Claridges Breastfeeding Policy

[ifgrandmahadawilly]

Aibu in posting this here, in the hopes that the people of mumsnet let Claridges know how unreasonable they are being?

www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-health/11267989/Mother-forced-to-cover-up-with-large-napkin-while-breastfeeding-at-Claridges.html

I believe that the woman concerned had a family tradition of meeting her mother and sister in Claridges for tea once a year as a Christmas treat. Her mother and sister had travelled down from the Midlands specially for this.

So now if you're well off you can't object to your baby being shoved under a napkin? From the sublime to the ridiculous.

Wealthy babies have rights too.. Oddest protest statement ever?

Good post, Chunderella. It's tedious, isn't it?

• she didn't complain the way I would have done, so she's in the wrong

• she said she was upset, but in the pics she's smiling, so she's in the wrong

• she was sitting in Claridges and I can't afford Claridges, so she's in the wrong

• she over-reacted and should have just walked out, so she's in the wrong

• she went to the papers (she didn't, actually), so she's in the wrong

• she's married to an actor, so she's in the wrong

*she did it just to draw attention to herself, so she's in the wrong

• I prefer using a shawl, so she's in the wrong

• I don't think babies should be allowed in posh venues, so she's in the wrong.

Tedious, anti-woman, and not-a-little-stupid....

I love 'the bogs are posh so she's in the wrong'.

I think you missed:

• if you are breast feeding you shouldn't leave the house until baby is weaned so she is in the wrong.

I've got another one!

• some men might see her and get an erection so she's in the wrong

And this one

• I have breastfed x children and never felt the need to do it in public so she's in the wrong

This one from our male friend last night:

• I don't masturbate in Claridge's restaurant, so she's in the wrong

Also 'breastfed babies only feed on a 3/4-hourly schedule which can be easily planned around, so she's in the wrong.'

LOL at Chunderella :) :)

Pterodacty, of course....because breastfeeding in Claridges shows she is disorganised and therefore, as before, she is in the wrong.

chunderella

You hero you!!!!

Dinosaur porn??

I am learning something new every day.

I too am shocked and saddened that so many people create such a 'thing' about the horror of seeing the tiniest bit of flesh when someone is breastfeeding. Like really. Get a grip. There's so many things to be properly upset about in the world....starving children, wars, global warming, Justin Bieber....I could go on....but breastfeeding? It's really not an issue. Stop spending so much time and energy getting hot under the collar about such a non-issue and start campaigning for something that really matters...like I dunno, world peace!

PhaedraIsMyName

I can see exactly why you feel offended by being singled out as having made supposedly the "most shocking" statement on this thread given some of the hateful vitriol that I've read on here.

Like I said earlier I totally understand how you felt. After anti-natal depression and then a severe breast infection requiring hospitalisation with DS2 I found the sight of breast-feeding made me physically shudder. I also found pregnant women horrible to be around and had to avoid talking to them as I found it very hard to think of anything positive to say.

Like you I knew this was a reaction to my own experience and I never made it anyone else's problem (although DH did sometimes have to remind me to change my facial expression when I was around pregnant women because he said I looked like I could smell something awful! )

5 years later I'm pregnant again and I'm even willing to give BF another shot (I had a much better experience the first time around so fingers crossed).

Anyone with any empathy or compassion should be able to recognise the difference between someone suffering from the after effects of a horrible, traumatic experience and some bigot who feels that their personal preferences should be respected above the rights of a mother to feed a baby.

Caprice is on 'This Week' at the moment talking about the breastfeeding at Claridges scenario. I guess they've brought her on as this week there have been Victoria's Secret fashion shows over here. She's saying shame is an intrinsical English thing..her & Andrew Neil bouncing convo back & forth but the general consensus is that, shame is used to control women. I believe that to be true. .

Coming to this thread late, but I'm in support of Mrs Burns. She was being discreet, and it is indeed true that it is the law that mothers can breastfeed their baby in public areas - it is illegal to ask them to leave. The hotel lawyer is probably going to say "it's not illegal to have a polite conversation about putting a large serviette conspicuously over her front" but they could be on thin ice trying to interpret it like that. Churches have also supported this law in saying that if families came and their baby started crying, the mother could nurse the baby during masses/services, and that would be allowed too.

It is very telling that none of the other customers appeared to have noticed a thing - or if they did, they didn't care in the slightest. So the Claridges waiting staff have basically given themselves unwanted publicity over nothing, and they've lost 3 regular annual customers, not to mention business from her husband and other family members. You'd basically have had to be spying on her for some time to be aware that she was feeding a baby - her outfit is certainly discreet and covers up more than adequately.

It's a bit rich getting this from a hotel where guests often swan about in the public areas skimpily dressed in "cutting edge" or "glamorous" fashions!

I'm looking forward to seeing what happens on Saturday when a number of breast feeding women are going to Claridges. Hopefully they will use this opportunity to redeem themselves.

Well I hope they booked a few months ago as we tried to book for tomorrow back in August and it was fully booked!

Naming and shaming wont put the very rich and their regulars off going back.

That's not the point, though, is it, brokenhearted? The point is simply to persuade Claridges to obey the law in future. And if they need any further incentive, it maybe brings home to them that if they do this again the next person may take legal action. If they haven't changed their policy voluntarily, their insurers have probably made them do so by now.

I wonder if the people with all their totally irrelevant bodily fluids arguments drink milk, eat cheese etc.....

The thing that's most objectionable and offensive is that the waiting staff thought they were acting on behalf of Claridges customers! How arrogant.

Hopefully lots of people who were in Claridges that day, and other clients who found out about the bf incident on the news will flood their General Manager with letters and emails of objection and say they will take their business elsewhere.

Not the reaction the waiting staff would have expected.