I heartily agree with KA Dettwyler's articulate defense of the USA's jury system, and would like to issue a challenge to US LactNetters that we begin to use our court system proactively to defend breastfeeding. Not just defending rights to breastfeed in public, but exercising rights to sue for damages when institutional, professional or administrative actions have casually ended the nursing relationship and medical problems ensue for the child.
   In our line of work, almost anyone can cite cases where breastfeeding was terminated for indefensible reasons, and the child suffered severe adverse consequences subsequently.  We need case law developed around these sequelae.  It is probably at present easier to get damages for falling off a stepladder and breaking an ankle than it is to get damages for the lifelong consequences of conditions that make use of artificial feeding unavoidable, when the mother was able and intended to breastfeed.
     A great principle of the US jury system is that ordinary people can be open-minded, sensible, and fair; the system also excuses from jury duty anyone who would not be able to understand the presentation of evidence.  I for one would value a jury of registered voters (many of them parents, and all of them former babies) listening to a lawyer for the baby's interests.
    LactNetters in countries outside the USA may consider if their court systems too would permit greater advocacy for the interests of breastfeeding infants.  Breastfeeding specialists in countries that now have national Codes of Marketing have special opportunities to protect children by ensuring that these Codes are followed, and perhaps by filing amicus curiae briefs when court proceedings occur, as in Guatemala and India.
    Someone quoted Rabbi Hillel on LactNet recently, and aptly.  I hope I get it right:
            If not us, whom?  If now now, when?