Jury Duty, State of Kansas: NO BREASTFEEDERS (awesome!)

a reply to: Cheddarhead

Could be. And I am very much pleased that the laws are swinging toward giving parents time and space to PARENT.

But still - shouldn't our society begin to be less puritan?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Sremmos80

I am trying to figure it out. Maybe because the baby squawks, and it distracts the courtroom?

well of course that's it...trials are serious, a jury member must pay attention to what's being said, and have a degree of focus to the proceedings.. that requires attentiveness...if you are breast feeding, you are distracted, and the people around you are distracted by it....you or other jurists may miss a crucial piece of evidence or testimony, which is unfair to the court, the plaintiff, and to the defendant.

Okay, guys and gals - you know what? I totally jumped the gun on this one.

LOL!!!!!!

Anyway, I'm glad to have presented that Obama's ACA has provided leeway for mothers to nurse, and so on.

YAY!!!

a reply to: jimmyx

well of course that's it...trials are serious, a jury member must pay attention to what's being said, and have a degree of focus to the proceedings.. that requires attentiveness...if you are breast feeding, you are distracted, and the people around you are distracted by it....you or other jurists may miss a crucial piece of evidence or testimony, which is unfair to the court, the plaintiff, and to the defendant.

All true.

Except, the REAL reason is that the new ACA (Obamacare) insists that mothers who breastfeed should be able to do so without undue stress and strain and inconvenience.

It's actually a very good thing. !!

I am always looking for a good exclusion from Jury Duty. We need more reasons not less.

a reply to: Metallicus

Why would you not want to be on a jury?

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Yes. Because boobs are just boobs.

And that is the only reason.

Yea....

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Hi all!

Okay, so today, I got another jury summons.

I was very excited..... (and I'm NOT being sarcastic!)
I LOVE getting jury summonses, and I'm going to try my best again this time to get on the jury. I've gotten close a couple of times, but then not.....

Anyway, so - reading the jury summons for THIS time, I was looking at the "ineligible if..." list.

So, yeah, anyone who has any of these conditions is ineligible:

a) no longer a resident of the county (I still am, so that's all cool)

b) not a citizen of the US (no problem)

c) convicted of a felony in the last 10 years (no problem there, either)


And here is the one I want to discuss:
"You are not eligible for jury service if:
d) You are a breastfeeding mother." (And, by the way, I am NOT a breastfeeding mother, either....)


I think it used to say 'you are not fluent in English'......
but - not now! Or, maybe that comes on the questionnaire at the beginning. Interesting.

Last time I got called, it was for a murder trial. During voir dire, one potential juror said he would be unable to be neutral because he could not impose the death penalty (something I respected) due to his religion. That's fine. Good for him.

My brother says he once sat on a capital murder case, and that he was the ONLY one who dissented in the verdict room and saved the guy from the death penalty (he lives in Montana).


I have no idea what cases there will be (although none are expected to require sequestration).....but it just really offends me that a law-abiding citizen of this county would be ineligible to serve on account of she is BREASTFEEDING.

What the hell difference should that make?

Oh....wait. Some people get upset when women breastfeed.

Right.

Anyway - this IS a social issue......EDITED: If it's for the welfare of the baby, then I'm all for it. New moms and breastfeeding moms SHOULD be exempt...........

Don't know if anyone else cares, agrees, or disagrees with this 'exclusion', but I personally don't think it's right. ANOTHER EDIT: Please see that I did my homework below, and that this 'exclusion' is for a good reason.



EDIT AGAIN: I admit my knee-jerk response was to blame the prudes.............but as it turns out, this is part of the National Health Plan already!! It's even part of the ACA!!!

Federal Health Reform and Nursing Mothers

President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on March 30, 2010. (See the combined full text of Public Laws 111-148 and 111-152 here.) Among many provisions, Section 4207 of the law amends the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938 (29 U.S. Code 207) to require an employer to provide reasonable break time for an employee to express breast milk for her nursing child for one year after the child's birth each time such employee has need to express milk.

The employer is not required to compensate an employee receiving reasonable break time for any work time spent for such purpose. The employer must also provide a place, other than a bathroom, for the employee to express breast milk. If these requirements impose undue hardship, an employer that employs fewer than 50 employees is not subject to these requirements. The federal requirements shall not preempt a state law that provides greater protections to employees.

www.ncsl.org...

