To expect an exception for bf baby?

[PatchItUp]

I have a 2 month old baby who is exclusively breastfed. Today I’ve got a hairdressers appointment for the first time in months and I’ve been really looking forward to it. I’m having cut and colour so may be a few hours. I’d expressed some milk and my DH is going to try giving him a bottle for the first time.

I mentioned when I arrived that this was the situation and that if he refused the bottle, my DH would bring the baby in to be fed then take him away again. I’ve done this in a different hairdressers with my older children before with no problem.

The receptionist said there was a no children policy and therefore I wouldn’t be able to bring him in. I was a bit shocked and reiterated that he is very young, exclusively bf and couldn’t be left hungry if he wouldn’t take the bottle. She said she would check with the hairdresser.

Hairdresser came and said much the same thing - no child policy, if we make an exception for you we have to make one for everyone and customers will complain. I said again that I understood a no child policy to prevent toddlers running around or making noise but this would be a small baby coming in for a feed and then out again. She said she would check with the manager.

Manager heard and said from across the room ‘there’s nowhere for you to go’. By this point all the customers are listening and I felt really conscious and upset about being argued with by three different members of staff. I was fairly sure that this was illegal refusal of services but not totally confident so I said ‘I don’t need to go anywhere, he’ll just be on my lap, have a feed then go again’. They all again said it’s company policy, they can’t make any exceptions. The manager said ‘what’s the percentage chance he’ll need to come in?’ And one of the women said ‘there’s a good chance he’ll just take the bottle so why not take the risk?’ I replied I couldn’t take the risk that he wouldn’t take it and would be left screaming and hungry and not allowed to come in.

Eventually the manager reluctantly agreed that he could be brought in if necessary but it was clear they were really unhappy about it and it’s soured the experience for me massively.

When I checked on my phone it seems they’re acting illegally in refusing services to a breastfeeding mother, although I guess they could argue it’s down to chemical hazards (although this wasn’t mentioned at any time as a reason).

So - was I being unreasonable? And would I be unreasonable to complain later on?

I know some people will say I should have just left but my hair is such a state!! And I’ve been really looking forward to having it cut and having a few hours to myself.

You should have just got a cut and been done quicker.

A no children rule has to apply to everyone or no one

It really doesn't. Reference legislation.

(Once more).

Can't believe the dicks telling you that YABU!!

Totally ILLEGAL AND DISCRIMINATORY of the hairdressers. YADNBU

@Tier20million

The number of people fulminating about the Equality Act without understanding it is rather worrying. As a solicitor, I'm frequently aghast at the incorrect legal advice given on here, but this seems to be a particularly badly understood area.

It is not unlawful to deny entry or services to a breastfeeding woman, provided you aren't doing it because she's breastfeeding. Being a breastfeeding mother does not mean a private business loses the right to impose age restrictions that exclude you and/or baby. Breastfeeding doesn't give you any rights you wouldn't have if not breastfeeding, it merely prevents you from losing any because you're doing it. This means a breastfeeding mother can absolutely be denied service and entry and it still be legal. It will depend on the reason.

The effect of this is that the salon are not in breach of the Equality Act if they refuse to allow any babies in and thus do not accommodate a breastfeeding mother. If however they would allow in a formula fed baby, they are, because then it would be about the breastfeeding.

It really is quite a minimal duty the law imposes wrt bf rights, which is why it's so depressing that sometimes businesses fail to even achieve this. They aren't obligated to anything to facilitate bf, they can have policies that would exclude all breastfeeding mothers and babies such as being only over 65s, male only, no under 18s etc.

The situation is different from the duty of employers towards employees and also public bodies, both of which I've seen mentioned. It also differs from protected characteristics like race, because it's not a breach of the Equality Act to deny service on the grounds of age.

On the issue of whether they're being dicks, that one's a matter of opinion.

Thank you, I was trying to make this point earlier but not as eloquently.

If the discrimination is because of breastfeeding I would defend the mother to the hilt. If it is because they feel entitled to bring their baby or toddler wherever they please including child-free places I would not.

It wouldn’t be absurd at all tier

If a breastfeeding mother was under 16 and wished to take her child to an under 16 event, she could.

YABU - why go this this hairdressers when plenty of others allow children? Or get a mobile hairdresser to come to your home?

@Lemonelderflower

Interesting that’s your first post on MN tier

And it is wrong.

It isn't actually, check with @MNHQ. I've been here years.

And I'm right, you're wrong. If you disagree, post the specific section of the Equality Act that states breastfeeding dyads are entitled to access any private business regardless of age restrictions.

@PatchItUp

Thanks for all the viewpoints. Even the one that said my baby would have to learn to like a bottle if I dropped dead! I hope so, rather than starve, but as I’m not dead, just having my hair done, I am able to be a bit more accommodating to his needs.

