Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Woman with infant asked to leave Chicago trade show
Chicago TGribune ^ | 05/19/2014 | Meredith Rodriguez

Posted on 05/20/2014 7:36:10 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd

A woman who had hoped to promote her family-owned business at the National Restaurant Association trade show over the weekend was instead driving back to her Minnesota home Sunday.

Kristin Osborne was escorted out of the exhibit hall at McCormick Place on Saturday, she said, because she was carrying an infant. Osborne, 31, knew about the trade show rule that does not allow children under 16, she said, but did not think it would apply to her sleeping, 10-day-old baby wrapped closely to her chest. Osborne left her two other children, ages 2 and 4, at home, but said she has never been kicked out of a place for having an infant.

"As a working mother — and I have been working since I had my first one — this is a big surprise to me," said Osborne, who takes charge of marketing for her family-owned Spring Valley winery, Four Daughters Vineyard. "I have brought my babies all sorts of places. You don't bring children to adult places, but he eats every hour currently."

(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: breastfeeding
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 next last
Yeah, its another breastfeeding story.

Who? Who takes their 10 day old out of state just to breast feed in public?

1 posted on 05/20/2014 7:36:10 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

“Who takes their 10 day old out of state just to breast feed in public?”

Perhaps a working mother.

Go pick on a welfare queen instead.


2 posted on 05/20/2014 7:39:32 AM PDT by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Osborne, 31, knew about the trade show rule that does not allow children under 16, she said, but did not think it would apply to her sleeping, 10-day-old baby wrapped closely to her chest.

why would it not apply to her 10-day old baby?

3 posted on 05/20/2014 7:40:45 AM PDT by latina4dubya (when i have money i buy books... if i have anything left, i buy 6-inch heels and a bottle of wine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

“She can bring her child. Why can’t I bring my child? I’m going to sue”.


4 posted on 05/20/2014 7:41:22 AM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus

Now that you got that snark out of the way; go read the article.

This is all about exercising her right to breastfeed in public.


5 posted on 05/20/2014 7:42:03 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
" Osborne, 31, knew about the trade show rule that does not allow children under 16, she said, but did not think it would apply to her sleeping, 10-day-old baby wrapped closely to her chest."

Where is the logic in her reasoning?

6 posted on 05/20/2014 7:42:25 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males---the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Is it a child? Or is it just a group of cells? For some people (Peter Singer) this may be a source of confusion.


7 posted on 05/20/2014 7:44:14 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Free Republic Doesn't Have One Of These


Click The Pic To Donate

Please Donate

8 posted on 05/20/2014 7:44:20 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

Where is the logic in her reasoning?

________________________________________

Good question. Maybe I’m wrong, but I see this as her being entitled. She has a right to breastfeed in public, and by golly if she has to drive 200 miles out of state to feed her 10 day old - then she’s gonna do it!


9 posted on 05/20/2014 7:46:21 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
"Good question. Maybe I’m wrong, but I see this as her being entitled. She has a right to breastfeed in public, and by golly if she has to drive 200 miles out of state to feed her 10 day old - then she’s gonna do it!"

Yep, I think you hit it right on the head.

10 posted on 05/20/2014 7:47:10 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males---the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
"I'm disappointed mostly," Osborne said. "It was a really big deal they invited us to pour at the show. It was a really big deal for our little winery."

as far as business is concerned, not a wise move on her part, and i do not think she was really that naive about it... her husband or someone else representing the winery ought to have gone to pour... instead no one is representing their winery...

11 posted on 05/20/2014 7:47:56 AM PDT by latina4dubya (when i have money i buy books... if i have anything left, i buy 6-inch heels and a bottle of wine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

A mature people interpret rules to make them appropriate to circumstances. Rules are not laws. They are not immutable. They are a convenience for participants. The rigid application of rules leads to excesses such as sending little boys home from school for drawing pictures or eating cookies.
It is obnoxious to allow ignorant watchdogs enforce rules intended to create a comfortable environment. Their blatant disregard for the intention of rules is the very foundation of tyrannical rule in civil society. The succor of an infant is a sacred act. Disallowing a mother and participant to care for and feed her infant is a vulgarity.


