Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Being shackled during labor.


Yes you read correctly women who are incacerated or detained are sometimes shackled during labor. 

First of all.  I apologize (not sure who actually reads my blog if anyone) but I haven't updated in quite some time.  Probably because I'm just about 9 months pregnant now and any bit of precious time I have at night I usually spend stuck in the couch or trying to get some much needed rest before baby #2 comes along. 

So I will try to post more often.  Also I changed the theme of the blog from "Family law issues" to pretty much any legal issue, because I think it was a bit misleading.  I'm not after all, a family law attorney, but I find legal issues that affect families to be interesting.  I'm not sure people really grasped the distinction because I kept getting requests from people to write about specific family law issues.

PHOTO The American Medical Association (AMA) adopted a resolution to prohibit the shackling of women during labor -- a practice outlawed in seven states but still used in some prisons and hospitals for inmates who are giving birth.

Anyway I digress, back to being shackled during labor.  It sounds like it would fit into the category of cruel and unusual punishment right? Well it should in my opinion, and some states have taken that stance.

I'm inspired to write about this, because in the last few years I have read a few stories online about women who had been charged with some immigration violations (like using false IDs) who were forced to give birth while in shackles or handcuffs!  I read those stories and was so incredibly angry. My heart went out to these women especially given that I have already gone through labor once and am now pregnant again and cannot even fathom having to be restrained while in labor.

The links to some of these stories are below:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128563037&ft=1&f=1128

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2009/07/06/giving-birth-chains-the-shackling-incarcerated-women-during-labor-and-delivery

I finally read a follow up to one of the stories and it inspired me to write this post.

Miriam Mendiola-Martinez and son Angel, born in MCSO custody during Christmas week.
image provided by: phoenixnewstimes.com

Two years ago a woman by the name of Miriam Mendiola-Martinez said she was forced to give birth while shackled to a bed, not allowed to hold her newborn baby after birth and even forced to walk out of the hospital while shackled just a few days after her c-section still bleeding. 


She has now (thankfully) sued our favorite sheriff, Joe Arpaio of Arizona (yes that was sarcasm, he is awful in my opinion). 

It all sounds extreme but that's what her lawsuit alleges.  I'm trying to get my hands on a copy of the complaint and hope to find a link to the actual complaint online. Here is the citation to the case:
Mendiola v. Arpaio, et. al, Arizona District Court Number 11CV2512, filed on 12/19/11.  I was able to access the case through the Federal Court filing and I THINK you can view it here.
For all the lawyers and others who actually want to know what her complaint is alleging, here are the counts in the complaint:

  • PLAINTIFF’S CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS FOR INTERFERING WITH PLAINTIFF’S RIGHTS UNDER 42 USC §§ 1981 and 1983
      • COUNT ONE
        VIOLATIONS OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT
        (Deliberate Indifference to Serious Medical Needs)
      • COUNT TWO
        VIOLATIONS OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT
        (Deliberate Indifference to Serious Medical Needs)
      • COUNT THREE VIOLATIONS OF THE EIGHTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS
        (Cruel and Unusual Punishment)
      • COUNT FOUR VIOLATIONS OF THE FIFTH, FOURTEENTH, AND FIFTEENTH AMENDMENTS
        (Equal Protection – Disparate Treatment)
      • COUNT FIVE-MONELL LIABILITY (this has to do with her alleging that she suffered immediate and irreparable injury, including physical, psychological and emotional injury and risk of death. See
        Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Svcs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978)

      And just to touch on some of the legal issues involved according to the Huffing Post article cited above and other research:

      Legal Issues

       

      And finally of course, this is not the first time a woman has been forced to give labor under these extreme and cruel conditions.  Here are lots of more examples I found. 

      The National Orgazination for Women

      The National Organization for Women put together a "Guide to Eliminating Shackling of Incarcerated Women Pre-, During and Post-Labor and Delivery" in 2010 that I found quite helpful in that it cited several cases and websites that provide information about this practice.

       Controversy

      The topic of shackling women during labor is sure to cause a heated argument amongst those who don't believe that prisoners or detainees have the same rights as others, and those who believe in human rights across the board. 

