# Women push for public breastfeeding policy at Starbucks, stage "nurse-in" **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 11, 2004, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378 "2004-08-11T16:35:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![OleOneEye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/f14d63/32.png) [@OleOneEye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OleOneEye)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2004, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/281 "2004-08-15T22:27:22Z")
> [@Chotii](#): > > Well. Obviously the woman herself. However I don’t think I can be faulted for looking at decisions people make, if I know the details, and judging them against my own concepts of what is right and wrong. I cannot (and must not) enforce my concepts on their lives, but I certainly can, and do, judge them. There are women I have seen make feeding decisions that were _entirely_ selfish, and their babies did suffer for it. How can I be faulted for labeling their choice selfish and bad, in the privacy of my own mind? Maybe you won’t enforce your concepts on their lives, but I wouldn’t mind hearing from the mango, who made the statements about “cutting slack” and “unduly difficult.” It’s not obvious that the Grand Arbiter of All That Is Motherly- having been revealed to be a piece of tropical fruit- believes that women should get to decide for themselves what is “unduly difficult.” Especially when the future component of a fruit smoothie speaks of “cutting slack.” What would be the alternative to “cutting slack?” Just because you keep your objections to yourself, doesn’t mean that the ripened ovary of the Mangifera indica tree would do the same, especially when protected from flames by asbestos. ---
**Author:** ![TeaElle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8491ac/32.png) [@TeaElle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TeaElle)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2004, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/282 "2004-08-16T02:21:05Z")
If you have an objection, make it on the merits rather than snotty ruminations on someone’s username, eh? ---
**Author:** ![OleOneEye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/f14d63/32.png) [@OleOneEye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OleOneEye)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2004, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/283 "2004-08-16T02:54:37Z")
> [@TeaElle](#): > > If you have an objection, make it on the merits rather than snotty ruminations on someone’s username, eh? I thought I did make my objection on the merits. Namely, that the use of the phrase “cutting slack” raises the question of what would be the consequences if The Asbestos Mango did _not_ “cut slack.” It kinda hinges on whether the “slack” is something she gives the person in her own mind without making her opinion the other person’s problem, or whether the “slack” applies to the choice whether to give the bottle-feeding offender a stern and public rebuke (like the folks who came up to Dangerosa and scolded her for bottle-feeding her infant). Only The Asbestos Mango knows what she meant by “slack.” Either way, the word “slack” carries the connotation of something that one of higher status gives to one of lower status, and sounds condescending. Also, who gets to decide what is “unduly” difficult? Chotii says that the woman decides, but The Asbestos Mango is the one who made the distinction. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2004, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/284 "2004-08-16T04:22:36Z")
> [@Chotii](#): > > There are women I have seen make feeding decisions that were _entirely_ selfish, and their babies did suffer for it. Just curious, what feeding decisions did you see that made babies suffer? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Asbestos\_Mango](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@The\_Asbestos\_Mango](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Asbestos_Mango)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2004, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/285 "2004-08-16T18:24:56Z")
OK, **OleOneEye** , first off, outside of this message board, I keep any judgements about other people’s parenting choices in the privacy of my own mind. Now… I’m going to say it again. I really don’t understand the idea that feeding a baby the way God and Nature intended is weird. Or somehow obscene or vulgar. Or considered something to be equated with the functions that eliminate bodily waste. Yes, I do mentally cut slack for someone who has a life situation that makes breastfeeding unduly difficult. I’ve already taken into account the fact that many low income workers have schedules and work environments that are very unfriendly to people with children to raise, and that using a breast pump can be difficult. In a case like that, if a mother is obliged to settle for feeding her baby formula because the pressures of providing the baby with little luxuries such as, oh, a home create difficulties, my major emotion in a case like that would be sympathy that a woman is not able to provide what is best for her child. Hell, the stress of having to go into a dirty bathroom and endure dirty looks to make food for the baby alone would probably partly offset the benefits of breastfeeding. But a mother should desire to give her baby what is best for it, and it has been well established that breast milk is what is best for a baby from a nutritional standpoint. What bother me most is that our culture has set bottle feeding as the default mode, and breast feeding as an option some mothers my choose. It should be the other way around. I could go further and say that I think a good deal of the anti-public breastfeeding sentiment is that we live in a culture that is very unfriendly to children in general, but that’s a really complicated argument that I’m not up for going into right now. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2004, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/286 "2004-08-16T21:00:39Z")
