Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Mother sues for £20k for being discouraged from bf while the wave machine was on

1000 replies

sizeofalentil · 02/05/2016 12:54

Daily Mirror link to the story here.

I'm totally for breastfeeding wherever and whenever, but I wouldn't want to eat my sandwiches in a swimming pool - they are so germy, like a human soup, so not sure a swimming pool with a wave machine on would be the best place to bf. Plus, obviously in this case there was the waves.

I realise that getting out of the water, especially if she had other kids, with a hungry baby would be a massive faff, but wouldn't the wave machine splash the baby and make it choke?

Serious question: AIBU to think this? Is bf in a swimming pool a done thing? Genuinely curious.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
YorkieDorkie · 02/05/2016 13:15

BFing in a pool? You must be kidding! I can't think of anywhere I'd like to BF less! Nothing to cover up with, already looking gross in swimwear... No thanks! Feed as much as possible before the pool and then surely baby can last for as much time as needed in the pool. My DD is a frequent feeder but she'd go 2 hours with that much distraction!

Original poster
sizeofalentil · 02/05/2016 13:17

What about the chlorine in the water/ on your nipple? Or the germs/pee in the pool? Are these things to worry about?

OP posts:
SauvignonBlanche · 02/05/2016 13:17

YABU for linking to the Fail and YABU for not reading the OP which clearly stated the source of the link.

TheNotoriousPMT · 02/05/2016 13:19

Sorry everyone Blush Blush Blush

AdrenalineFudge · 02/05/2016 13:19

She's an utter halfwit looking to make a quick buck

Much like the other woman in the press not too long ago who had to throw away litres and litres of breast milk, presumably because her breasts weren't going to be accompanying her on the trip.

Sparklingbrook · 02/05/2016 13:21

Attention seeking and Hmm

honkinghaddock · 02/05/2016 13:22

She compares it to disability or racial discrimination. I don't think she understands what discrimination is.

allowlsthinkalot · 02/05/2016 13:22

I have fed in the swimming pool many, many times. A baby who is latched on can't swallow the water. A child will swallow swimming pool water every time they go swimming. If you're worried about the germs in the water or on your nipple, or the chlorine...does swimming pool water never go anywhere near your mouth or your child's mouth?!

Under the Equality Act she can breastfeed anywhere she likes. However, I haven't read the link. I don't see why the wave machine would make any difference or be a safety issue. Suing is a bit OTT but if asked not to breastfeed in the pool I would most certainly refuse and explain my rights.

Lunar1 · 02/05/2016 13:23

I think she's a complete prat. Anywhere you are allowed to eat you should be able to feed a baby. A pool is not an appropriate place to eat, for anyone.

I imagine the poor lifeguard wanted to keep the baby safe, FFS, it's a pool with a wave machine! Apart from the waves there will
Be people jumping, splashing and playing. They have paid to play in a wave pool, why should they have to be careful of someone breastfeeding!

Sparklingbrook · 02/05/2016 13:24

The wave machine can knock you off balance and I would imagine the baby was getting a faceful of water. Confused Just common sense to not feed while the wave machine is on.

allowlsthinkalot · 02/05/2016 13:27

www.laleche.org.uk/breastfeeding-at-a-swimming-pool/

Sparklingbrook · 02/05/2016 13:27

Maybe she wanted to give it a go on the waterslide next. Grin

OurBlanche · 02/05/2016 13:28

Well... in the story, in the link... she was not told to stop, she was offered a chair if it would be more comfortable.

Offering probably seemed like a good idea as the whole point of a wave machine is to make waves capable of moving human beings... not something you'd automatically think was good when bfing.

Her first foray into suing - which from the little bit of info included - was probably right but seems to have given her a bit of an overly touchy response,

FranHastings · 02/05/2016 13:28

You only have to sit by the side of a pool, with a deep area of waves when the wave machine is on and you will see the lifeguards jumping in more to rescue at any other time. I saw one lifeguard go in 5 times during one wave session to rescue kids and teenagers knocked off their feet and kids that had been sucked into the area by the currents. It is really not safe at all for a baby. Even further out, you could easily lose your balance.

AssembleTheMinions · 02/05/2016 13:28

You can't see why the wave machine being on would make a difference allow ? It's very easy to lose your balance, especially if you can't use your arms because you have a child in them.

soapboxqueen · 02/05/2016 13:28

She's allowed to feed wherever she likes. Whether other people would like to or feel comfortable bf in a pool, at the side of the pool, in the changing rooms or under a palm tree is irrelevant. She is allowed to make her own choice for her and her baby.

With regards to safety, if they felt her baby was in danger, I'm assuming they told all adults with babies to leave the pool while the waves were on. If they didn't, why did they assume that the only person who couldn't make a choice as to her child's safety was the breastfeeding mother?

If she was feeding and the baby's head was partially or sporadically under the water, they could have told her to move further to the shallower end.

Do I think it's worth £20k and a sad face report in the paper etc? Not a chance. I agree she's probably out for the money.

RedDenmanBrush · 02/05/2016 13:29

The baby has to get latched on though, plus my DD came on and off loads during a feed.

Totally stupid woman. She's damaging breastfeeding instead of supporting it.

Sparklingbrook · 02/05/2016 13:29

They sound an alarm when the wave machine is about to be turned on so plenty of time to get sorted.

FranHastings · 02/05/2016 13:29

Actually, maybe it was more than one lifeguard during the session. But it was 5 times. Shock

Fluffycloudland77 · 02/05/2016 13:29

The lawyer gets paid regardless of the outcome, that's why they took it on.

Lawyers have bills to pay too.

OurBlanche · 02/05/2016 13:30

The No Eating rule in the laleche link made me smile - breastmilk is not like other food, it won't contaminate a pool in the same way other food will - just like a cup fo tea won't contaminate one in the same was a a can of Fanta would, I suppose Smile

Stopyourhavering · 02/05/2016 13:30

I'm all for bf and fed all 3 of my dc ( a total of 51/2 yrs) but I would never have thought to feed in a swimming pool....yuk!... All those germs and not at all relaxing for mother or child

allowlsthinkalot · 02/05/2016 13:31

That makes no sense, Lunar!! They wouldn't need to be any more careful of someone breastfeeding than they would if someone holding a baby.

And the issue of eating in swimming pools is about contaminating the water. Doesn't apply to breastmilk. If it did then you'd have to ban lactating women from swimming pools.

IceBeing · 02/05/2016 13:32

So this is straight forward.

For the swimming pool in general

Is the baby in MORE danger from the chlorine, germs when breast feeding than when not?

Answer: the risk to the baby is the same regardless of breast feeding. So there is no reason to prevent feeding on safety grounds.

For the wave machine

Is the baby in MORE danger from the wave machine when breast feeding than when not?

Answer: well you might be able to hold the baby higher when not BFing, but it isn't like you can't interrupt the feed if an emergency strikes.

So the H&S issue is, are pools (with or without wave machines) safe for babies, yes or no. The BFing makes little or no difference to this.

My personal stance on this was that babies are safe in pools, but I wouldn't want to carry a

ScreenshottingIsNotJournalism · 02/05/2016 13:32

You can't see why the wave machine being on would make a difference allow ? It's very easy to lose your balance, especially if you can't use your arms because you have a child in them.

If that was the case they would have said "no babies in the pool when the wave machine is on" not "no breastfeeding"

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.