      It also separates those who believe that law enforcement should be allowed to protect themselves and shackle inmates even in labor who may pose a risk to the public, from those who believe the practice amounts to cruel and unusual punishment. 

      Finally, as far as the immigration and deportation cases go, there will also be those people who argue that people who are in this country illegally should not have a right to sue the government and receive compensation from the American people and others who do want to hold our government accountable for their actions even if committed against an "illegal" or undocumented immigrant. 



        

      Thursday, October 27, 2011

      Paternity Fraud


      First of all what is paternity fraud?  Actually, it's a pretty meaningless legal term.  It just refers to a situation where a father is tricked or "defrauded" into fathering a child that is not biologically his.  Usually the fraud is perpetrated by the mother who knows or has reason to know that a man is not her child's father but "pins" paternity on him anyway- for a variety of reasons.

      There is really no hard and fast definition for paternity fraud, since again it is just a phrase that has only become popular in the last 20 years or so. 

      This is an interesting topic because with all of the day time talk shows such as the Maury show that almost exclusively deals with a "YOU ARE NOT THE FATHER" theme, I think it deserves some discussion.

      I will admit I have watched the Maury show more than once in the past and really felt bad for some men who have fathered a child for months or even years, only find out through a DNA test that they are not the biological father of their child.  Before I became a lawyer I would wonder, what happens next?  Of course, like any good tv show we don't know what happens next and can only guess. 
      • Maybe he stops being a part of the child's life?
      • Maybe he doesn't care and still continues to care for the child?
      • What about child support?
      • Was there a child support order in place?
      •  Does child support continuet even though a DNA test has disproven paternity? 
      • What if no child support order is in place, can the mother still get a child support order with a negative DNA test?
      • What if the couple is married?
      • What if they're not?
      • What if the father signed the birth certificate?
      • What if the father signed a Voluntary Acknowledgment of Paternity at the hospital? What if he didn't?
      Well after I became a lawyer I realized that there is no easy answer to any of these questions and like most areas of the law. the answer depends on the specific set of circumstances in the case.  Oh and most importantly the law varies greatly from state to state.

      What I will say is that with the advances in DNA testing in recent years, I almost feel that mandatory DNA testing at the hospitals (especially for unmarried couples) is probably a good idea.  I say "probably" because of course it's a giant intrusion on people's privacy which I'm generally against.  But I think that the pros probably outweigh the cons. 

      The issue is complex to say the least, but let me say that the anti-paternity fraud issue has really become a movement, especially among men's right attorneys  who specialize in divorce and custody cases.  If you simply google "paternity fraud" you will find several websites with catchy slogans such as: "If the genes don't fit, you must acquit".  I think we all know where that came from!

      These sites devote themselves to bringing awareness to "paternity fraud" and even want it to become  a crime of its own (aside from just fraud for example).  Here in IL a few bills have even been introduced asking that paternity fraud become a crime. 

      Amends the Criminal Code of 1961. Creates the offense of paternity fraud. Provides that a person commits the offense by knowingly alleging that a person is the biological father of a child when that person knows that the allegation is false. Provides that the penalty is a Class A misdemeanor.
      House Committee Amendment No. 1
      Provides that the offense of paternity fraud may only be committed if the defendant knows that the allegation that a person is the biological father of a child is both false and may result in the person alleged to be the biological father of the child being erroneously adjudicated as the father of the child.
      Synopsis As Introduced
      Amends the Illinois Parentage Act of 1984. Requires the court to vacate a child support order entered under the Act if the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the moving party is not the biological father of the child who is the subject of the support order and that the obligee maliciously misrepresented the paternity of the child to the obligor. Requires the obligor to file the motion to vacate the support order within 2 years after the discovery of evidence that he is not the biological father of the child. Permits the obligor to bring an action against the obligee or the true biological father of the child to obtain restitution for child support previously paid pursuant to the order, if the court vacates the support order. Provides that any judgment obtained in an action for restitution may not be enforced against the mother until after the child for whom the vacated support order was entered is 18 years old or is otherwise emancipated. Provides that any wage deduction or garnishment action taken to enforce a judgment for restitution against the true biological father shall stand behind any withholding order entered against the true biological father for the support of the child for whom the vacated support order had been entered. Provides that if the support order is vacated, the court shall also vacate the judgment or adjudication of paternity under which the support order was entered.
      The reality of the situation is that many times an unwed couple will go to a hospital to have a baby and the man who believes he is the biological father signs what is called a Voluntary Acknowledgment of Paternity.  Here is the one for Illinois.  Now before I go on, it's important to realize that these paternity issues only arise in cases where the couple is unmarried.  If the man is married to the woman any children born during the marriage are presumed to be his children.  Rebutting paternity in those cases is a whole other matter.  So the VAP looks like this:



      It's a simple enough document, short and to the point.  The problem is many men don't read it before signing it.  They are caught up in the moment of the birth of their beautiful child and don't realize the legal implications of signing the document.  Not to mention it is hospital policy to give this form to unmarried couples and it's just one more thing for the father to sign at the hospital. 

      Now the document is not necessarily a bad thing since it establishes paternity and gives the father a right to establish custody and visitation rights in court later.  But really, the most important thing it does is establish paternity presumptively and legally- on the spot, with no DNA test of any kind.  In fact the document states that the father shall WAIVE his rights to genetic testing and that he agrees to be financially responsible for the child until the child is at least 18 years old and agrees to pay child support.  Now don't worry the document can be rescinded within 60 days but the problem is what if you wait longer than this to get a DNA test?  What if you wait a year? Or two years?  Most likely, it will be too late and even if a man who signed the document laters turns out to NOT be father of the child, he will still have to pay child support because this is in the best interest of the child and he shouldn't have waited so long to get tested, says case law at least.

      So, the moral of the story is, that an unmarried man should really think twice about signing this VAP at the hospital unless he is 100% certain that the child is biologically his.  In fact, if there is any doubt at all, a simple DNA test done in the hospital could save everyone involved a lot of hardship and pain.


      *there is much more to this issue that is not discussed here and if you think you want to dispute paternity or need help establishing paternity seek the help of an experienced family law attorney immediately, the clock is ticking!

      Tuesday, September 27, 2011

      Toddlers and Tiaras

      If you have been watching any television recently or been on the internet at all, chances are you have seen this image of a little 3 year old girl dressed up as Julia Roberts' prostitute character in Pretty Woman.  It has caused quite the controversy and you can imagine why.  

      Toddlers-and-Tiaras

      Beauty pageants have been around for quite some time but recently our obsession with reality t.v. has launched young girls like the one above who participate in toddler pageants, into stardom- all thanks to a show called Toddlers and Tiaras on TLC. 

      Now I'm the first to admit that I used to watch the show.  It came out a few seasons ago I believe, and I was intrigued at first. I think I got through a few episodes until I started feeling so bad for these poor little girls that I was turned off by the show and stopped watching it.  The parents on the show clearly have some serious psychological issues going on and the torment these young girls endure was too much for me to watch. 

      Yet people continue watching the show and TLC continues to profit off of the seeming exploitation of these toddlers.  

      I don't think I need to get into the reasoning behind it, after all reality television programming has skyrocketed in popularity in the last few years and if anything, most people seem to enjoy watching on as reality stars' lives plummet into the ground.  Like a gory car accident we can't help but stare and criticize.  I have no problem with most reality shows that give us a glimpse into the lives of deranged adults, like Jersey Shore for example.  But the real problem for me is that the main characters of Toddlers and Tiaras are children, hardly more than babies.  These children have no choice but to participate in the pageants (despite what the parents may claim) and their further involvement in a grotesque reality television show is obviously not their choice either. 

      Now many opponents of the show are quick to shout "CHILD ABUSE" and demand that the parents of these children be put in jail as a simple solution to the problem, but as an attorney I really have a problem with that too. 

      People seem to not understand that enrolling your child in a beauty pageant really does not (usually) equal child abuse.  

      For fun, let's explore what child abuse really is. The information below is gathered directly from The U.S. Department of Health and Human Service's website here

      First of all like anything else in this country you have to make a distinction between the federal and state level. 