For two very simple reasons - one baby's need to feed often - the court can't take time out for a woman to breatfeed her child in private and if she were allowed to keep her baby with her and breatfeed at need it might offend some people.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I agree that a breastfeeding mother is indicative of a fragile relationship that could, can, & will disrupt the courts proceedings.

Also I have known women, who breastfed, and when they went too long without pumping or feeding...the milk would let down; staining the blouse or shirt. This would cause a unexpected trial delay. Therefore it is best to alleviate a breastfeeding mother from jury duty.

a reply to: fshrrex

Also I have known women, who breastfed, and when they went too long without pumping or feeding...the milk would let down; staining the blouse or shirt.

Yes, that happens. Sometimes if a woman is just 'away from her baby' and even thinks about the baby, this can happen. It did to me.

This would cause a unexpected trial delay.

For her blouse to be wet with breastmilk excretion?

Therefore it is best to alleviate a breastfeeding mother from jury duty.

Not clear on your thought process here.
Is it because others would be offended if her milk 'let down' in public that you think she should be excused?
Because, as it turns out, the Federal Government decided that is was BETTER FOR THE BABY and the mother to allow them to do what they do in peace.

Interesting little situation to think about, though, isn't it?

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

To be completely fair about it, several states excused nursing mothers prior to any ACA legislation even being talked about.

The ACA may have spurred some others into doing it also, but some already were.

And yes, a woman's shirt suddenly getting wet, and her trying to deal with it, would cause undue distraction in a court proceeding.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Metallicus

Why would you not want to be on a jury?

My husband served on a child molester's trial. He had granddaughters about same age as the victims. Some of the evidence was really hard to take.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Well, then - we are still stuck with the original question -

why do people have to be offended by women who breastfeed? (They DO make 'leak-proof bras', you know).

I am totally aware that it would be disruptive - and I guess I'm just curious about how others feel about it (regardless of whether or not it is a Federal Case)......

Shouldn't it just seem "normal"?

Trust me, Shamrock, I totally understand what you're saying. It just did (unintentionally) bring forth the different reasons why people would "object".

When they learn it is about the best-practice for mom and baby, would they still be 'distracted' or 'offended'? I mean - it's a breast that provides milk. It's a baby who needs that milk. It's part of life. Not exactly a "Public Display of Affection".

What about if it was someone who had to take insulin shots every four hours?

Do you see what I mean? I believe there are MANY people who are offended or distracted or grossed out, or whatever when they see a woman doing the most healthy and natural thing in the world.

Anyway, I'm rambling. Not sure where this thread is going, either.....but oh well

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Look at it this way: every last person in the court room can be totally accepting of it, but that doesn't change the fact that mom now has a soaked shirt and can either a) sit there with wet spots on her shirt or be excused to change.

Is that fair to her?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Okay, guys and gals - you know what? I totally jumped the gun on this one.

LOL!!!!!!

Anyway, I'm glad to have presented that Obama's ACA has provided leeway for mothers to nurse, and so on.

YAY!!!

*snort* Oh, since Obama's law decreed it and not Brownback's evil ways ... then it's totally fine?

Not a bias here at all ...

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

tell me something, BuzzyWigs...why would you want to be in a court in the first place when your nursing?...you are not missing out on much, believe me...and I would think that the time you spent nursing your own child would be kind of a "quiet peaceful togetherness" type of time for both of you. plus, it's not like years out of your life, it's just for a few months, right?

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Some people just think it offensive to see a woman breastfeeding. Not me, I will never tell a woman to put her boobs away .

a reply to: alienjuggalo

This makes twice we've agreed on something.

I think the earth just shifted on its axis.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: alienjuggalo

This makes twice we've agreed on something.

I think the earth just shifted on its axis.

In this instance, it's not about the act of breastfeeding as it is about the appropriateness of having a baby that size in the courtroom for that long, or breaking the proceedings up to allow for pumping since you have to do all the equipment.

I mean, I just don't see an infant as appropriate for the jury box. In this case, motherhood is actually more important.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: alienjuggalo

This makes twice we've agreed on something.

I think the earth just shifted on its axis.

I think this is one that most hetero males will agree on.