Lactivism and Rosa Parks: Um, What Are We Fighting For?

Kelly Mills — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:02:00 GMT

Breastfeeding rights have been the big stink on the Derby lately. We had Chag's post on the mom kicked out of Applebee's, and then this post written by some freak yesterday about the mom who wants additional break time during medical exams to pump. And don't ever let us forget the controversy that was Rachael's take on formula give-aways. There's obviously some mixed feelings here, and some back-and-forth. I know I'm all over the map, and here's why.

First of all, like Chag, I had a problem with Applebee's evictee Brooke Ryan saying being asked to cover up with a blanket was "like telling Rosa Parks she still had to sit in the back of the bus, but we'll give her a blanket to make her more comfortable." Yeah, it's a soundbite, and really, I don't think a blanket is necessary or should be required. But Rosa Parks? Um, Parks wasn't fighting for the right to sit at the front of the bus, she was fighting against the systematic discrimination against an entire group deemed inferior by those in power. The lactivism in this case was about...fighting for the right to nurse in public. A right we should totally have, and any right you don't protect gets taken away. But it's still not the same as what Parks stood for.

Now, are lactating moms also discriminated against, and could we advocate for that? Sure, and no doubt the mom working two jobs who can't even imagine breastfeeding would love some of our social support. Unfortunately, feminism is rarely easy. Here's some more thorniness: when my baby was a week old, my husband and I went to a nursing supply store to buy a pump and bottles. The lactation consultant/salesperson was horrified. "You can't bottlefeed yet. It could result in nipple confusion! Why would you want to do that?" When my husband replied, "Well, for starters, I'd like to be able to bond with our baby this way too," she said, "Well, you just can't be selfish like that. This is her special time with the baby." Too bad I wanted to share.

See, exclusively breastfeeding with no pumping or bottles meant not only was I really the primary caretaker in the early days (a job I had hoped to share equally for all of our sakes,) it also meant a real struggle to introduce a bottle so I could go back to working outside the home, something I wanted and needed to do. And this small example is just part of a whole larger struggle I felt, when I read books like the Sears baby book that said I should stay home with my baby or I'd be doing her wrong. I felt this revival of the traditional view of motherhood, and again, supposedly it's the children that suffer. I was willing to risk nipple confusion because I wanted something different. And I believe in all kinds of choices in motherhood, and I don't believe kids are condemned to a second-class life because they got bottles or boobs or because their moms stayed at home full time or went out into the workforce. I'm not pretending to have the answers in all this, but sometimes I wanna talk about more than nursing in a restaurant.

Parents of Kids With Special Needs Discriminated Against at Work

Karen Murphy — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:32:00 GMT

Most parents I know who have kids with special needs (defined as having behavioral or physical issues) don't think too much about their plight, or about it being much different from the plight of any other parent. Therapy? Okay. Medical appointments? Got it. A hospital stay because of open-heart surgery? You just do what you have to do, that's all. Sure, you might wish an easier life for your child, but there's not a lot of "poor me" going on, at least not in my experience.

But what if the very fact that you have a child with special needs adversely affects your ability to get or keep a job? Which clearly impacts your family's financial bottom line? And that's what's going on for many parents in this very position. So not only do you likely have increased medical/ therapeutical expenses, but you're also penalized financially in the workplace. "Behavioral, developmental and medical problems make it difficult to find child care, and fitting medical appointments and therapy schedules around work requires flexible hours and understanding employers." And often, employers are unwilling or unable to be flexible enough, which means that parents have to cut working hours to attend to their children. More than 5% of Maine parents in an upcoming study said they'd actually been fired over their situation involving their child.

We're all aware of discrimination toward pregnant women in the workplace, but this? Clearly, parents of all kinds need better support. And with one in ten Maine children reported as having a diagnosed disability or chronic health condition (up 30% from 1992 to 2005), I'm guessing that the numbers are similar in other areas. Which translates into a lot of parents impacted by the lack of support for them and their children, and a lot of families impacted adversely as a result.

What about you? Any horror stories to share?

Strollerderby : discrimination in the workplace

Lactivism and Rosa Parks: Um, What Are We Fighting For?

Parents of Kids With Special Needs Discriminated Against at Work