Breast Feeding Juror

OK, I think she should be excused because there is no way she should be on a jury while nursing.

link

why not?


Reminds me of this case

Breastfeeding expert decries parliament ban
The AGE
February 27 2003
By Adam Morton[/I]


The Victorian parliament's ejection of new mum Kirstie Marshall for breastfeeding her baby in the chamber showed women were still second-class citizens, an international breastfeeding expert said today.

Speaking before her address at an Australian Breastfeeding Association (ABA) conference in Melbourne, British academic Sheila Kitzinger said parliamentary standing orders banning non-MPs - including new-born children - from the floor were archaic, like something ``before the flood''.

She said she was ``gobsmacked'' to learn the parliamentary Sergeant-at-Arms asked Ms Marshall to leave the Legislative Assembly yesterday after she began breastfeeding 11-day-old Charlotte prior to question time.

``This is really a throwback, and I thought Australia was a progressive country,'' Ms Kitzinger told AAP.

``You still get men who think parliament is a man's club. They just about tolerate women, but they can't tolerate babies.

``I think it says women are second class citizens and babies are way down - they are fourth class citizens, if that.''

But Ms Kitzinger said the public debate over breastfeeding in parliament would help people accept it in public.

``We have to reorganise our workplaces for both mothers and fathers, and babies and I think this will do some good. It's worth the discussion,'' she said.

She called on the Bracks government to change rules forcing Ms Marshall to move to a separate room to breastfeed.

Premier Steve Bracks said yesterday a line had to be drawn somewhere, but speaker Judy Maddigan - the first female speaker in the lower house - said the issue would be examined in a review of parliamentary rules.

``Question time was an important part of her job,'' Ms Kitzinger said.

``Do they set aside a room for men's business, or just female business?''


Viewed 8/9/11 at 10:26

There was justified outrage about this and the rules were changed to prevent this (her being ejected from the house) ever happerning again

In your case the judge should be ashamed of herself. The judge should be fired for misconduct no questions asked, I belive breast feeding is protected by law in the US just like it is here
 
OK, I think she should be excused because there is no way she should be on a jury while nursing.

link
blame it on the lawyers.
they (both parties) screen prospective jurors.
a female, or male for that matter, should not be allowed to have children inside the jurors booth or behind closed doors.
if children are going to be a problem for you then you shouldn't even be serving jury duty.
 
Legislation permitting breastfeedingA United States House of Representatives appropriations bill (HR 2490) with an amendment specifically permitting breastfeeding[27] was signed into law on September 29, 1999. It stipulated that no government funds may be used to enforce any prohibition on women breastfeeding their children in Federal buildings or on Federal property. Further, a U.S. Public Law[28] enacted in 1999, specifically provides that "a woman may breastfeed her child at any location in a Federal building or on Federal property, if the woman and her child are otherwise authorized to be present at the location." A majority of states have enacted state statutes specifically permitting the public exposure of the female breast for breastfeeding infants, or exempting such women from prosecution under applicable statutes,[29] such as those regarding indecent exposure.

As a result of these previously mentioned and other controversies, 47 states as of January 2009 have passed legislation that either explicitly allow women to breastfeed in public or exempt them from prosecution for public indecency.[29] Attempts during 2007 to codify a child's right to nurse were unsuccessful in West Virginia.[30]

Section 4207 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act amended the Fair Labor Standards Act to require employers to provide a reasonable break time for an employee to breastfeed her child who is less than one year old.[31] The employee must be allowed to breastfeed in a private place, other than a bathroom.[31] The employer is not required to pay the employee during the break time.[31] Employers with fewer than 50 employees are not required to comply with the law if doing so would impose an undue hardship to the employer based on its size, finances, nature, or structure of its business.[32]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breastfeeding_in_public#United_States

Aparently i was only partually right sadly, only some states enforce it across the board (as it should be)

I found this for Australia since aparently wikipedia belives there are only 2 "regions", the US and Canada

Your Right to Breastfeed
It is reassuring to know that breastfeeding mothers in all parts of Australia can have recourse to anti-discrimination legislation. This legislation creates rights and provides a mechanism for redress where people feel their rights have been breached. In Queensland, Tasmania and the Northern Territory the legislation specifically mentions breastfeeding. This year, attempts to introduce a similar amendment into Victorian law once again raised the question of a mother's right to breastfeed in public. Publicity surrounding this Bill ignored the fact that the law in Victoria already prohibits discrimination on the grounds of parenthood. In 1985 The Victorian Equal Opportunity Board found that a woman who was refused service in a hotel dining room after she began breastfeeding her child was discriminated against on the ground of parenthood, because of her status as a nursing mother. The Australian Capital Territory prohibits discrimination against a person on the basis of their status as a parent. In Western Australia discrimination on the grounds of a person's family responsibilities is not allowed. Following the Victorian decision, breastfeeding could be seen as an aspect of being a parent or having family responsibilities. Other State laws and Commonwealth law prohibit discrimination on the grounds of sex. It may be that a complaint of sex discrimination could be substantiated under these laws if services were not provided to a woman who was breastfeeding in public.

http://www.breastfeeding.asn.au/bfinfo/out.html
 
i wonder if a shrewd lawyer could argue his client never got a fair trial because one of the jury members was "distracted".
 
