Breastfeeding mom could be arrested for bringing baby to jury duty
Laura Trickle, of Lee’s Summit, delivered her daughter Axel in March and was breastfeeding when she was called for jury duty in August.
She asked to be exempt from appearing, as she was breastfeeding, but received notice that she must report to court to fulfill her civic obligation and serve jury duty….
Trickle was told to either arrange for child care or bring somebody with her who could care for the child during jury selection. On September 3, she appeared for jury duty with her child, but according to the ensuing court order, she ‘willfully and contemptuously appeared for jury service with her child and no one to care for the child’.
Trickle will now face Jackson County Presiding Judge Marco Roldan on Thursday at a hearing at the Jackson County Courthouse downtown.
~ The Daily Mail, October 19
[HT: Laura Loo]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Seriously?
Some of us have lost our marbles.
Hope she has wise legal counsel.
(??) Can we say “insane”?
Insane.
So stupid. There is nothing wrong with breastfeeding! When I had to breastfeed I carried a shawl with me so I could do it discreetly, but I am no way offended by seeing a woman with an exposed breast feeding her child. That’s what they were made for.
Crazy! This can’t be the first time something like this has come up. How can the justice system not have an exemption for this?
I would not pay any fines if I were her. I also doubt she will serve any jail time. Her defense: I did appear in person as instructed so I did not dodge the jury summons. The judge will most likely nolle pros the case and request accommodations for her to serve. I am certain of it. If not, the system will be taken through the wringer by the Kansas City Star again.
This is incredibly stupid. Has no breastfeeding woman ever been called to jury duty before? They seriously don’t although an exemption for this? This is insane.
I remember being called for jury duty when I was breastfeeding one of my babies. I explained the situation– that my baby was just an infant and breastfeeding exclusively– and that I could either not serve or be allowed to bring my baby with me everyday. They let me off immediately. Weird that protocol is apparently inconsistent across state / county lines.
Lord have mercy. These people are nuts!
When I was nursing our youngest, I was called for jury duty as well. And we homeschool, so I explained to the jury manager my situation and she immediately let me off, asking when it would be best for ME to serve. I requested a summer slot about a year down the road and they gave it to me without any trouble whatsoever.
Unless this woman has tried to skirt jury duty multiple times, I don’t understand why they would do this to her.
I had a son that was 3 weeks old and I was let go of jury duty then too and rescheduled.
“Woe to pregnant women and nursing mothers in those days!”
Mt 24:19
Snipers in Syria targeting pregnant woment and judges in America penalizing nursing moms.
These days must be another one of “those days”.
Ken, I must politely disagree that facing a judge and being harassed for bringing your nursing child does not qualify as woe. Baby shot dead in the womb, yep that qualifies. But woe, woe is big life altering immense anguish and this just doesn’t get there.
No Ken. The hearing is scheduled for 10/24/13. You are premature in exclaiming penalization.
It is not alway possible to get ‘anyone’ to babysit while we have jury duty. This is absolutely absurd. It’s that Jaffe memo again making women work.
I get why they wouldn’t want a baby in the courtroom, but they couldn’t have offered her options? Like rescheduling jury duty, or paid daycare at a nearby place, or anything like that? Seems screwed up.
“paid daycare at a nearby place”
that’ll be the day when I leave my infant or preschooler at a govt-provided daycare.
I’m all in favor of rights for nursing mothers & the right to nurse in public, but I disagree here. There is probably a good reason for not allowing young infants & children at jury duty. If she had plenty of notice, then she should have made prior arrangements for someone to care for the baby and could of pumped breastmilk in advance. It sounds like she was purposely defying the rules to make a point.
I don’t get your point Ladybug? She is not defying any rules as she showed up with the infant. It is not the court’s job to tell you and me what to do with our children even for a noble cause such as a jury duty. I served last year and got a whopping 17 bucks for a full day that I gave to my employer to get paid for that day. What if someone is a stay-at-home mother? 17 bucks for the day plus the cost of a babysitter if no family members are available. Perhaps this woman’s circumstances were such…
The court is not going to penalize her as it will send the wrong message and less citizens will want to serve…
Eh? What do you mean she didn’t break any rules? It apparently was against the rules to bring a baby to the selection process. Which is fine, it’s not appropriate to have kids in some places, like a court of law. I think the issue is that they didn’t offer her other options. It’s not like just anyone can nurse her baby, and don’t some women have trouble expressing breast milk? They could have made an exception or given her some options. I’m a single parent and it would be difficult to find a babysitter on a short notice, but I wouldn’t expect that it’s okay to bring my young children into a courtroom. I don’t think it’s wrong to not allow children, but I think it’s unfair to penalize people for not having a babysitter unless you offer other options.
Yes, some women have trouble expressing breast milk. It never worked well for me. Plus some moms want to breastfeed for the bonding benefit to the child not just for the nutritional value. If you cannot express your milk and are not nursing your baby, you will stop making milk so I don’t see what benefit bringing a sitter along would be anyway.
