Bill will protect mothers' rights to nurse babies in public
On Dec. 2, there was a hearing in Lansing in the House Judiciary Committee on bill HB 5515 that I attended. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Rebekah Warren, D-53rd District, will allow women to breastfeed in public without being asked to move, leave, or fear arrest for trespassing when told to leave.
The bill adds to the existing Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights bill protections for women breastfeeding in public and allows them the freedom to do so without fear, harassment, or arrest.
Women with children know that a baby can be fed at home and be hungry an hour later. Trips away from the house can take time and babies will need to be fed at some point. Must women be forced to either stay home, or pack a bottle just to leave the house when breast milk requires no additional packaging, preparation or cost?
Would you eat in the bathroom let alone deal with the germs in the washroom?
There's an expense and time constraint to preparing bottles when breast milk is naturally and conveniently stored. There are also health benefits that are not associated with formula. What really made me side with these women was hearing how they've been kicked out of public parks, pools, schools, stores even while being discreet.
We've heard about the Harper Woods woman who was feeding her 4-week-old baby in a Target store recently and the police were called and she had to leave. Well, she's not the only one. Other women like her testified in Lansing.
A woman at the hearing testified she was kicked out of the Detroit Institute of Arts while being discreet and covered, while in a room surrounded by nudes in art.
Nursing mothers as a class need to be protected. But this is more than about nursing mothers. This is about women's rights. If you subdivide women into a class and begin to not protect that class, you are decreasing women's rights and equal protections under the law.
Michigan has already amended its public indecency act to state that breastfeeding is NOT public nudity and a woman cannot be arrested for it (because women were being arrested for it.) Now, they face trespassing laws just for feeding their child.
The bill does not legislate discretion or the amount of skin that can be shown. The bill does not require businesses to create nursing rooms. And if such rooms existed, a woman could still nurse where convenient for her.
Protect women's rights under the equal protection clause of the U.S. and Michigan constitutions. Protect a nursing child from public harassment. Support the House bill 5515 by writing to your State Representative and Senator in support of the bill. It's not law yet. The bill passed out of committee; will go to the House floor for a vote; if passed, to the Senate committee, then the Senate floor for a vote, and to the governor for signature.
Joanne Marbut is a resident of Ypsilanti and a member of the Washtenaw County Democrats. She is “a mother to seven cats.”
Comments
Gold
Fri, Jan 8, 2010 : 3:38 a.m.
Thanks so much for the knowledge!
shepard145
Thu, Dec 24, 2009 : 10:58 a.m.
The first presidential election in the United States was held in 1789. In 1920, 131 years later, men in the Senate granted women the right to vote without restriction by adopting the 19th amendment. Flash forward today and this Bill makes women legislators look like a bunch of fragile amateurs running around in the state house looking to bestow special rights on each other. Comparing the civil rights movement to breast feeding mothers is as laughable as it is insulting. A shop owner can deny anyone service if they don't wear a shirt or shoes. Will Mrs Warren's next proposal make the barefooted women a protected class in Michigan? This Bill would make "nursing mother", AN ACTIVITY, a protected class!! Said another way, it takes away the rights of business owners to remove nursing women who may be doing their business in a fashion that is disruptive, in poor taste, unsanitary or just trashy. Mrs Warren, a democrat, admits that while it is explicit about what will happen to business owners who would dare "break this law", it says nothing about the conduct of nursing mothers breast feeding their babies! Topless? Sure, why not?...the bill sets NO LIMITS.....because that is "for the courts to decide". Imagine that, another democrat making frivolous laws who "wants the court to decide"!
shepard145
Sun, Dec 20, 2009 : 12:17 a.m.
This Bill is an embarrassment to the state and to women legislators in general. This makes women, who men granted parity fairly recently in our state's history, look like a bunch of fragile amateurs running around in the state house looking to bestow ridiculous rights to their "sistas". Nursing mothers a protected class!!? Are you serious? Comparing the civil rights movement to breast feeding mothers is as laughable as it is insulting. Business owners cannot bar people based on race or gender (protected classes) but certainly if patrons are doing something that is disruptive to other customers, they certainly should have a right as CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES, to remove the disruption. One example is "no shirt, no shoes, no service" - heard of it?? This Bill would make "nursing mother", AN ACTIVITY, a protected class!! At the same time, it takes away the rights of business owners to remove nursing women who may be doing their business in a fashion that is disruptive, in poor taste, unsanitary or just trashy. The "woman" (surprise) who is pushing this embarrassment of a Bill, admits that while it is very explicit about punitive penalties for business owners who would dare "break this law", it says nothing about how far some middle aged, 300lb, mustached earth mother can go while breast feeding her baby! Topless? Sure, why not?...the bill sets NO LIMITS FOR CONDUCT....because that is "for the courts to decide". Imagine that, another democrat writing frivolous laws who "wants the court to decide"! What's next, are people who don't want to wear shoes at the mall are going to demand that their bare feet make them a "protected class" in Michigan with special rights!?
JordynsMom
Sat, Dec 19, 2009 : 3:45 p.m.
Dear VoiceofReason: If covering up discreetly was the only issue, then perhaps you would be right that this is a non-issue. However, as the article above noted, women are still being harassed even when being discreet (e.g., the women who was arrested while discreetly nursing her baby at the DIA). As a nursing mother, I can tell you firsthand how difficult it is to nurse in public. It's not easy to latch your baby on to the breast discreetly without the accidental skin-flashing. And what about babies who refuse to be covered by blankets? It's not as easy as you may imagine. I'm the type that ALWAYS covers up, but still I get looks of disgust from men and women alike. Do people look disgustedly at mothers who bottle-feed their babies? Babies needs to eat. Why is one disgusting while the other is "normal," "acceptable?" Nursing mothers ARE discriminated against - even in situations where a woman isn't asked to leave, they have to deal with the looks. My life is so much easier when I have private places to feed my little one. I doubt legislature will ever mandate that such places be provided, so it would be such a relief to know that I can feed by baby in the most natural way possible WITHOUT the discriminatory behavior on the part of the viewing public.
voiceofreason
Tue, Dec 15, 2009 : 6:49 p.m.
Barb, Please explain which right is being violated here. The failure in logic is that nursing mothers are somehow a special class of people worthy of special rights. However, this assumption is contingent upon the public actually having knowledge and visible evidence that the mother is indeed nursing a child. Because a strategically placed blanket can eliminate the public from even knowing, this is rendered a non-issue. The fact that she even mentions businesses having compulsory "nursing rooms" is laughable.
Barb
Tue, Dec 15, 2009 : 4:07 p.m.
Logical fallacies? Care to be more specific? I think if people's rights are being violated, our legislature would be remiss if it didn't concern itself with the issue.
voiceofreason
Tue, Dec 15, 2009 : 1:31 p.m.
Aside from the logical fallacies contained in this column, I wonder whether this topic is really something the Michigan legislature should be concerning itself with.