special_kala
love my bugs
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2008
- Messages
- 21,358
- Reaction score
- 0
The law states that it is NOT illegal to ask someone to not BF when there is a health and safety risk which there is in this case
The law states that it is NOT illegal to ask someone to not BF when there is a health and safety risk which there is in this case
The no food or drink would be enough to show there is a H&S risk otherwise the rule wouldnt be there
The law states that it is NOT illegal to ask someone to not BF when there is a health and safety risk which there is in this case
I would think in a legal scenario, you'd have to prove the health and safety risk. Can that be shown in this case? The only thing I can think would be to argue about the bm in the water, but it's not classed as a bodily fluid, sooo... any legal experts here?
The no food or drink would be enough to show there is a H&S risk otherwise the rule wouldnt be there
That's not true at all. If that were the case, they would have to prohibit lactating mothers from being in the same area no food is allowed.
The law states that it is NOT illegal to ask someone to not BF when there is a health and safety risk which there is in this case
I would think in a legal scenario, you'd have to prove the health and safety risk. Can that be shown in this case? The only thing I can think would be to argue about the bm in the water, but it's not classed as a bodily fluid, sooo... any legal experts here?
1. Chance of mother slipping and hurting herself since her hands are occupied;
2. Chance of baby getting hurt if mom slips as her hands are occupied;
3. Risk of someone else in the pool getting injured and not being noticed due to lifeguard keeping an eye on mom and baby in case they fall.
I'm sure there are more, but these are the ones that I can think of offhand.
The no food or drink would be enough to show there is a H&S risk otherwise the rule wouldnt be there
That's not true at all. If that were the case, they would have to prohibit lactating mothers from being in the same area no food is allowed.
I think the point is to limit water contamination as much as they can without going over the top. Checking every woman for lactation or menstruation would be ridiculous. The next best thing is to prohibit food and drink.
I will protect a womans right to feed her child in public until im blue in the face but not in this situation. Breastfeeding is normal and i will feed Fox where ever i would eat myself because he has the same rights to eat as anyone else. I have no right to eat in a pool.
If I have to take the two minutes to get out of the pool with my son to soothe him, so can she.
Breastfeeding women are not entitled to do whatever they please.
You really love to twist people's words.
She is feeding her baby. There is a no feeding/drinking rule in place.
What's so hard to understand??
The no food or drink would be enough to show there is a H&S risk otherwise the rule wouldnt be there
That's not true at all. If that were the case, they would have to prohibit lactating mothers from being in the same area no food is allowed.
I think the point is to limit water contamination as much as they can without going over the top. Checking every woman for lactation or menstruation would be ridiculous. The next best thing is to prohibit food and drink.
Either lactating in the pool is a HnS risk or it isn't. Bf or not, milk will get in the pool. Besides, I thought the conclusion we came to was that she wasn't in the pool, but was at poolside?
1. Sucking on a nipple soothes her baby. Sucking on a nipple soothes my child. Her nipple is attached to her breast, my son's soothing nipple is attached to a bottle. Either way, both soothe their children.
2. Sure she might want to avoid a meltdown - who wouldn't?! However, a lot of parents don't get that option and she shouldn't get it simply because she breastfeeds.
If you want to breastfeed in public, great. If you want to normalise breastfeeding, even better. But that doesn't make you above the rest of the world's population and act so entitled.