She should be allowed to have her baby with her or excused from duty.
Big Brother is Way too Big.
Eh jury duty is a civil service, and I don’t see anything wrong with not allowing children into a courtroom. Fair is fair, all citizens should serve jury duty if called, being a mother doesn’t change that. That doesn’t mean that they need to be unreasonable though. They should have allowed her to reschedule if she was unable to express milk and get a baby sitter. Maybe it should be standard practice for nursing mothers or stay at home parents/single parents to be able to reschedule so their children’s needs are adequately taken care of.
The thing with pumping and feeding with a bottle… unless it’s a way of life or your baby radically takes an instant liking to it, you can’t “just” pump and give them a bottle. When my daughter was four months I had to be away from her for about four days – totally against all my plans, theories, and practices of parenting – but it had to be. I knew about the impending separation before she was born and within her first weeks of life we had to start preparing us both for the separation. Jury duty should not require such long-term, life-style commitment.
That being said, since she showed up without someone who could tend to the baby while keeping her child there at the courthouse (which it sounds like was provided to her as an option), it sounds like she may have thumbed her nose at the situation. (Or else she, like many of us, just got down to the wire and wasn’t able to find someone to help.) Some situations need nose-thumbing.
Here in California I was able to check a box to push out my summons six months or a year, forgot which – I didn’t end up getting called for a couple more years.
“Big Brother is Way too Big”
AMEN to that Praxedes!!!
What makes a jury candidate unattractive is admitting pro-life ideology on the questionnaire and stating a belief that what is legal does not always coincide with what is moral. This might help those who work in such fields as health care or who cannot afford child care or a wet nurse.
Unfortunately those statements might also put you on the “no fly” list. ;-)
I thought there was exemptions for people who have children under the age of 10. Is that only in some states or have things changed?
Her mistake was in telling the court she was breastfeeding and rather than getting an exemption under 4(1):
http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c400-499/4940000430.htm
Mother in Texas, I think Texas states age 10, but Missouri doesn’t. Nevertheless, the exemption could have been obtained. However, she still would have to have attempted to find child care. The statute doesn’t give “special rights” for breastfeeding.
I have yet to meet a Judge who strictly adheres to a statute “merit.” Judges have the ability to think/act outside-the-box and hopefully Pres Judge Roldan will demonstrate it today.
Well, Thomas R., you might have “met” one now.
And, in many jurisdictions, she could have simply gotten rescheduled. I think her problem was just showing up to court with the baby. That wasn’t very bright.
I say it was bright enough!!! Babies in our world are not disposable “merit.” The court system is not going to suffer by accommodating this young lady and methinks that Judge Roldan is smart enough to realize that (as evidenced by some of the exerpts from him in the Daily Mail).
Court systems are becoming more and more citizen-friendly precisely because jury duty is an integral part of our society. This baby will get consideration.
And, how do you know “merit” that I do not meet Judges on a daily basis?
Thomas, I never stated you don’t meet judges. You stated, “I have yet to meet a Judge who strictly adheres to a statute “merit”.
I replied, “Well, Thomas R., you may have met one now”. How does that imply that I feel you “do not meet Judges on a daily basis”? Your spin on that is truly weird.
And, no, it wasn’t bright on her part. She should have just said she couldn’t get someone to look after her child and asked to be rescheduled. And, where did you get the “Babies in our world are not disposable ‘merit'” concerning this situation?
You put the met in parenthesis “merit.” That indicates you did not actually think that I do. Am I reading the parenthesis correctly or what?
Not disposable simply means that the Judge has to accommodate the mother and not the other way around.
The other difficulty specific to a nursing mom whether she is at home with the baby or working outside the home, is that she needs to express milk *during the time she’s stuck on the jury,* as in, every 2-3 hours. If she doesn’t, she’ll either leak and make a mess of herself and her clothes, and/or she’ll get plugged ducts which soon lead to a breast infection, which feels like bad flu. Will court recess for her to pump every 2-3 hours? I doubt it. Missouri would not permit me to postpone based on my child, but when my doc wrote a letter explaining the accommodations that would need to be made for my own health, that took care of it.
Thomas R., I made a grammatical error.
And, the judge only has to follow the law. Accommodations outside of the law are at the judge’s discretion. But, here’s the thing. Whether she breastfeeds or not isn’t the issue under the law.
Your rejoicing is premature “merit:”
http://www.kansascity.com/2013/10/24/4573628/jackson-county-judge-delays-contempt.html
Not really, Thomas. The judge is affording the legislature a chance to clarify things.
But, I am rejoicing at parts of the Texas antiabortion law that have been put on hold for awhile. Concerning the Missouri case–a small thing.
Did you personally give yourself a “like” for the comment above “merit?”
No, Thomas, I don’t do the “likes”. I don’t need affirmation when I come here. Some do, I think.
I meant specifically that no one other than a pro-abort would give you a “like” for anti pro-life commentary. Have I clarified it for you?