I recently served on jury duty in my state, and the written requirements explicitly stated no children to accompany prospective jurors to court. So I can understand the judge's ire at a juror appearing with a newborn in arms (or should I say "attached").

However, it is inherently obvious that mothers caring for their small children should be exempted from jury duty. ... or would the court rather risk impaneling a lactating mother (the involuntary milk ejection reflex in the middle of a trial, occasionally recessing court to allow her to express her milk, etc).

Besides the baby's health overrides the need for a lactating mother to sit on a jury.

The Honorable Judge Claudia Jordan below (the first African-American female judge in Colorado), currently presides in criminal court cases involving misdemeanors, and is apparently out of touch with the necessities of raising a child.

2jordan.jpg

source
To assess Judge Jordan's performance, the [Second Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance] reviewed the statistical results of questionnaires completed by lawyers ... The statistical ratings from attorneys were generally slightly below the averages for Denver County Court judges and all rated judges state-wide; ... Seventy-two percent of attorneys surveyed recommended that Judge Jordan be retained, while 28% recommended that she not be retained.


According to the statistics in the report, Jordan received low grades in demeanor, willingness to consider error in fact or law, and treating people politely.
 
Are you lot serious?

what about witnesses?, court reporters, JUGES THEMSELVES, lawyers, defendents.

Why shouldnt mothers be able to paticipate in the legal system (which may well be her job) simply because shes breast feeding.

Legislation permitting breastfeedingA United States House of Representatives appropriations bill (HR 2490) with an amendment specifically permitting breastfeeding[27] was signed into law on September 29, 1999. It stipulated that no government funds may be used to enforce any prohibition on women breastfeeding their children in Federal buildings or on Federal property. Further, a U.S. Public Law[28] enacted in 1999, specifically provides that "a woman may breastfeed her child at any location in a Federal building or on Federal property, if the woman and her child are otherwise authorized to be present at the location." A majority of states have enacted state statutes specifically permitting the public exposure of the female breast for breastfeeding infants, or exempting such women from prosecution under applicable statutes,[29] such as those regarding indecent exposure.

As a result of these previously mentioned and other controversies, 47 states as of January 2009 have passed legislation that either explicitly allow women to breastfeed in public or exempt them from prosecution for public indecency.[29] Attempts during 2007 to codify a child's right to nurse were unsuccessful in West Virginia.[30]

Section 4207 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act amended the Fair Labor Standards Act to require employers to provide a reasonable break time for an employee to breastfeed her child who is less than one year old.[31] The employee must be allowed to breastfeed in a private place, other than a bathroom.[31] The employer is not required to pay the employee during the break time.[31] Employers with fewer than 50 employees are not required to comply with the law if doing so would impose an undue hardship to the employer based on its size, finances, nature, or structure of its business.[32]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breastf...#United_States
 
basically is there a danger to the child? (a PHYSICAL danger, not a "icky" imaginary one)

Is there a danger to the mother? (a PHYSICAL danger, not a "icky" imaginary one)

Is there a danger to the court? (a PHYSICAL danger, not a "icky" imaginary one)

no then the law should protect the childs right to eat and the mothers right to paticipate fully in sociaty
 
Are you lot serious?
yes. that's EXACTLY what courtrooms are all about, serious business.
it isn't a nursery, playground, 3 ring circus, or religious temple.
Why shouldnt mothers be able to paticipate in the legal system (which may well be her job) simply because shes breast feeding.
it isn't "just breast feeding", it's the distraction.
can this be compared to texting and driving?
 
I am in full support of a woman's right to breast feed, even in public places. I remember years ago when breast feeding was far more common in the U.S. That an area was established, essentially by breast feeding mothers theirselves, at the country fair. It was not segregated from the fair in general just an area with seating and shade apart from the general hubbub.

This issue in a court room has nothing to do with the woman's rights or the baby's safety, it has to do with the defendant's right to a fair trial. And while we can all voice support for the practice, it is also true that in public areas it still draws attention. In a court room setting that attention may at times have the potential to adversely affect the defendant's right to a fair trial.

While the way issues like this are handled is often less than the best, there are also times that women pushing an agenda draw attention for their own purposes. I am not trying to say that this is the case here.

In the end the decision must be made based on how it affects the court room proceedings and the defendants right to a fair trial.
 
I am in full support of a woman's right to breast feed, even in public places. I remember years ago when breast feeding was far more common in the U.S. That an area was established, essentially by breast feeding mothers theirselves, at the country fair. It was not segregated from the fair in general just an area with seating and shade apart from the general hubbub.

