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

[sizeofalentil]

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.

I wouldn't like to swim in a can of Fanta, a cup or tea nor breastmilk.

What are you talking about, Blanche?!

Ice that would be my take on it too. There is little issue I can see with bfing in a pool. But with a wave machine on... that would just make things difficult.

It would be interesting to know how the request/s was/were phrased, as far as I can see she was NOT asked to STOP. So what would she be suing for?

You'd better ban lactating women then, Red. There will be breastmilk in swimming pools whether or not one breastfeeds!! There will also be worse. That's why the pool is chemically treated.

Sorry owls I thought that was fairly obvious!

Can't see any health and safety problems to breastfeeding in a swimming pool.

I would worry about taking a baby into an area with a wave machine. Though as others have pointed out, there wasn't a 'no babies' rule.

Not really!!

YABU for linking to the Fail.

How can she be unreasonable for linking to the most popular newspaper on Mumsnet?

As for the woman in the story, she sounds like an attention seeking twat.

The life guard would want to be able to see that the babies face isn't in the water, when people are playing this is easy not so much when they are snuggled up breastfeeding. How long do you think it would take a baby to drown. The life guard has no idea if the mum is the most responsible person in the world of a complete idiot.

The person responsible for the pool safety was the tide guard, and they didn't think this was safe. She wasn't asked to leave, just sit t the side while she fed.

Yes and you can quickly raise a baby out of the water if a wave hits, it's not quite as easy if you have a latched on baby however.

Given all the !!! I am assuming you think I mean that breastmilk is a horrible contaminant and should be banned from pools.

No.

I was just commenting that the reasoning in the link is a bit silly. Anything that contaminates a pool - as in anything that isn't water an the chemicals, including human bodies and anything emanating from them - is legally considered to be a contaminant in public pools. That is why they are dipped and checked regularly.

The seeming assertion that breast milk is a contaminant unlike any other just struck me as one of those rather silly statements, nonsensical given what the word actually means.

What a nutter! I was knocked over when I was in the shallow end of a pool with the wave machine on. I wouldn't have been wanting to hold my baby sitting in the waves never mind feeding him.

Just because something is legal and allowed does not mean it is a sensible thing to do.

I'm really against all this 'banning' that seems to be becoming more and more common, but it does depend on people having a degree of common sense, which in this case appears to be missing. Then again. while the courts entertain cases like this, the nanny state will have little option but to pass laws...

I breastfed for 2 years. Would never dream about BF in a swimming pool. That's totally loony.

Lunar then surely they should have a rule that either all babies are banned when the waves are on or all babies should be carried vertically when the waves are on. Any argument about bf eg position, germs etc could be said of any baby in there. So why only the rule for her?

but if asked not to breastfeed in the pool I would most certainly refuse and explain my rights

And to hell with the 'rights' of anyone else hey
You sound as entitled as her.

There couldn't possibly be any precedent

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't that mum who lied about the Primark security guard snatching her baby also claim she was stopped from BF in a pool?

Can't believe she would even think it was a good idea

I got sucked in under the waves years ago in a wave pool and had to hauled out by a lifeguard. I was a reasonably strong swimmer then and still went under, it was pretty scary tbh.

So bf or not bf I'd be really wary of having a younger child in a wave pool let alone a baby.

Does everything need to be banned soapbox? Or can we make judgment decisions regarding safety. If I was that life guard I'd feel very uncomfortable about not being able to see that babies face and mouth. I'd have done the same, because I could live with someone being pissed off with me, I couldn't live with a potential drowned baby on my watch.

i prefer to breast feed while riding a bicycle myself...

It's my right to do whatever I like, how dare anyone think it's not safe.

"describes herself as a 'vegan lactivist' and is a breastfeeding support volunteer, was instead asked to use a chair by the swimming pool instead of feeding in the water."

So she wasnt asked to stop feeding, she was asked to move somewhere safer for her baby - again what would she have done if the baby threw up in the pool? she's not answered that - why would you even want to feed your baby in a swimming pool? full of wee and chemicals.....

From what I've read she wasn't told to stop, was she? It was just suggested that she might be more comfortable sat poolside than in the waves, which to me is a perfectly reasonable assumption to make.