> [@The Asbestos Mango](#): > > I’m going to say it again. I really don’t understand the idea that feeding a baby the way God and Nature intended is weird. Or somehow obscene or vulgar. As the one who started the thread, I never said anything about breastfeeding being weird, obscene or vulgar. In fact, I don’t think anyone said that in this thread. > [@The Asbestos Mango](#): > > But a mother should desire to give her baby what is best for it, and it has been well established that breast milk is what is best for a baby from a nutritional standpoint. Question: should a woman desire to give her baby what’s best at _her own expense?_ For example, if breastfeeding is so painful to a woman that she can’t bear the pain to do this, would you “cut her some slack?” > [@The Asbestos Mango](#): > > What bother me most is that our culture has set bottle feeding as the default mode, and breast feeding as an option some mothers my choose. This breastfeeding discussion has brought up a very important question in my mind: OK, we know breastfeeding is best. And we know that to keep a good flow and to keep the flow for a long period, it must be done regularly. We also know breastpumps are not always very reliable. SO, that would mean that for a woman to breastfeed regularly and for a long time, she would probably not be able to easily work a full-time job. So, how do we reconcile the pressure/need to work and the pressure/need to breastfeed? Is breastfeeding becoming a luxury for the rich or women who don’t have to work because their husbands can support the family? > [@The Asbestos Mango](#): > > I could go further and say that I think a good deal of the anti-public breastfeeding sentiment is that we live in a culture that is very unfriendly to children in general, but that’s a really complicated argument that I’m not up for going into right now. I know you said you don’t want to go into it, and that is OK. But I would have to disagree that we live in a culture that is unfriendly to children. For many reasons. People in our day and age seem kid-crazy to me, as in, kids are the most wonderful thing in the world (which they probably are). Life seems centered around children, to me. Just the sheer amount of money local and state governments spend on education and child welfare/health care shows me that kids are the #1 priority. The only thing that I would say is “unfriendly” to kids is the fact that most women have to work nowadays and it is very hard to juggle a career with kids (see my above comments about how it’s difficult to breastfeed when you’re working.) ---
**Author:** ![The\_Asbestos\_Mango](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@The\_Asbestos\_Mango](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Asbestos_Mango)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2004, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/287 "2004-08-16T21:57:43Z")
> [@nyctea scandiaca](#): > > As the one who started the thread, I never said anything about breastfeeding being weird, obscene or vulgar. In fact, I don’t think anyone said that in this thread. , but you did, rather vulgarly describe breastfeeding as “a gland excreting a bodily fluid into someone else’s mouth”, which is technically accurate. You also said it shouldn’t be done in public, which gives the impression you do regard it as a vulgar biological function. > [@](#): > > Question: should a woman desire to give her baby what’s best at _her own expense?_ For example, if breastfeeding is so painful to a woman that she can’t bear the pain to do this, would you “cut her some slack?” I think this falls under the category of “unduly difficult”. I already covered physical/medical problems in a previous post. > [@](#): > > This breastfeeding discussion has brought up a very important question in my mind: OK, we know breastfeeding is best. And we know that to keep a good flow and to keep the flow for a long period, it must be done regularly. We also know breastpumps are not always very reliable. SO, that would mean that for a woman to breastfeed regularly and for a long time, she would probably not be able to easily work a full-time job. So, how do we reconcile the pressure/need to work and the pressure/need to breastfeed? Is breastfeeding becoming a luxury for the rich or women who don’t have to work because their husbands can support the family? Sadly, this seems to be the case. Being able to be the primary caretaker of your own children in general seems to be becoming a luxury for women of greater financial means. > [@](#): > > I know you said you don’t want to go into it, and that is OK. But I would have to