12 posted on 05/20/2014 7:48:49 AM PDT by Louis Foxwell (This is a wake up call. Join the Sultan Knish ping list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
and by golly if she has to drive 200 miles out of state to feed her 10 day old - then she’s gonna do it!

and that is exactly what this is about... and she (they) sacrificed business for their winery to make this point... how is it that this little story is news?

13 posted on 05/20/2014 7:50:06 AM PDT by latina4dubya (when i have money i buy books... if i have anything left, i buy 6-inch heels and a bottle of wine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Taking a 10 day old baby into a trade show that attracts tens of thousands of people from all over the country? I don’t care what her motivation is, she’s a freaking moron. I feel sorry for this kid having to grow up with a mother who has been spared from the ravages of intelligence.


14 posted on 05/20/2014 7:50:06 AM PDT by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell
It is obnoxious to allow ignorant watchdogs enforce rules intended to create a comfortable environment. Their blatant disregard for the intention of rules is the very foundation of tyrannical rule in civil society. The succor of an infant is a sacred act. Disallowing a mother and participant to care for and feed her infant is a vulgarity.

i get what you are saying... but i believe it was obnoxious of her to show up and assume... she could have called before hand to find out if they would accommodate her... but i know why she did not do that...

15 posted on 05/20/2014 7:52:13 AM PDT by latina4dubya (when i have money i buy books... if i have anything left, i buy 6-inch heels and a bottle of wine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: latina4dubya
"...why would it not apply to her 10-day old baby?"

Because the only reason for exclusion of children is the possibility of a rug-rat getting loose, wandering into the infrastructure, and being injured (or causing damage, or both). Not gonna happen with a "babe in arms".

The rule needs to be re-written to reflect today's realities.

16 posted on 05/20/2014 7:53:44 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (Newly fledged NRA Life Member (after many years as an "annual renewal" sort))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
This is all about exercising her right to breastfeed in public.

No, it isn't. Nobody says she can't breastfeed anywhere she wants to. She is attending an event which she probably clicked the little button that says, "by signing up, you agree to these rules." There you go. Sorry, lady, you should have gotten a sitter, or a supportive husband. She knew the rules, and tried to "grey area" her compliance.

The problem is that the "grey area" is used to destroy the rule of law every day. Illegal alien, hiding in the shadows for years, poor thing, deserves citizenship. It can be anywhere from decades to days, when amnesty happens.

So, where to draw the line? Well, 16 is what the rule says. Pregnant is never determined to be a child, so if she had gone 11 days earlier, no gray area. 1 day old? Suddenly, we have a grey area? I don't think so. 10, 15, 20, 30? Next thing you know, there is no rule.

17 posted on 05/20/2014 7:54:33 AM PDT by webheart (We are all pretty much living in a fiction.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Stories of this kind are like a Rorschach test for commentators. It’s weirdly fascinating.


18 posted on 05/20/2014 7:54:34 AM PDT by Tax-chick (You say I'm insane ... I say you're afraid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
“She can bring her child. Why can’t I bring my child? I’m going to sue”.

yes--i can see it now... "so what if i still breastfeed my three-year old... who is anyone to judge me?"

19 posted on 05/20/2014 7:54:42 AM PDT by latina4dubya (when i have money i buy books... if i have anything left, i buy 6-inch heels and a bottle of wine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Why would she assume her child would be the exception to the rule?? Why not contact the coordinators first before bringing the baby with her??


20 posted on 05/20/2014 7:55:18 AM PDT by MissTed ( Private Tagline - Do Not Read!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: latina4dubya

Of all institutions, the National Restaurant Association ought to be exceedingly generous in welcoming nursing mothers into their affairs. Would any participating restaurant send a mother home for having an infant in her arms.


21 posted on 05/20/2014 7:56:19 AM PDT by Louis Foxwell (This is a wake up call. Join the Sultan Knish ping list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
"This is all about exercising her right to breastfeed in public."

What is supposed to be so bad about a mother breastfeeding in public, and why are you so incensed about it??

22 posted on 05/20/2014 7:56:30 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (Newly fledged NRA Life Member (after many years as an "annual renewal" sort))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
“Who takes their 10 day old out of state just to breast feed in public?”

