I am going to address Linda's concern about NY's bill, and give you info on
showing this bill to others, and others that may be better.
For those that aren't going to read this entire note, let me start by saying:
*** I am NOT sure that the penalties for violating a mother's civil rights
are a $5000 fine. I believe that this figure came from an erroneous AP
report. If you are going to share the NY law with someone, DELETE THAT
PARAGRAPH AT THE END TELLING WHAT THE FINE IS - unless the original poster
is going to verify that with an attorney licensed to practice civil rights
law in NY.
*** There are other and better bills to show people if you are using this
for a point. Texas is a good one - covers not only breastfeeding in public,
but employment, and even provides an incentive to the private sector to
encouarge women to continue breastfeeding when they return to work. Nevada
is a good one because it not only updates the preambles, but puts them into
their law.
*** If you want to educate someone about legislation, how about showing
them articles on legislation? You all have two of mine on the Web, and one
of them is updated to include all states that have legislation enacted. It
also describes the language of their bills, and gives a brief intro on why
we have legislation, and what it means. You all have permission to copy
these and give them to whoever needs them.
Linda,
You are NOT wet behind the ears but... there is more to consider before we
draw conclusions from that.
>Thank you for posting the content of the NY law! I was one who saw
>gobble-dee-gook and appreciate the chance to read the text. However, I am
>sorry that the NY law (which is otherwise so wonderful) prefaces itself
>with the comments that bf is recommended from birth to one year of age.
>Yes, that's what the SG said and it does lend some weight to the law.
Sorry for being behind on initials, but what is SG?
>However, mothers nursing older children often feel less able to nurse in
>public than those nursing children under the age of one.
Well - just because they have that in the preamble doesn't mean the law is
restricted to under age one. However, we all know that babies under one are
the ones that HAVE to nurse that very minute, and the older our babies are
the more patient they (sometimes) are... And those nursing past age two or
three, well, rarely do we want to make a big statement about it in public.
However, there is not as much to fear as you may think.
>Not only do they
>have to deal with the social issues of decency but also those of bf being
>sexual/abuse.
I think this depends on the age of the child. Nursing a 5 year old or a 7
year old in public could cause a bit of a stir, given that society does not
understand extended breastfeeding. BUT no social service agency in the US
has determined that extended breastfeeding is abuse/neglect. NONE. And the
issue has been dealt with through age 8! You might want to read my article
"Extended Breastfeeding and the Law", up on the web off of LLLI's webpage,
off of Breastfeeding and the Law.
In New York, people may be more concerned after the Denise Perrigo case of
years ago. But she was NOT found guilty of neglect for extended
breastfeeding. There were other issues in her case that resulted in a judge
ruling that way - it had to do with sexual issues, NOT extended
breastfeeding. Even the Judge was reported to say that he was breastfed
until age 3!
>This lends an aspect of fear (will my child be taken away?)
>to the already loaded issues of convenience/cleanliness/segregation etc.
>It is a shame that so strong a law implies (and it is not stated but is
>implied through the preface) that bf is only important through the first
>year.
The reason it talks about one year is that NY law was patterned after
Florida's 1993 law. NY took Fla. bill changed maybe one or two words, and
then put it under the civil rights act. But the preambles are NOT part of
the law. The only thing on the books in NY is:
"Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a mother may breast feed her
baby in any location, public or private, where the mother is otherwise
authorized to be, irrespective of whether or not the nipple of the mother's
breast is covered during or incidental to the breast feeding."
My disappointment with NY law was NOT the preambles (no one really looks at
those anyway), but two other issues: one is the language of 'baby' - Utah
solved that problem by not saying what we breastfeed - after all, we can't
breastfeed puppies, so why talk about what? Utah talks about "a woman's
breastfeeding". However, fear not because the word baby can be construed to
be as long as the child is breastfed - even an infant is a minor child in
many states... and the former surgeon general with her statement about a
'Lucky baby that gets to nurse till age 2...".).
My second gripe is that the actual law eliminated the language that Florida
kept in:
"Breastfeeding is an important and basic act of nurture which must be
encouarged in the interests of maternal and child health, and family values."
I wish that EVERY state would put this language on the books. Then it could
be used in more situations than just nursing in public.
Other bills since then have updated the preambles. Look at Nevada, who put
the preambles in their law! And they talk about the study indicating that if
all women breastfed all their kids till age 2, that breast cancer could
decline by 25% in this country! For a brief summary of other state's laws,
see my articles on legislation on the Web.
>This implies that if you go longer there is "something else going
>on" and plays into the hands of those feeling that bfing older children is
>deviant.
Not necessarily so, and we professionals should ASSUME and ENCOURAGE mothers
to NOT interpret the law in that way. Again, this is just in the preamble.
Not in the actual law. And just because it validates breastfeeding till age
one, doesn't mean it isn't important after one.
Liz Baldwin
_______________________
Elizabeth N. Baldwin, Esq. Baldwin & Friedman, P.A.
2020 N.E. 163rd St. # 300 N. Miami Beach, Fla. 33162-4970
Phone: 305-944-9100 Home office: 954-929-9090
Fax: 305-949-9029 [log in to unmask]
http://www.parentsplace.com/shopping/esq/index.html
Breastfeeding and the Law: http://www.lalecheleague.org/LawMain.html
|