disagree that we live in a culture that is unfriendly to children. For many reasons. People in our day and age seem kid-crazy to me, as in, kids are the most wonderful thing in the world (which they probably are). Life seems centered around children, to me. Just the sheer amount of money local and state governments spend on education and child welfare/health care shows me that kids are the #1 priority. The only thing that I would say is “unfriendly” to kids is the fact that most women have to work nowadays and it is very hard to juggle a career with kids (see my above comments about how it’s difficult to breastfeed when you’re working.) Tell that to a working mother, especially a low-income working mother. I don’t have kids myself, but I do pay attention to what’s going on in the world around me, and mothers having to make child-care arrangements on short notice because of unpredictable schedules, or trying to find graveyard shift childcare because Wal-Mart wants them available on a 24/7 basis or be penalized by not getting enough hours to support the children, having to use Medicaid or County Social Services (translated, low standards of health care with sometimes month long waits to schedule appointments with incompetent doctors, or sitting for hours in an emergency room or a doc-in-a-box if the child needs immediate care) because they can’t afford the premiums or deductibles on the company’s health insurance policy, the risk of losing a job because of frequent absences if one must miss work to care for a sick child. No, this is not a child-friendly culture. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2004, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/288 "2004-08-16T22:45:26Z")
> [@The Asbestos Mango](#): > > , but you did, rather vulgarly describe breastfeeding as “a gland excreting a bodily fluid into someone else’s mouth”, which is technically accurate. You also said it shouldn’t be done in public, which gives the impression you do regard it as a vulgar biological function. Nope, I never said it was vulgar. > [@The Asbestos Mango](#): > > Tell that to a working mother, especially a low-income working mother. I don’t have kids myself, but I do pay attention to what’s going on in the world around me, and mothers having to make child-care arrangements on short notice because of unpredictable schedules, or trying to find graveyard shift childcare because Wal-Mart wants them available on a 24/7 basis or be penalized by not getting enough hours to support the children, having to use Medicaid or County Social Services (translated, low standards of health care with sometimes month long waits to schedule appointments with incompetent doctors, or sitting for hours in an emergency room or a doc-in-a-box if the child needs immediate care) because they can’t afford the premiums or deductibles on the company’s health insurance policy, the risk of losing a job because of frequent absences if one must miss work to care for a sick child. > > No, this is not a child-friendly culture. Are you saying that special accomodations should be made for employees who have children, or that employees with children should be treated differently or more favorably than employees without children? (i.e. giving the childless employees the “unpredictable” schedule, or the 24/7 schedule, while giving the parent employee better schedules, more leave/time off, and favorable treatment when frequently absent?) Also, I would like to know why you think doctors who participate in Medicaid are incompetent. And do you think Medicaid patients have to wait longer in an emergency room than patients with private health insurance? ---
**Author:** ![TeaElle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8491ac/32.png) [@TeaElle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TeaElle)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2004, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/289 "2004-08-17T02:27:52Z")
The United States remains the standout as the only industrialized nation which does not have a mandatory, funded maternity leave which allows all mothers the opportunity to stay at home with their babies for at least the first 3-6 months of life. We are not going to be a child-friendly, pro-breastfeeding country until we change our policies to reflect a commitment to children having full access to at least one of their parents at the most crucial point in their lives. ---
**Author:** ![Chotii](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/71e660/32.png) [@Chotii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chotii)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2004, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/290 "2004-08-17T05:07:31Z")
I’m confused, **nyctea scandiaca** : first you say: > [@](#): > > …I would have to disagree that we live in a culture that is unfriendly to children. For many reasons. People in our day and age seem kid-crazy to me, as in, kids are the most wonderful thing in the world (which they probably are). Life seems centered around children, to me. Just the sheer amount of money local and state governments spend on education and child welfare/health care shows me that kids are the #1 priority. The only thing that I would say is “unfriendly” to kids is the fact that most women have to work nowadays and it is very hard to juggle a career with kids (see my above comments