Totally appreciate that many of you want your child free time uninterrupted, and have waited a long time for a hair cut too. I just do feel that a tiny breastfed baby is not the same as a toddler running around, and yes, I can be confident it would only have taken 15 minutes, and no, I wouldn’t expect the hairdresser to stop what they were doing, and yes, I am willing to take the risk of my baby eating my hair, because it’s non existent. For those of you lambasting me for not choosing a salon with a child friendly policy, I didn’t know they had a policy against children when I booked. In fact the manager is from my old salon where they did allow babies in. Had I known, I would have spoken to them before booking. I know lots of you are worried about my baby being blinded or stabbed by falling scissors or suffocated by fumes or ingesting hair. I’m not worried about any of those things, maybe that makes me too relaxed, I’m ok with it though. In the event, he wasn’t put it any danger as he took the bottle, so...phew.

I would just like to add that it’s been a rough year for all of us mental health wise and certainly it’s been no picnic being pregnant and giving birth while looking after my other children and working during the hardest year of my life, I know this is the same for many of us. But it’s worth bearing in mind that I am just a normal person wanting to have my hair done and also feed my baby before you call me

Entitled
Ignorant
Selfish
Self obsessed
Karen
Ridiculous
PFB
Thinking the world revolves around me
Etc etc etc. I just wanted to get my hair done whilst also being a parent to a small baby. Yes, next time I will check the policy. Or book a mobile hairdresser. Or practice more with the bottle. All fair points. But maybe you don’t need to speak to me like shit for just asking if it was unreasonable to expect the salon to comply with their legal obligation not to refuse me service because I’m breastfeeding, at a time when it’s particularly hard to be a new mother.

It does seem some people just hate any ‘special treatment’ afforded to people who are breastfeeding - it’s not because I think I’m special. It’s because I’m giving my child food out of my body and that makes life more difficult in some aspects. I don’t think I’m better than anyone else I’m just temporarily in a different situation.

I’ll leave this here as I know I’ll get loads more grief about being a special snowflake but legally they were in the wrong even if morally you feel they weren’t. Thanks all.

What an eloquent post OP. There needs to be a whole culture change around breastfeeding before we increase rates of it in the UK. There should be exceptions for tiny babies.

Why is "no children" such a hard rule for people to understand? I work somewhere where it is illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to come over the door. That includes babies and small children. So should we make an exception for breastfeeding mothers because denying them service is apparently also illegal? Which law takes priority?

@1Morewineplease

Makes me wonder where this breastfeeding whenever, wherever will end. Maybe dentists will have to stop, mid procedure, to accommodate a breast fed baby. Maybe the cashier at the supermarket must stop for a quick latch on. Maybe the post office cashier should hang on while you latch your baby on. Maybe your baby should be allowed to step out of the witness box , while you're giving evidence in court, so that you can feed your child.

I don't know, how on Earth did we ever cope?

This is hilarious (or bleakly depressing).

Actually the answer is 'yes' to all these scenarios.

Most are unlikely, as reasonable people make provisions for themselves, the situation & the baby. Like OP did

But if ever I was in a situation with a crying hungry EBF baby, of course I'd stop & feed them. What else would I do? 🤷🏻‍♀️

I’m sure you have. Strange thread to name change for.

It’s been repeatedly posted.

There are two instances when a breastfeeding mother can be denied entry. This is not one of them.

@Lemonelderflower

It wouldn’t be absurd at all tier

If a breastfeeding mother was under 16 and wished to take her child to an under 16 event, she could.

Yes, she could. If however she was over 16, which I accept I should've made clearer in my example, the venue would be able to deny her access without being in breach of the Equality Act and it would be absurd if they couldn't. You do not understand the law you are attempting to argue about.

Crikey you’ve had some mean comments here and I haven’t read the whole thread. When my baby was a newborn I got a mobile hairdresser over, have never looked back, sometimes I miss the salon experience and having a break from kids but actually in your situation that might be easier for a little.

I think you’re the one who doesn’t understand it tier

I will concede I’ve no idea what you were talking about with the under 16 disco mind you.

@OrchidLass

YABU. Massively. I didn't expect exceptions for my babies because they were breastfed and nor should you.

I'm sorry to hear that Orchid. Were you unaware of the legislation that provided such exceptions?

OP has every right to avail of this protection.

@Lemonelderflower

I’m sure you have. Strange thread to name change for.

It’s been repeatedly posted.

There are two instances when a breastfeeding mother can be denied entry. This is not one of them.

You don't even have sufficient information to ascertain whether she could lawfully be denied entry, because we don't know if the no babies ban is equally applied to all of them or just the breastfed ones.

@Lemonelderflower

I think you’re the one who doesn’t understand it tier

I will concede I’ve no idea what you were talking about with the under 16 disco mind you.

You evidently have no idea what any of us who have accurately explained the Equality Act are talking about.

This thread is so sad. A parent just wanting to breastfeed a newborn baby in a hairdressers, and the venom she receives in response is astonishing.

