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.

@DarcyLewis

You can breastfeed your baby anywhere you can take your baby. Unfortunately, you can’t take your baby to a child-free hairdressers.

This.

Have to say that I can totally see both sides of this. I wouldn't mind a breastfed baby being in a salon at the same time as me ... it'll be feeding, not screaming the place down
But the salon has this particular policy, and that's their prerogative. They're probably worried about what would happen if something happened to your baby, with the hair dye or whatever. It would be on them, and that's not fair.
Actually, reminds me of one time I went to the hairdresser to get my greys covered. I had just been shopping, and had a gorgeous black Phase Eight dress in a carrier bag. They didn't offer me somewhere to put my bags, so I shoved them under the hairdressing unit (can't think of the word), where my hair was being done. I rolled down the bags and thought the dress would be impermeable.
Wrong! The dye somehow found its way in and my new dress was ruined, with bleach spots all over it. Gutted! So yeah, I guess it could be quite damaging to a baby's delicate skin
Hope you manage to get your hair done soon, OP. kids ruin everything

YANBU my lovely hairdresser said it was ok to bring the baby in to an appointment I had 6-8 weeks postpartum (I can't remember) if necessary.

It wasn't necessary in the end (as it may not be or you), and I'm a very loyal customer years on. And still breastfeeding

@EarringsandLipstick

I am not going to say I doubt Tier's qualification but I do take issue with this:

I appreciate you taking the time to write simple and accurate comments!

I don't think it is possible to be as definitive as Tier has been.

Discrimination can occur directly and indirectly. If OP cannot avail of a service as a breastfeeding mother, on the grounds that children are prohibited, that is indirect discrimination.

You wrote this before I did my last post explaining why this is wrong, but what you're talking about here relates to the public sector equality duty. That doesn't apply to a private business.

I remember my first haircut after having dd- dh was walking around town with her but she was screaming so he brought her to me and I just fed her on my lap. Nobody said anything and this was 17 years ago. I did know the hairdresser very well though, had been to her loads of times etc. I'd say go to a different hairdresser tbh rather than making a fuss at this one

To the lawyers here who have been explaining the equality act in more detail..... I feel that the laws around this subject are not clear cut. I would argue that it is discrimination to prevent the woman from feeding her baby on the premises, on the basis that a mother and breastfeeding baby are a dyad and so not subject to the same 'no child' policy. The baby needs the mother in order to eat and stay alive and the mother needs the baby to feed regularly to prevent engorgement, mastitis and to protect her supply. Therefore a woman WOULD be prevented from attending on the basis that she was breastfeeding. And that could be in breach of the equality act protecting woman during pregnancy and the 26 weeks postpartum

Where is this wonderful child free salon? I would love to become a customer! It's non stop baby talk where I go....

Bloody good for them for sticking to their guns. They have a childfree policy and yes that includes babies who are breastfed. It was an absolute cheek to expect them to bend the rules for you.

I don’t think they handled it well and I have breastfed both of my children so understand the difficulty. However, for a luxury (which a haircut is!) I think you should wait until baby is happy with a bottle or can go longer without you

I'm so surprised at the responses here. And people wonder why we have some of the lowest breastfeeding rates in Europe.
YANBU

Just find a good mobile hairdresser. I have had many a haircut in the comfort of my own home with my baby breastfeeding, sitting in his bouncy chair, toddling round the room etc. Much easier.

YABU and entitled. The salon has a child free policy. That should be respected. Children are not welcome everywhere and that is ok.

YABU. The hairdressers policy sounds sensible.

Some options. Do you have a car? If it’s only for 15 minutes maybe you could ask for a break halfway through and feed in the car and nip back. Alternatively you can feed the baby in a sling or maybe do cut and colour on two separate days. Or use a mobile hairdresser.

I remember going for a walk-in hair cut when I was out shopping with my 2 month old. I was fairly sure he wouldn't want feeding as he slept like clockwork and it was fine. They had no problem with a baby. I was really nervous though, I'd have been embarrassed trying to get him latched (super hard as he was tongue tied). The current situation is different in all sorts of ways, so I think a bit YABU.