about how it’s difficult to breastfeed when you’re working.) And then you say: [quote] Are you saying that special accomodations should be made for employees who have children, or that employees with children should be treated differently or more favorably than employees without children? (i.e. giving the childless employees the “unpredictable” schedule, or the 24/7 schedule, while giving the parent employee better schedules, more leave/time off, and favorable treatment when frequently absent?) [QUOTE] Is it a child-friendly society, or a child-unfriendly society? On the one hand, even _you_ suggest that parents shouldn’t get any special consideration no matter what impact their jobs may have on their children. On the other, you seem to think that governments throwing money at child-related programs shows how valued children are. Which is it? ---
**Author:** ![Aspidistra](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspidistra/32/3894_2.png) [@Aspidistra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspidistra)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2004, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/291 "2004-08-17T06:04:18Z")
> [@TeaElle](#): > > The United States remains the standout as the only industrialized nation which does not have a mandatory, funded maternity leave which allows all mothers the opportunity to stay at home with their babies for at least the first 3-6 months of life. Sadly, not quite… ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2004, 11:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/292 "2004-08-17T11:29:52Z")
But who pays for maternity leave? Right now its covered under short term disability insurance (where it is covered) - and that is become Mom is in recovery after delivery (I needed most of that six weeks before I would walk well). To fully fund maternity leave for six months would be expensive (and, possibly, inadequate - babies SHOULD be breastfed for a year). I don’t really want my tax dollars (or the cost of the stuff I buy in the store) going to support a woman living in a $750,000 house while she stays home with her kid. Call me selfish. There are so many more child centered programs I would support first - health care, better education, more subsidized daycare for low and middle income people, a drop of the welfare cap, a rework of our foster care systems. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Asbestos\_Mango](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@The\_Asbestos\_Mango](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Asbestos_Mango)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2004, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/293 "2004-08-17T11:51:23Z")
> [@nyctea scandiaca](#): > > Nope, I never said it was vulgar. > Are you saying that special accomodations should be made for employees who have children, or that employees with children should be treated differently or more favorably than employees without children? (i.e. giving the childless employees the “unpredictable” schedule, or the 24/7 schedule, while giving the parent employee better schedules, more leave/time off, and favorable treatment when frequently absent?) OK, first off, there are some jobs which require a person to be on call on a 24/7 basis to deal with emergency situations which may come up. Cashier at Wal-Mart is not one of these occupations. However Wal-Mart does ask that its employees be available 24/7, and will schedule an employee to work 10:00 am to 7:00 pm one day, 4:00 pm to 1:00 am the next, then want you back again at 7:00 am the next day. I actually had to deal with this kind of crap before I had to lock down my availability so I could go to school, and even with my availability cut off at midnight Sunday, managers would still schedule me to work until 3:00 am, knowing that I had an 8:00 class Monday morning. And, yes, they do penalize employees who have limited availability by giving them reduced hours. Which means reduced income, which may mean being financially unable to support your children. As for the question of whether people with children should receive preferential treatment when it comes to work scheduling, I would say, yes, La Tonya’s baby’s need for care trumps my desire to watch Britcoms on public television on Saturday night. > [@](#): > > Also, I would like to know why you think doctors who participate in Medicaid are incompetent. And do you think Medicaid patients have to wait longer in an emergency room than patients with private health insurance? Actually, I was thinking more in terms of county social services. Which is where I’m currently getting my health care. In Clark County, Nevada, the county will only cover University Medical Center and its affiliated clinics. The doctors there basically come in two varieties - residents who go on to work in private clinics and hospitals as soon as their residency is up and doctors who are simply not good enough to cut it in private practice. Even the front office staff will admit as much, when they are sure nobody else is listening. And if you go to the emergency room at UMC, or to one of its affiliated Quick Care clinics, whether you have insurance or not, you can expect a minimum of a two hour wait. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2004, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/294 "2004-08-17T14:26:34Z")
