 1993-4 Regular Session, Illinois Bill Tracking Statenet, introduced March 4, 1994.  

New Jersey Assembly Bill 2009, 206th Legislature, First Regular Session 1994), New Jersey Bill Tracking Statenet, introduced March 29, 1993, last action May 16, 1994.  

Ohio Senate Bill 342, 120th General Assembly, 1993-4 Regular Session, Ohio Bill Tracking Statenet, introduced August 4, 1994." 

  

http://www.lalecheleague.org/Law/NBNovDec94p164.html 

Start using a term other than red herring. Public breastfeeding is legal and necessary. I don't really understand how someone as intelligent as you are doesn't get the conflict and difficulty involved when you propose women should have to conform to the standards of strangers in their feeding choices. It's already a lot of work being a mom, adding unnecessary barriers to breastfeeding in a social setting would only make women more isolated, and ashamed of something wonderful and healthy, and more likely to formula feed, which is neither wonderful nor healthy. 

I am curious exactly what your stand is. I really don't understand if you are against public breastfeeding, or breastfeeding without a blanket covering? Do you think that we need to go to a separate room, go home, go to our cars? Exactly what is your position? 

There are no legal restrictions on exposure of the breast during nursing. There are people like you who insist there are, but there aren't. There are protections against the oppression of people like you written into the law.  

You are right, I am not a victim. Why? Because I don't listen to people like you when I decide to nurse my son in public. 

If you think this issue is political, you are right. It becomes political any time someone like you tries to take away a baby's right to eat and a mommy's right not to get mastitis or have to listen to her hungry baby cry for her breast. 

But in my life, it has never been very political because I nurse my son in public all the time and nobody bothers me about it. Thank God. They would get an earful of information on the health risks of formula and the psychological implications of detached parenting, as well as the legal background of segregation and human rights if they tried.  

The restrictions I was talking about were other than the special case of nursing, which makes the law  grossly inconsistent. If you didn't listen to  'people like me' (whatever that means) you wouldn't be bellyaching. 

  

 You do your share of crying that 'we' would be 'oppressing' you, because 'we' object to the public exposure of the breast, and are therefore against blah blah blah (a whole catalogue of issues othere than the aformentioned exposure of the breast). 

  

This kind of victim rhetoric is entirely political and not very convincing.  

'We' find it  illogical and inconsistent that a breast should not be exposed other than to nurse. 

How just the fact of nursing neutralizes any of the sexual aspects of exposure is a mystery to us. 

  

Nowhere have 'we' mentioned that nursing or baby rights or motherhood are in question. That's the handle you need to play victim. 

  

The statutes are vague, at least in California, about what part of the breast may be exposed or not. Where there is no language the law is open to interpretation, so your case is not so cut and dry. 

  

Notice, that it does not apply to private homes. Supposedly there still is a degree of  'oppression' and as a result a restriction. 

  

Cal. Civ. Code §43.3
1997 Cal ALS 59; 1997 Cal AB 157; Stats 1997 ch 59  

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a mother may breastfeed her child in any location, public or private, except the private home or residence of another, where the mother and child are authorized to be present.  

  

When it comes to the workplace, it stipulates that a room must be provided. Notice the proviso 'in private'. So there is a restriction in that case. Now the workplace is oppressing you. I guess 'we' include employers. 

  

1031. The employer shall make reasonable efforts to provide the employee with the use of a room or other location, other than a toilet stall, in close proximity to the employee's work area, for the employee to express milk in private. The room or location may include the place where the employee normally works if it otherwise meets the requirements of this section. 

  

Instead of whining off topic about babies and health issues, you could have just stated initially that you were within your legal rights to expose yourself when nursing, with some restrictions in private homes and the workplace. That would have been a cue to address legal inconsitencies and lobby for change to either allow breast exposure in the same venues that men do (such as in some provinces of Canada) or to disallow it in public. 

But that would not have attracted enough attention to you and people like you. 

  

Red herring is the precise term for your kind of logical fallacy and I will stop using it when you stop committing the fallacy. Even after all the careful distinctions I have drawn between the issue of public exposure of the breast, and nursing you still don't get it. 

I will make one more pass and then I give up. Why would I be against using a blanket when I have stated in several places that my concern was with the EXPOSURE and nothing, I repeat nothing else. There are many women, including my own mother, who agree with this position. So the battle lines are not cleary drawn between genders. 

There's a lot of complaining on both sides of the fence. And awareness is the beginning of change. It doesn't mean I'm not going to do anything about it. Why don't you lobby? 

  

we ought not have to look the other way. But if you show off your too too's the male population will look and it is better not to because you do not know if someone out there will develope an unwanted or unwelcome interest.  I suppose as long as the husband does not mind you sharing your privates with others then I suppose you cant say anything if he does.  So go ahead.

 I find it sad that we live in a world that is so obsessed with sex that people cannot nurse a baby without causing arousal or erotic ideas in peoples' minds. It's also disturbing that people are so hush-hush about the way our bodies are designed, to the point that our children may suffer from ignorance. Did you ever think that proper education on functioning naturally as the being God created may prevent some of the perverse behavior and thoughts of the people out there? Maybe if things weren't so taboo, it wouldn't be necessary for anyone to become obsessed with it.