The same people that go into a Chipolte Restaurant dressed like every leftwinger’s worst nightmare and carrying SKS and or An AK47. In that one, the only thing missing was a bible in the left hand of one of them.

23 posted on 05/20/2014 7:57:19 AM PDT by Tupelo (I feel more like Philip Nolan every day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

10 day old? My wife and eldest daughter didn’t feel like walking outside 10 day after giving birth much less driving 20 miles and attending a trade show...


24 posted on 05/20/2014 7:57:19 AM PDT by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Actually, it’s not about her right to breast feed in public.

As the breastfeeding law expert in the story explains, a breastfeeding woman does not have a right to take her child where children are prohibited.

And children have long been prohibited at this trade show.


25 posted on 05/20/2014 7:59:16 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

Don’t get me started on the vulgarization of motherhood. Why should a mother expect to be told she may not bring her utterly dependent infant with her? Are pregnant women also refused participation?


26 posted on 05/20/2014 8:00:11 AM PDT by Louis Foxwell (This is a wake up call. Join the Sultan Knish ping list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Not to jump on all the media led stories on MERS.
But what is this mother thinking, taking a new born into an environment with 10's of thousands of people, many with questionable health issues?

I'm not talking about bubble wrapping a kid for life. It just seems stupid to take a NEW born into that type of environment.

Me thinks mommy wanted some extra attention, by having her little dollie with her.

27 posted on 05/20/2014 8:00:34 AM PDT by mountn man (The Pleasure You Get From Life Is Equal To The Attitude You Put Into It)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

It’s weirdly fascinating.

_________________________

Yeppers. That’s why I posted it. I’ve got no dog in this fight. The sight of a boob feeding a baby in public doesn’t rattle my cage one way or another.

But it certainly does for others.


28 posted on 05/20/2014 8:01:04 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

The trade show had a reasonable rule, and reasonable rules in such situations need to be enforced.


29 posted on 05/20/2014 8:01:14 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Tupelo
You really don't like for people to lawfully exercise their God given rights, do you?

/johnny

30 posted on 05/20/2014 8:01:16 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: latina4dubya; Louis Foxwell
Latina, according to the spokesman, the rule was to protect kids so they wouldn't be running around in an environment where there are knives, hot stoves, open flames, etc. That makes good, practical sense.

This practical rationale wouldn't seem to apply to a tiny infant who can't walk, or even crawl, let alone run, and is plastered up against his mother's chest. He can't "get into things" any more than a preborn could.

31 posted on 05/20/2014 8:01:37 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Sanity is the adequate response of the mind to the real thing: adaequatio mentis ad rem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
The rule needs to be re-written to reflect today's realities.

ORrrrrrrrr...maybe people need to go back to yesterdays decorum.

32 posted on 05/20/2014 8:05:06 AM PDT by mountn man (The Pleasure You Get From Life Is Equal To The Attitude You Put Into It)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Tupelo

THAT is a great point. I’m often on threads calling into question the motives of gun owners who parade around with their AR 15’s and such - just to call attention to themselves.

Are they any different that militant moms who breastfeed in public just to call attention to their cause?


33 posted on 05/20/2014 8:05:29 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

She knew the rule but in her mind it applied to others, not her.

I think she might be ready for the federal Senate or the Presidency.

Or at the least, Attorney General.


34 posted on 05/20/2014 8:06:12 AM PDT by Iron Munro (The “fourth estate”has morphed into a 5th column)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mase

Why could her husband not have gone to the trade show in her place?


35 posted on 05/20/2014 8:06:33 AM PDT by itssme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

According to the article, nobody observed her nursing the baby. The issue for the event security was simply the baby’s presence, regardless of how he was fed.


36 posted on 05/20/2014 8:07:07 AM PDT by Tax-chick (You say I'm insane ... I say you're afraid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
You don't like for people to lawfully exercise their God given rights?

/johnny

37 posted on 05/20/2014 8:07:16 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

“What difference does it make?”


38 posted on 05/20/2014 8:08:54 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

“Stories of this kind are like a Rorschach test for commentators. It’s weirdly fascinating.”

Shows how fragmented and factionary FR has become, like Hussein’s new fundamentally transformed America.

At each other’s throats now over in-your-face/public breastfeeding.... mission accomplished.


