Author Topic: Lactation not pregnancy-related, says judge  (Read 1051 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23022
  • Reputation: +20177/-243
  • Gender: Male
Lactation not pregnancy-related, says judge
« on: February 15, 2012, 11:22:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Judge says lactation not 'pregnancy-related' - upholds firing of pregnant woman in Texas

    (NaturalNews) If you asked your employer for permission to use a breast pump in a private back room during your break and he responded by laying you off, would this constitute sex discrimination? One U.S. District Judge, the Honorable Judge Lynn Hughes of Houston, Tex., does not think so, nor does he believe that lactation is a valid "pregnancy-related" event, having ruled recently that a woman who was allegedly fired for requesting permission to breast pump at work was not a victim of discrimination.

    Donnicia Venters had worked for Houston Funding, a debt collection agency, for several years before getting pregnant, and during her leave she says she kept in close contact with her employer. But after returning back to work and asking the company's vice president, Harry Cagle, if she could use a private room during her break time to breast pump, he allegedly told her that she was officially laid off.

    "I didn't think anything was wrong," said Venters to KHOU-TV in Houston. "I'm very shocked that it did happen. I worked very hard for that company going on three years, a lot of hours. I was a good employee, and I didn't see it coming at all."

    According to reports, Venters kept in very close contact with Houston Funding during the two months she was on maternity leave, as both written statements from her direct supervisor and mobile phone records confirm this to be true. But the company claims that Venters failed to keep in contact with the company, which is the excuse Venter and her lawyer say Houston Funding is using for why they essentially fired her.

    When the case was taken to court by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on Venters' behalf, Robert Fleming, Venters' direct supervisor at Houston Funding, provided a signed affidavit before Judge Hughes explaining that when he talked to Cagle about Venters using the breast pump at work, he responded by saying "No. Maybe she needs to stay home longer."

    Firing someone because of lactation or breast-pumping is not sex discrimination, according to Judge Hughes

    But despite all the evidence that Venters was fired because of wanting to use the breast pump, and not because she had committed "job abandonment" as her company claimed, Judge Hughes ultimately sided with Houston Funding by declaring that "lactation is not pregnancy, childbirth or a related medical condition," which are the requirements for substantiating a sex discrimination claim.

    Adding to this opinion, Judge Hughes declared that after the day Venters gave birth, "she was no longer pregnant and her pregnancy-related conditions ended." In other words, facilitating the feeding of a child once he or she is born is not a valid pregnancy-related condition in Judge Hughes' mind, even though the mother continues to lactate naturally, and this lactation is unique to women.

    At this point in time, no higher-level appeals court has ever ruled on whether or not firing or laying off a woman due to breastfeeding-related issues constitutes discrimination, so no precedent has been officially set on the matter. But Venters hopes that the EEOC will appeal the ruling.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline Alex

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1413
    • Reputation: +263/-2
    • Gender: Female
    Lactation not pregnancy-related, says judge
    « Reply #1 on: February 15, 2012, 06:59:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Good! Now she can stay home and take care of her baby like she is supposed to.


    Offline Iuvenalis

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1332
    • Reputation: +1116/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Lactation not pregnancy-related, says judge
    « Reply #2 on: February 15, 2012, 07:39:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Matthew, link?

    Offline Sigismund

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5366
    • Reputation: +3104/-8
    • Gender: Male
    Lactation not pregnancy-related, says judge
    « Reply #3 on: February 16, 2012, 09:22:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Alex
    Good! Now she can stay home and take care of her baby like she is supposed to.


    Yes, but the judge is still an idiot.
    Stir up within Thy Church, we beseech Thee, O Lord, the Spirit with which blessed Josaphat, Thy Martyr and Bishop, was filled, when he laid down his life for his sheep: so that, through his intercession, we too may be moved and strengthen by the same Spir

    Offline CathMomof7

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1045
    • Reputation: +1270/-10
    • Gender: Female
    Lactation not pregnancy-related, says judge
    « Reply #4 on: February 24, 2012, 03:37:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Sigismund
    Quote from: Alex
    Good! Now she can stay home and take care of her baby like she is supposed to.


    Yes, but the judge is still an idiot.


    Yes, the judge is an idiot, but what do we expect?  Bottle-feeding has been the norm in this country since the 1940s when it was marketed as "the responsible way middle-class women feed their babies."  You would be hard pressed to find a woman from the 60s or 70s who nursed their babies for more than 2 or 3 months, unless they were hippies.

    Lactation is now viewed as something not necessary to motherhood or even a by-product of pregnancy.  It is viewed as a choice.  For many, women who "choose" to nurse their babies must be willing to accept the consequences.  Working mothers who "pump" are seen as a liability.  In their minds, if you want to work, buy formula; it's just as good.

    We have done it to ourselves.  There is no one else to blame for the insistence that women must reject themselves and their offspring to self-actualize and join the work force.

    We long ago separated the sex act from procreation.  Now we have also separated milk from motherhood.  

    Nothing to see here, folks, just more of the same.


    Offline sedetrad

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1585
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Lactation not pregnancy-related, says judge
    « Reply #5 on: February 24, 2012, 03:54:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Yes, the judge is an idiot, but what do we expect?  Bottle-feeding has been the norm in this country since the 1940s when it was marketed as "the responsible way middle-class women feed their babies."  You would be hard pressed to find a woman from the 60s or 70s who nursed their babies for more than 2 or 3 months, unless they were hippies.

    Lactation is now viewed as something not necessary to motherhood or even a by-product of pregnancy.  It is viewed as a choice.  For many, women who "choose" to nurse their babies must be willing to accept the consequences.  Working mothers who "pump" are seen as a liability.  In their minds, if you want to work, buy formula; it's just as good.

    We have done it to ourselves.  There is no one else to blame for the insistence that women must reject themselves and their offspring to self-actualize and join the work force.

    We long ago separated the sex act from procreation.  Now we have also separated milk from motherhood.  

    Nothing to see here, folks, just more of the same.


    Good post! This was inevitable.

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16