This happened to me with dc , I had to go home with wet hair as he was screaming and wouldn’t take a bottle. My friend went home and had highlights which were the same before and after as she had to rush out before the dye had set in.
I wouldn’t have pushed to bf in a hairdressers though. I see it as an adult space and people are trying to relax and don’t want babies in there. Absolutely, I bf everywhere else no issues but i don’t think it’s fair to push it when the hairdresser has a no child rule.

I'm really surprised by how many pp think yabu! Are breastfeeding mothers not allowed a haircut? Wtf!

I see no issue with you sitting in the waiting room breastfeeding. But if you are sitting on the hairdressing chair that means the hairdresser can't cut, blow-dry, or dye your hair. So that means they lose money while you breastfeed.

Congratulations on breastfeeding.

I think you are being unreasonable. The time to discuss this was at the time of the appointment being arranged so that either a plan could have been made or you could have made an appointment at a different salon. It was unfair of you to foist this on the salon as a fait accompli. If it was so important to use this salon you should have ensured baby would have taken EBM before attending the appointment. It would have taken the apprehension away so you could enjoy the ‘pamper’ more.

Hope your hair is lovely

@namechangeApril21 I didn't say anything about it being discrimination 🙄 just that I don't think it's unreasonable to ask if a baby can come in and feed for 15 mins if necessary.

I have three children, including a 9 month old baby so yeah I get wanting to be in "adult spaces" but come on, it wouldn't harm you if there was a newborn in the same room as you feeding for 10 mins would it? Not sure why you assume a newborn being fed would be a "whinging kid" tbh

I'd say for your own peaceful child free pamper experience to try the bottle before hand and see how you go! Surely a few hours alone with adult company sounds perfect ☺️

YANBU

You are not being unreasonable to think it’s not a big deal like a toddler and that they should have no way embarrassed you. That’s terrible client service. Hearing what other people are saying except of course swallowing hair I mean a bit dramatic but there is some logic and if someone sees that an tells her friend oh you can take your baby there etc. it will set a precedent. Some mums will have gone to just get away and if your baby cries what then etc. a great opportunity for the hairdresser to say something like you know what we value you so Tuesday afternoons are for mums with their babies or something. Remember you’re fighting for your right for your baby to be fed they’re fighting to keep their businesses alive after lockdown. Everyone is a bit frazzled. Sorry you had this though.

@Somethingsnappy

To the lawyers here who have been explaining the equality act in more detail..... I feel that the laws around this subject are not clear cut. I would argue that it is discrimination to prevent the woman from feeding her baby on the premises, on the basis that a mother and breastfeeding baby are a dyad and so not subject to the same 'no child' policy. The baby needs the mother in order to eat and stay alive and the mother needs the baby to feed regularly to prevent engorgement, mastitis and to protect her supply. Therefore a woman WOULD be prevented from attending on the basis that she was breastfeeding. And that could be in breach of the equality act protecting woman during pregnancy and the 26 weeks postpartum

It would be discrimination to prevent a baby who had already been allowed in from being fed on the premises. It isn't a breach of the Equality Act to refuse to allow certain age groups in, even when this disproportionately affects people with a protected characteristic. I understand that you might feel this is unfair, but because this is a private business, it isn't illegal.

And indeed a lot of age limits will disproportionately exclude people with protected characteristics, for example an over 75s event would be more likely to include non-white people and males, because the over 75 population is more female and white than the general population. But a private business would not be breaking the law to hold an over 75s event despite this, nor would they have any obligation to ensure males and non-white people have the same access to their events. Despite sex and race both being protected characteristics.

Sorry, should have said an over 75s event would be more likely to exclude non-white people and males. Not include!

Discrimination can occur directly and indirectly. If OP cannot avail of a service as a breastfeeding mother, on the grounds that children are prohibited, that is indirect discrimination.

Yes, I'm sure they have the blanket rule of no children allowed to indirectly discriminate solely against breastfeeding mothers 🙄

@AppleAppleAppleApple no normal human would starve themselves to death, calm down