This issue in a court room has nothing to do with the woman's rights or the baby's safety, it has to do with the defendant's right to a fair trial. And while we can all voice support for the practice, it is also true that in public areas it still draws attention. In a court room setting that attention may at times have the potential to adversely affect the defendant's right to a fair trial.

While the way issues like this are handled is often less than the best, there are also times that women pushing an agenda draw attention for their own purposes. I am not trying to say that this is the case here.

In the end the decision must be made based on how it affects the court room proceedings and the defendants right to a fair trial.

Thats a cope out excuse, im sorry but it really is. A jury of your peers, not a jury of men and unchilded children.

This sort of argument has been used constantly to exclude groups, women couldnt possibly give a reasonable verdict, blacks are unable rationalise in the same way whites are.

If you can forfill the basic requirements of a jurier (ie you have the mental capacity to do the job) then you should be alowed to.

Aparently deaf and blind people can serve quite adequately in the US on [COLOR=Blue""]juries[/COLOR] so why shouldnt mothers be allowed to serve

here is one mothers experiance with serving on a US jury while expressing milk for her child

http://www.kellymom.com/bf/normal/my-jury-duty.html

Concidering the laws (in the US) which protect a childs right to be breastfeed in the workplace and the mothers right to work i cant see how this could possibly even be LEGAL in the US. If a judge was breastfeeding they would have the right to continue to work and breastfeed so why shouldnt a jurier
 
Juries are chosen by the attorneys and are not an issue of "allowed to be", or to fit a requirement. In that vain, a breast-feeding woman would be easily excused for her caring sensitivities, as well as her prejudice against such crimes as rape, incest, abuse, etc.
 
Thats a cope out excuse, im sorry but it really is. A jury of your peers, not a jury of men and unchilded children.

This sort of argument has been used constantly to exclude groups, women couldnt possibly give a reasonable verdict, blacks are unable rationalise in the same way whites are.

No, it's about practicality. It's about the need to feed the child, and that it would be a distraction for the mother, and other jurors, in the middle of session, to call a time out, and go feed her child.

It's the same reason we don't have people in an iron frikking lung in the jury. PRACTICALITY.
 
Well Asguard it's not really a cop out excuse. Would you allow a man with a severe case of Tourette's Syndrome to sit on a jury? I hope your answer is no, because it is a major distraction and does deprive the defendant from a fair trial. Now while you may have transcended your mortal body into an ideal world, the majority of us still live in an imperfect physical world. I'm sorry to say, but men are easily distracted by breasts - especially when they are laid to bare. It may not be as severe as an auditory distraction from the guy with Tourrette's Syndrome, but it's a still a major distraction nonetheless. There are plenty of citizens available to select from without having to resort to a nursing mother.
 
No, it's about practicality. It's about the need to feed the child, and that it would be a distraction for the mother, and other jurors, in the middle of session, to call a time out, and go feed her child.

It's the same reason we don't have people in an iron frikking lung in the jury. PRACTICALITY.

once again, you have people who are deaf and blind allowed to (infact encoraged to) serve and as (by law) employers are required to make alowences for breast feeding, there for a judge would be allowed to have her child breast feed. Hell there was a women breast feeding on the floor of the lower house in victoria (it was great to see actually). Acording to the artical i posted courts ALREADY make alowences for women to go off and express milk and there should be no reason for her to "go off" anywhere, if she feels comfertable doing it in court she should be alowed to. ITS A NATURAL THING FOR FUCK SAKE.

If she doesnt feel she should be doing it, feels embarised or feels her child would be to disruptive thats one thing, but if she is willing to do it and wants to do it then she should be encoraged to and she shouldnt have to hide.
 
Would you allow a man with a severe case of Tourette's Syndrome to sit on a jury?

(In memory of the nice truck-driver guy I worked with with Tourette's)

F*ck
yes.
Jurors should be taking notes, so as to not get distracted.
And it would keep the court reporter busy :D
Also thinking a drape of some sort could be arranged for the breastfeeding mom, so as not to offend any delicate male sensibilities.
 
once again, you have people who are deaf and blind allowed to (infact encoraged to) serve and as (by law) employers are required to make alowences for breast feeding, there for a judge would be allowed to have her child breast feed. Hell there was a women breast feeding on the floor of the lower house in victoria (it was great to see actually). Acording to the artical i posted courts ALREADY make alowences for women to go off and express milk and there should be no reason for her to "go off" anywhere, if she feels comfertable doing it in court she should be alowed to. ITS A NATURAL THING FOR FUCK SAKE.

If she doesnt feel she should be doing it, feels embarised or feels her child would be to disruptive thats one thing, but if she is willing to do it and wants to do it then she should be encoraged to and she shouldnt have to hide.

A baby has no business being in a jury box FOR FUCK SAKE. Its not so much about the nursing as it is about a baby having to be kept quiet in a jury box.
Or are they supposed to keep interrupting the trial so the mom can leave to feed it?
 
Back
Top