Yes.

As well as the utter ignorance about the legislation that protects women & babies in just this situation (& refusal to accept it when told).

No tier

I think I have decided to stop using MN on the basis of this thread.

I understand the mods have a difficult job but comments like the ones the OP has received should not be allowed to stand.

I do not wish to post on a website that is clearly OK with misogynistic comments like ‘Karen.’

we all know that the law is on her side , but we can also disagree as well and see other option

It simply doesn't matter @worriedatthemoment

If the law protects breastfeeding mothers' rights, then it does. She is entitled to avail of those rights. Which means, by definition, she is NBU.

I find it utterly depressing, as a woman and a mother yourself, you would even want to look to reduce women's rights.

@Lemonelderflower

No tier

Yes, lemon. You do not understand the Equality Act.

@Tier20million

The number of people fulminating about the Equality Act without understanding it is rather worrying. As a solicitor, I'm frequently aghast at the incorrect legal advice given on here, but this seems to be a particularly badly understood area.

It is not unlawful to deny entry or services to a breastfeeding woman, provided you aren't doing it because she's breastfeeding. Being a breastfeeding mother does not mean a private business loses the right to impose age restrictions that exclude you and/or baby. Breastfeeding doesn't give you any rights you wouldn't have if not breastfeeding, it merely prevents you from losing any because you're doing it. This means a breastfeeding mother can absolutely be denied service and entry and it still be legal. It will depend on the reason.

The effect of this is that the salon are not in breach of the Equality Act if they refuse to allow any babies in and thus do not accommodate a breastfeeding mother. If however they would allow in a formula fed baby, they are, because then it would be about the breastfeeding.

It really is quite a minimal duty the law imposes wrt bf rights, which is why it's so depressing that sometimes businesses fail to even achieve this. They aren't obligated to anything to facilitate bf, they can have policies that would exclude all breastfeeding mothers and babies such as being only over 65s, male only, no under 18s etc.

The situation is different from the duty of employers towards employees and also public bodies, both of which I've seen mentioned. It also differs from protected characteristics like race, because it's not a breach of the Equality Act to deny service on the grounds of age.

On the issue of whether they're being dicks, that one's a matter of opinion.

V surprised to hear that you're a solicitor - hope you've got good PI because this post is 100 percent wrong - the EqA applies both to employment and provision of services (a solicitor would know that perfectly well).

Thank you stacks

@PatchItUp

Thanks for all the viewpoints. Even the one that said my baby would have to learn to like a bottle if I dropped dead! I hope so, rather than starve, but as I’m not dead, just having my hair done, I am able to be a bit more accommodating to his needs.

Totally appreciate that many of you want your child free time uninterrupted, and have waited a long time for a hair cut too. I just do feel that a tiny breastfed baby is not the same as a toddler running around, and yes, I can be confident it would only have taken 15 minutes, and no, I wouldn’t expect the hairdresser to stop what they were doing, and yes, I am willing to take the risk of my baby eating my hair, because it’s non existent. For those of you lambasting me for not choosing a salon with a child friendly policy, I didn’t know they had a policy against children when I booked. In fact the manager is from my old salon where they did allow babies in. Had I known, I would have spoken to them before booking. I know lots of you are worried about my baby being blinded or stabbed by falling scissors or suffocated by fumes or ingesting hair. I’m not worried about any of those things, maybe that makes me too relaxed, I’m ok with it though. In the event, he wasn’t put it any danger as he took the bottle, so...phew.

I would just like to add that it’s been a rough year for all of us mental health wise and certainly it’s been no picnic being pregnant and giving birth while looking after my other children and working during the hardest year of my life, I know this is the same for many of us. But it’s worth bearing in mind that I am just a normal person wanting to have my hair done and also feed my baby before you call me

Entitled
Ignorant
Selfish
Self obsessed
Karen
Ridiculous
PFB
Thinking the world revolves around me
Etc etc etc. I just wanted to get my hair done whilst also being a parent to a small baby. Yes, next time I will check the policy. Or book a mobile hairdresser. Or practice more with the bottle. All fair points. But maybe you don’t need to speak to me like shit for just asking if it was unreasonable to expect the salon to comply with their legal obligation not to refuse me service because I’m breastfeeding, at a time when it’s particularly hard to be a new mother.

It does seem some people just hate any ‘special treatment’ afforded to people who are breastfeeding - it’s not because I think I’m special. It’s because I’m giving my child food out of my body and that makes life more difficult in some aspects. I don’t think I’m better than anyone else I’m just temporarily in a different situation.

I’ll leave this here as I know I’ll get loads more grief about being a special snowflake but legally they were in the wrong even if morally you feel they weren’t. Thanks all.

Well put OP.

I couldn't agree more. I hope you're relaxed at home with your new 'do' & baby is all cuddled up & happy. 💐💐💐