Pregnant Woman Told To Leave Pub

[stinkymonkey]

the nanny state continues

I can understand where the landlord is coming from, though I don't agree with what she did.

That's the point though lissie - according to the letter of the law, any landlord could refuse to serve people in hats, or people with freckles if they wanted to. Which would clearly be an insane misuse of a law whose spirit and purpose is to prevent fallout from seriously excessive drinking.

The basis on which this law works is that a visibly inebriated person cannot make a sensible adult judgement about how much is too much, so they need the purveyor of the alcohol to step in and impose common sense. To twist this to justify denying a pregnant adult a second glass of beer is just ridiculous. And rather worrying.

But I don't think they are allowed to discriminate! Which is what this is!

Exaclty WSH, I completely agree with people who say that drinking this much when pg was stupid! There's no way that's a choice I'd make. But people make choices differently from me all the time, unless there's a law to cover it or definite proof that what they are doing is harmful it's none of y business.
OTOH....
gets back on fence

In this case it's not about whether it was a GOOD decision to (try to) have a pint and a half of lager, but about who has the right to MAKE that decision.

fwiw in their situation I might have agreed with the landlady/manager that a pint and a half was maybe pushing it from a health point of view (but I don't know all the circumstances). But that would have been my PERSONAL opinion, based on what I would do myself, and not based on any medical proof. And unless she asked me for my opinion on the matter when ordering her drink, I wouldn't dream of giving it.

And maybe it's not illegal to refuse to serve someone on the basis that you're not personally comfortable with it, but equally that person has a right to take offence at your making that judgement FOR them, and make a great big fuss, as this woman is doing.

ffs, im just repeating myself here, nice to have a debate that i can use in uni tomorrow though

Message withdrawn

Vsamanos - if the underlying reason that you were uncomfortable serving someone was discriminatory in nature, you wouldn't be legally entitled to refuse them service. You couldn't, for instance, legally refuse on the basis that you were uncomfortable serving black people.

sorry, Vamanos

I wish more people in society were "do-gooders". People should stand up for what they believe. I don't think anyone on this thread believes that it is a good idea to drink more than a pint of lager when you are pregnant. Society should put pressure on people who do stupid things to desist. There doesn't need to be a law about it, just a concensus.

Vamanos - no I would have had soft drink who ever I was with.
I work in a pub and I don't think I have ever had a pregnant woman ask for an alcoholic drink but if they had I don't think I would refuse to serve them.
We do however refuse the drunks etc when we feel they have had enough and most of them accept that without a problem

so if your own personal belief is that you shouldn't drink at all during pregnancy and you invited some friends round, one of whom is pregnant, would you refuse her a small drink if she asked?

and when we refuse one we generally will refuse the whole group so in our pub none of her group would have got another drink!

Message withdrawn

no if a friend wants a drink they can do, I had the odd glass of wine during pregnancy.

sorry whoops, that wasn't really aimed at you, just trying to understand how far people feel is appropriate to push their choices onto others when there's no specific evidence.

By christiana on Wed 01-Apr-09 17:03:29
"What happens lissielou if things change in future and it's recommended to drink 2 pints a day or something. Will you just start drinking 2 pints a day? Or will you question the new evidence and whether there is a scientific basis for it?"

i would start drinking two pints a day. because i owe it to my unborn child to do what is best for them according to the guidelines at the time. dont think that makes me a "jobsworth" but a responsible person doing what i feel is best.

"People who believe in jobsworth style 'rights' of the landlord to protect the 'unborn child' are the kind that think that laws and the current recommendations are just to be taken at face value without any kind of intelligent question or debate, without looking at the evidence and so on. What about common sense too!"

actually, the landlord was exercising his right to adhere to objectives as set in place by the government, objectives that are there for a reason. alcohol affects you differently while you are pg and none of us were there and knows the full story, only what has been reported by the "wounded party". and actually i think it takes more common sense to say "no, i feel that you have had enough" than "ah, its your body, do what you want"

"If this is how EVERYONE thought then we would have serious problems - things would NEVER change. Laws would never change or adapt."

the law regarding the sale of alcohol HAS changed and will continue to change based on research and to protect the consumer.