> [@The Asbestos Mango](#): > > As for the question of whether people with children should receive preferential treatment when it comes to work scheduling, I would say, yes, La Tonya’s baby’s need for care trumps my desire to watch Britcoms on public television on Saturday night. Your kidding, right? Cause I don’t see why any one else’s baby trumps my needs. What ranking system do we use? Does La Tonya’s baby’s need for care trump my need to be at my kids kindergarten graduation? How about my need to see my sick grandfather? How about my desire to spend time with my spouse or my friends? La Toyna is responsible for her babies care…not me. I had two kids already and I’m done caring for babies. I actually have always worked over holiday weeks when kids are out of school - mine are little enough yet where it doesn’t make any difference which week we go on vacation - I’ll leave the school vacations to the people who need them. But if I were obligated to do so, I’d be very angry. ---
**Author:** ![CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crankyasanoldman/32/11670_2.png) [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrankyAsAnOldMan)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2004, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/295 "2004-08-17T14:33:10Z")
_Just the sheer amount of money local and state governments spend on education and child welfare/health care shows me that kids are the #1 priority._ I don’t think investing public dollars on children-related things that are so widely considered a public good necessarily means the culture is kid-friendly. We spend a lot of money on corrections, but that doesn’t make us a criminal-friendly culture. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2004, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/296 "2004-08-17T16:02:59Z")
> [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](#): > > _Just the sheer amount of money local and state governments spend on education and child welfare/health care shows me that kids are the #1 priority._ > > I don’t think investing public dollars on children-related things that are so widely considered a public good necessarily means the culture is kid-friendly. > > We spend a lot of money on corrections, but that doesn’t make us a criminal-friendly culture. Education is most states’ budget’s biggest expense. Medicaid (which mostly covers pregnant women and children) is most states’ second largest expense. This speaks for itself. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2004, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/297 "2004-08-17T16:04:38Z")
> [@TeaElle](#): > > The United States remains the standout as the only industrialized nation which does not have a mandatory, funded maternity leave which allows all mothers the opportunity to stay at home with their babies for at least the first 3-6 months of life. Cite? ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2004, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/298 "2004-08-17T16:07:21Z")
> [@Chotii](#): > > Is it a child-friendly society, or a child-unfriendly society? On the one hand, even _you_ suggest that parents shouldn’t get any special consideration no matter what impact their jobs may have on their children. On the other, you seem to think that governments throwing money at child-related programs shows how valued children are. Which is it? 1. States spend a heck of a lot of money on children. 2. No group of people should receive special/preferential treatment in a place of employment. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2004, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/299 "2004-08-17T16:09:55Z")
> [@The Asbestos Mango](#): > > As for the question of whether people with children should receive preferential treatment when it comes to work scheduling, I would say, yes Why? Isn’t that discriminatory? ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2004, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378/300 "2004-08-17T16:41:53Z")
> [@](#): > > **TeaElle** said: > The United States remains the standout as the only industrialized nation which does not have a mandatory, funded maternity leave which allows all mothers the opportunity to stay at home with their babies for at least the first 3-6 months of life. This isn’t covered by the FMLA which guarantees that their job be held for a year? Or are you suggesting that they should get three to six months off at full pay? If so, why would this different treatment be fair to the employees who may have other medical or family related reasons to take the time off and who would not be paid for it? How would it be fair to the employees who have to keep coming to work to retain their full pay? Who would pay for it? Employer or taxes? Will someone else’s decision to have a child affect my bottom line? > [@](#): > > **The Asbestos Mango** said: > As for the question of whether people with children should receive preferential treatment when it comes to work scheduling, I would say, yes, La Tonya’s baby’s need for care trumps my desire to watch Britcoms on public television on Saturday night. How is it that La Tonya’s personal choice which created a desire for time off should be deemed more worthy than mine? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-push-for-public-breastfeeding-policy-at-starbucks-stage-nurse-in/259378.md?page=16)