39 posted on 05/20/2014 8:08:55 AM PDT by treetopsandroofs (Had FDR been GOP, there would have been no World Wars, just "The Great War" and "Roosevelt's Wars".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

The baby eats EVERY HOUR?

Yikes.

.


40 posted on 05/20/2014 8:09:28 AM PDT by Mears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell
Disallowing a mother and participant to care for and feed her infant is a vulgarity.

In this current age of lawsuits, exercising discretion is a sure way to get sued over "discriminatory" treatment. The rule was "no kids under 16". The baby is under 16. If they let her in, then they invite all sorts of complaints from other participants who took the time and expense to arrange for child-care away from the trade show.

41 posted on 05/20/2014 8:10:29 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

There’s a fine line between lawfully exercising your God given rights and foolishly abusing those right which harm your cause.


42 posted on 05/20/2014 8:14:04 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

what part of “NO CHIDREN” was this idiot missing?

yes Lady, NO CHILDREN means your post-born fetus!


43 posted on 05/20/2014 8:17:16 AM PDT by silverleaf (Age takes a toll: Please have exact change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: treetopsandroofs

Instead of “Look! A squirrel!” it’s “Look! A breast!”


44 posted on 05/20/2014 8:18:23 AM PDT by Tax-chick (You say I'm insane ... I say you're afraid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
And you are the one that determines when someone is foolishly abusing those rights? Hardly.

As long as no-one is breaking the law in exercising their God given rights, they are fine, regardless of whether it offends your sensibilities or not.

And it sounds like your sensibilities are easily offended if anyone steps out of your comfort zone.

Man up, and quit being afraid of the boogey man of 'harming your cause'. It exists mostly in your mind anyway.

/johnny

45 posted on 05/20/2014 8:18:43 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

It exists mostly in your mind anyway.

_________________________________

Does it now? 50 plus replies on this thread prove you wrong.

This (public breastfeeding or open carrying) is a hot button issue.


46 posted on 05/20/2014 8:22:14 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

I’ve been to many trade shows at McCormick Place,and the Jacob Javits Convention Center in NYC, and before you are allowed to enter you are screened for proper documentation. There are guards checking you in as you enter the hall.Children are never allowed, for safety and legal reasons.I don’t know how she was allowed in, she should not have been.Obviously she hid the infant in order to gain admission.

There are thousands of attendees who follow the rules, if they didn’t the convention center would be filled with strollers, baby gear, screaming toddlers, etc.

This is a business convention, not a playground. Why anyone would bring a ten day old baby to such an environment defies logic.

If this woman felt compelled to attend she should have left pumped breast milk at home with a care giver and her ten day old infant and attended to her business.

As Freud said “Sometimes the rules are just the rules”.


47 posted on 05/20/2014 8:22:59 AM PDT by COUNTrecount (There's no there there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
try limiting your “no children” event to allow “babes in arms” and you will soon discover more than you want to know about todays realities of the selfish Mommy set

I guarantee people would bring 8 yr olds in strollers and babe sin arms who would just need a little toddling exercise in the midst if the crowd to stop the whining

Not to mention someone holding a true babe in arms. soft spot and all, and being jostled or knocked down in a huge adult trade show crowd

and then, there is the diaper- changing, another beautiful natural act some people choose to share in public

On tables, on floors, on chairs- and the trash cans (if they use them)- eeewwww

spoken as one who does MANY NO CHILDREN events and has barred a few indignant violators

48 posted on 05/20/2014 8:24:22 AM PDT by silverleaf (Age takes a toll: Please have exact change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Name one time that open carry has resulted in a subsequent loss of firearms freedoms in some place that wasn't already a liberal hell-hole.

/johnny

49 posted on 05/20/2014 8:24:37 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

There are plenty of other reasons to ban kids. Even a little arm bundle has the ability to start screaming and interrupt the show. Not to mention the show is probably pretty noisy and not too good on infant ears. And arm bundles don’t travel well without a lot of baggage, so that mom is taking up a lot more floor space than other attendees. They made their rules for their reasons, there’s nothing wrong with them sticking to them.


50 posted on 05/20/2014 8:25:42 AM PDT by discostu (Seriously, do we no longer do "phrasing"?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson