Is there anywhere where you cannot legally breastfeed?

[lovelymama2]

I know that breastfeeding is protected by law ... but in privately owned places like, for example, Target, is it considered private property and therefore if they ask you to go to the bathrooms or something, you have to listen? Or is breastfeeding pretty much something you can do anywhere you want--whether or not you're in a store?

I'm just asking because it really surprises me that there are still issues with breastfeeding. I was just talking with someone who was asked to move into a changing room in Wal-Mart.

[lovelymama2]

Actually, I see that my state has a law protecting a mother's right to breastfeed in any place that she has a right to be, including private property. So a privately-owned store can NOT make you move into the bathroom, is that correct? They can't kick you out, either?

"Colo. Rev. Stat. § 25-6-301 and § 25-6-302 (2004) recognize the benefits of breastfeeding and encourage mothers to breastfeed. The law also allows a mother to breastfeed in any place she has a right to be. (SB 88)"

[Equuskia]

Target (just an example) is privately owned, but open to the public, therefore making it a public place where you can breastfeed.

ETA: As for your friend that got told to move in Walmart, she should complain to Firstright.org. This is NOT Walmart's corporate policy. A mother is free to breastfeed her child anywhere in the store (except obviously in places where customers aren't allowed to be, like the backroom, on a gondola shelf, or any other place where customer safety may be a concern).

I have worked in Walmart (as a IC merchandiser) for many years, and have pumped and breastfed as well. The employees have been nothing but gracious. They will offer me the lactation room because it has a rocker and whatnot, but would never tell me I have to go. So every time I hear about a Walmart employee harassing a mother I am completely appalled.

Then I remember. If someone does that here in PR, they can be fined $500.

[jocelynr]

Originally Posted by Equuskia

Then I remember. If someone does that here in PR, they can be fined $500.

EVERY state should have this kind of fine for breaking the law!

[annettemarie]

The only place I've ever heard of is a prison visiting room. And I don't know that it's illegal, just that you'll be kicked out.

[PatioGardener]

I would think that it wouldn't be legal for a baby to breastfeed somewhere that the baby wasn't legally allowed to be (even if the mother was) - for example in court or in a bar.

Other than that - Anytime, Anywhere!

(I'm in Canada.)

[tanyam926]

And someone's private residence right? Because it doesn't fall under the "otherwise legally allowed to be" provision. (Sorry if the op wasn't asking about that).

[Momily]

In states where it's protected, I think it's protected in any space that's open to the public -- so Target, which is definitely open to the public, is protected. Of course that rules out spaces where one or both members of the nursing dyad don't have the legal right to be -- the men's room, the driver's seat of a moving vehicle etc . . .

There are a few places where I think a very good case can be made for not allowing nursing -- prison visiting rooms (the kind where lots of prisoners are together with lots of visitors) seems to risky for my liking. I've also commented on presurgical waiting rooms in children's hospitals where other children are fasting. I also think there are some situation where one person's rights/wishes prevail ethically -- for example, if someone was hospitalized for something serious and asked me not to breastfeed at their bedside I'd probably respect that, because I know they don't have the option to get up and move, and because that wouldn't be the time to be educating them on lactivism. On the other hand, if the doctor or nurse made the same request I'd say hell no. However, I don't think those things are "legal" as much as "ethical" or in the case of the prison visiting room "sensible".

As a homeowner, or in my case tenant, I have the right to kick anyone out for any reason or no reason, and I assume if I wanted to I could kick out a nursing pair, just like I could, in theory decide to exclude someone due to race or religion. Not saying that would be a nice thing to do, but I don't think one has a "legal" right to breastfeed in someone else's home.

[sapphire_chan]

Originally Posted by tanyam926

And someone's private residence right? Because it doesn't fall under the "otherwise legally allowed to be" provision. (Sorry if the op wasn't asking about that).

Until they ask you to leave. But they'd have to ask you to leave their property, not just go into another room. Still legal to refuse to go to a bathroom.

[Dar]

Originally Posted by annettemarie

The only place I've ever heard of is a prison visiting room. And I don't know that it's illegal, just that you'll be kicked out.

I did it. With a big kid, even - I know we were still nursing there when she was 2, I don't know about 3. To be fair, I'm not sure anyone except her father actually realized what as going on...

[TopHat]

Utah's law says "breast feeding...in any location where she otherwise may rightfully be..." So I guess if you snuck into a game or concert and you're not allowed to be there, you probably can't breastfeed there either.

[mysticmomma]

mens room?

[ErinsJuneBug]

My state (mass) has a clause that doesnt protect breastfeeding women in a church. I think it has to do with the seperation of church and state. However, ive nursed in our church several times and have only been warmly supported.

[2lilsweetfoxes]

Where I live (WA state)--a bar. But only because no one under 21 years of age is allowed in there (we couldn't even carry the baby through the bar to get into the restaurant--had to go all the way around to the other door. In the rain)

[Super~Single~Mama]

In NY you can nurse anywhere that mom/baby both have a legal right to be.

Also, in very cool lactivism news I recently found out that NY requires an employer to provide a nursing mother a place to pump in private until her baby is THREE YEARS OLD!!!! Wow. I think thats awesome. It's also off topic. Sorry.

[vegasgrl]

This is seriously not legal advice, as this is not my area of law, but I just wanted to add something...

When you go to a store like Target, you're allowed on their premises as an "invitee." An invitee is only an invitee within the scope of permission granted by the landowner, i.e., by Target. Generally, the scope of permission at a store would be in order to shop and do business there. If Target, or its employees as agents of Target, decide that BFing isn't within the scope of permission, then you become a "trespasser" who isn't "legally" or "rightfully" allowed to be there, and thus the statutes don't apply.

Same thing in a private residence. If you're invited in someone's house and they escort you to the living room, but their scope of permission doesn't extend to the upstairs of their house, then you'd be trespassing if you went upstairs. (Granted, they'd have to let you know before it could be actionable.) But if you start BFing in the living room and they decide that's not within the scope of permission because they're uncomfortable with it, they're totally allowed to ask you to stop or leave or go somewhere else.

I could be totally wrong about this though.

[Equuskia]

Originally Posted by vegasgrl

This is seriously not legal advice, as this is not my area of law, but I just wanted to add something...

When you go to a store like Target, you're allowed on their premises as an "invitee." An invitee is only an invitee within the scope of permission granted by the landowner, i.e., by Target. Generally, the scope of permission at a store would be in order to shop and do business there. If Target, or its employees as agents of Target, decide that BFing isn't within the scope of permission, then you become a "trespasser" who isn't "legally" or "rightfully" allowed to be there, and thus the statutes don't apply.

Same thing in a private residence. If you're invited in someone's house and they escort you to the living room, but their scope of permission doesn't extend to the upstairs of their house, then you'd be trespassing if you went upstairs. (Granted, they'd have to let you know before it could be actionable.) But if you start BFing in the living room and they decide that's not within the scope of permission because they're uncomfortable with it, they're totally allowed to ask you to stop or leave or go somewhere else.

I could be totally wrong about this though.

This is incorrect. Like a pp mentioned, stores like Target and Walmart are open to the public, therefore must abide by state and federal law. By your interpretation, then it would be legal to discriminate against women, or people of color, etc. I could decide I don't want to attend people of color in my restaurant, but this would be illegal and I could be fined. In states with an "otherwised authorized to be" clause, the mother cannot be thrown out of a place open to the public (store, restaurant, amusement park) for breastfeeding, if she (and the child) was authorized to be there, and began to breastfeed. The owner or management cannot "unauthorize" her for simply breastfeeding, just as they can't unauthorize for someone being of color, or a particular gender, etc.

[the_lissa]

Originally Posted by PatioGardener

I would think that it wouldn't be legal for a baby to breastfeed somewhere that the baby wasn't legally allowed to be (even if the mother was) - for example in court or in a bar.

Other than that - Anytime, Anywhere!

(I'm in Canada.)

Babies are allowed in court and in bars in Canada, and it is only dependent on where the mother is allowed to be in Canada.

[PatioGardener]

Originally Posted by the_lissa

Babies are allowed in court and in bars in Canada, and it is only dependent on where the mother is allowed to be in Canada.

Really? That's awesome! Is there anywhere that has an age limit on access (even if child is with a parent)?

[vegasgrl]

You can actually discriminate against people for any reason other than the protected classes: race, gender, sometimes age, etc. Maybe there's been a successful constitutional argument that dicriminating against BFing mothers is tantamount to gender discrimination? I'm new here.