"Recommendations are not rules to be put in place by a landlord!"

no, but his license, his premises, his reputation. he sat the exams, paid for all the checks and holds the license. his right to refuse service if he feels that the health of the consumer is at risk

Pigleto - but the problem here is that people have such differing views as to what constitutes 'stupid behaviour' when it comes to pregnant women drinking. Some people have a 'zero tolerance' approach, others believe that moderate drinking carries an acceptable risk based on the evidence available.

WildSeahorses - the sexual discrimination point was brought up a while back on the thread and tbh I'm not sure if the issue was fully resolved, sorry if I missed it. fwiw I agree that it appears discriminatory to me.

Lissie no-one is suggesting that landlords should be irresponsible, the question is how far they should be entitled to make judgments regarding pregnant women's ability to consume alcohol regardless of that woman's own wishes.

Vamanos I don't think there was any consensus about whether it is sex discrimination. FWIW as a lawyer (although not in this area) I think it is, and I think that industry guidelines (and the landlord's concerns re his own reputation) do not entitle him to be have in a discriminatory fashion. But that's just my two pennorth

Lissie, you have made a massive number of assertions and gross generalisations in your last post that simply don't stand up to any kind of scrutiny. I think this is the kind of thing the woman who went to the papers was objecting to - ignorant, unfounded interference in her life, based on nothing more than a misreading of a statement put out on the hoof by one lone organisation in the absence of a proper scientific study, and a bit of general societal moral panic about women of childbearing age and their behaviour as mothers and future mothers.

I do despair at people who take opinionated positions based on nothing more than a lazy acceptance of one organisation's reading of a position at any given time, with no reference to the actual science, or the fact that certain organisations may have a vested interest in promoting a particular position.

People should make more effort to be properly informed and understand what risk actually means, before passing judgement on others. In this case, the pg woman is much more at risk travelling in a car than drinking 1.5 pints of lager.

If landlords should be refusing anyone alcohol, it should be Asian customers as it is well documented that they are much more likely genetically to have problems metabolising alcohol. Yet that would be considered racism. However refusing a pg woman alcohol is, according to you and some others, not sexism.

Is anyone else going to answer my question of 09:08:37? DSM? Lissielou?

boffinmum, my argument is based on the landlords obligations and rights as a licensee. i assure you that i have not made a "massive number of assertions and gross generalisations" from the statemnets you have made i would assume that you know your stuff regarding science and the human body, well i know my stuff regarding the sale of alcohol and the standards and rules that licensees are obliged to uphold. this particular licensee chose to take an aspect of the objectives more seriously than some of his counterparts. i am perfectly well informed of the risks of drinking while pg, i choose not to take them. what is wrong with that?

daisymoo, will try to find it.

Oh expat, I've only just seen your post.

Did I touch a nerve? You seem awfully upset by me sharing me experiences.

It's April Fools Day, chequers.

But the psychobabble is a joke every day.

It's April Fools Day, chequers.

But the psychobabble is a joke every day.

I also wonder if this is why so many pubs are going out of business - they are too quick to make (female?) customers feel uncomfortable or awkward rather than welcome. They have never really recovered from women wanting to go in there in equal terms. Quite different to bars on the continent.

Would I support laws forcing pregnant women to abstain from activities deemed harmful to the foetus? No - the woman in question has the right to make those decisions. What your question suggests would, in effect, create a legal concept of "foetal rights" and I do not think that the law should be extended thus. If such a concept was introduced, I think it would be extremely difficult to balance the rights of the pregnant woman and the rights of the foetus (obviously, these would conflict in a lot of areas). FWIW there have been a small number of cases where this sort of issue has arisen (e.g. where doctors have tried to argue that a woman should have to have a caesarean to save the child) and, as far as I am aware, in all cases the court in question has held that a mentally competent pregnant woman has the right to refuse consent to medical procedures.