Is this legal? Breastfeeding ban in family court!

[Aero]

Unbelievable!

Weeeeeeell, I can see why it might be distracting to have a young baby in a courtroom. I don't think it's banning breastfeeding per se, just minors.

The sensible decision would be to adjourn until the mother could leave the baby for longer periods.

Shocking.

I thought the law said everyone has a right to breastfeed a child under 1 year old in public???

I don't think it actually does frasersmummy - seem to remember that's scotland only? Might well be wrong

I have no experience of these things tinker, so I guess that's probably what it is. The article doesn't make that clear though. It would indeed be sensible to adjourn until a later date in this case.

I know though when I was bfing ds1 this would have upset me as he was exclusively bf. When we did try to give him a bottle at four months old, he completely refused.

You're right Onebatmother. It is only in Scotland.

Oh, my youngest never took a bottle. Still bf her now at nearly 3 so am sympathetic.

Can we not express our solidarity in a meaningful way??

Hmm, can see both sides here - the court does have a job to do and has to consider how much it costs to run a court for a day, let alone taking intermittant breaks even for the best of reasons . You'd think that some sort of video link to an adjourning room would be possible or hold the proceedings in camera (f they aren't already). Failing that, postpone until she is able to leave her for longer periods.

It's a bloody court of order not a public place. How can that lady concentrate on contact isssues etc and feed baby at same time - bottle or breast. Daft.

A tiny breastfeeding baby is not disruptive. At that stage they are the easiest of alll. I went to the cinema loads when my dd was under 12 weeks.

I can see how the court could take the view that an 11 week old baby is old enough to be left with someone for a relatively short period BUT what if the baby were younger?

I'd be inclined to think that letting her take the baby in and breastfeed her would be the least worst option since otherwise it could be argued that she is being forced to choose between missing the hearing and feeding the baby by what is agreed to be the best possible method.

If you limited it to babies who are exclusively breastfed, what real problem would it cause?

no it really isn't that distracting tbh. it is family court - children are often present.
a court isn't a public place, but the right isn't law in England.
a video link would be a possibility but really there is no reason to exclude a tiny baby

Tbh, this is an area where bfing is by far done by the minority of new mums AFAIK, so I strongly feel that it should be encouraged wherever possible. To tell her she doesn't need to bf is plain wrong imo.

I do understand about court needing to do a job etc, but in this case, the issue should have been taken into account so the case could be heard when the baby is less dependent on such regular feeds.

Suppose they banned a pregnant woman from bringing the foetus with her?

If you believe as many do that breastfeeding is essential to the babies health then no one should be able to demand you be separated.

It's a natural function and there shouldn't need to be a law allowing it any more than there needs to be one allowing people to breathe.

How very strange.

Of course an 11 week old breastfed baby needs to be with her mother and breastfeeding
as and when.

Yeah, well, just adds to the general impression that there is an awful lot wrong with these so-called family courts if they don't even begin to have the tiniest understanding of b/f and the needs of a tiny baby and her mother. Why should a baby be prohibited from feeding to suit the convenience of the legal system - a system that is supposed to decide on what is in the best interests of children?!

just feel it's disgusting that the courts would make a mother choose between being in court and the method of feeding her child actually disgusted isn't a strong enough word if educated adults can't work around the few cries, suckles etc of a tiny baby something is very wrong yes it is a court but FGS it's just feeding a baby!!!!! not setting off fireworks

it's not just any court, it's a family court, FFS. With attitudes like that towards women and babies, what hope is there? Bet the bloody judge is the sort who thinks domestic violence is just an excuse women use to avoid seeing their exes, too.

Can see I was only one on other side of bf fence as it were here. I really could not concentrate on anything else but my child (and constant bf and fussing) at that age. Am thinking about it on practical level and have changed my mind from before. But still, it's daft. Can the lady not be separated for the shortest time possible. I just think there are times where bf is just not appropriate. Yes, it's natural and right, but just not appropriate and /dooable in a court. ?

I'm a family lawyer and I've never seen a child in court in a contact dispute.

I've seen plenty of mums though who will say that dad can't possibly have contact with their babies because they need to be at the breast constantly. Maybe I'm being cynical but if she's found time to go to the media and fight a court case she could find time to express or if the baby won't take expressed milk use a video link.

Ime the court would be objecting to the child being present, not the fact that the baby is being breastfed.

My personal guidelines on BF is to do it anywhere I would eat a sandwich... so not in a court IMHO....

The family court should be adjourning the case until the mother is able to go to court - not banning her feeding!

but that could be months - can you imagine desperately wanting to see your child and waiting for months for the chance even to argue about it?