      At the federal level, the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) defines child abuse and neglect as:  
      Any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker, which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse, or exploitation, or an act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm. 

      The CAPTA definition of sexual abuse includes: 

      The employment, use, persuasion, inducement, enticement, or coercion of any child to engage in, or assist any other person to engage in, any sexually explicit conduct or simulation of such conduct for the purpose of producing a visual depiction of such conduct; or The rape, and in cases of caretaker or interfamilial
      relationships, statutory rape, molestation, prostitution, or other form of sexual exploitation of children, or incest with children
      Then from there most states make the distinctions between the different types of abuse like:
      • physical abuse
      • neglect
      • sexual abuse/exploitation
      • emotional abuse
      • parental substance abuse
      • abandonment
      So basically, in order to figure out if a type of behavior is categorized as a crime you should look to your particular state's statutes.  The definitions of physical abuse, neglect, sexual abuse and exploitation, emotional abuse and abandonment for Illinois can be found here

      1. Physical abuse:
      -If you read through them it's pretty clear that physical abuse is probably not being committed by merely entering your toddler in one of these glitz pageants (despite the tanning and waxing that goes on).  What goes on behind closed doors and is not caught on film is another issue.
      2. Neglect:
      -The standards for neglect are fairly high too, requiring the child to be denied basic food, clothing and shelter. Unless these little girls are being starved on camera this seems hard to prove too.
      3. Sexual abuse or exploitation:
      -While it may seem to many that these girls are being exploited (and in fact I even used the term loosely in this blog), you have to basically be allowing some kind of sex offense to be committed against the child.  Here I think it's important to note the difference between the apparent over-sexualization of a child and an actual sex act being committed upon that child.  
      4. Emotional abuse:
      -Finally it seems that some of the behavior of these parents might actually fit into the offense of emotional abuse: which includes impairment or substantial risk of impairment to the child’s emotional health.  
      5. Abandonment:
      -probably N/A here.

      So after all that research it appears the parents might be abusing their children emotionally, but of course there has to be enough probable cause to show that these children are suffering severe emotional abuse at the hands of their parents in order to charge the parents, then it has to be proven that a crime occurred.  

      So instead of participating in the popularization of these type of shows that most people can agree are probably harming at least the emotions of young children, I urge you to change the channel and NOT watch these type of shows.  Instead participate in discussions about why these shows are detrimental to young children and spread the word!

      Monday, September 12, 2011

      Parental Leave

       


      Finally I thought I would tackle a very popular legal issue that affects working mothers AND fathers: parental leave.  Notice I've called it parental leave not maternity leave because dads have rights too, as might partners under a civil union or domestic partnership.


      As many of you know all too well, in general, here in the US you do not have a right to parental leave.  It is much more complicated than that.  First of all there is paid time off work and unpaid time off work.  The first thing you have to know is that in general you do not have a right to get paid time off work for parental leave here in the US.  There are a lot of factors that come into play to determine what kind of parental leave you are entitled to.  Such as:


      -whether you work full time or part time
      -whether you work for a governmental agency of some kind
      -the size of your employer
      -what kind of leave you are looking for: paid or unpaid?


      Then you have to figure out WHO is going to compensate you for your leave:
      -your own private employer
      -the Federal government
      -or a State agency



      There are several misconceptions about parental leave and specifically maternity leave that I want to address.
      1. Any generalizations about maternity leave are probably wrong.
      First of all you cannot generalize maternity leave in this country by saying: Women here get X amount of maternity leave.  Again, there is no inherent RIGHT to receive maternity leave.  It is nice if your employer provides it or if you work for a company covered by FMLA so the federal government provides you with some kind of protection.

      2. I can take all the time off in the world and my boss can't fire me. 
      Not necessarily true.  In general you can take plenty of UNpaid time off and not be fired or rather discriminated against for being pregnant or having a child, but eventually you can be terminated from your employment.  You are basically treated as if you have an illness or disability but your job will not be held open forever.


      Here is some information about pregnancy discrimination as provided for by the Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964, taken from the Equal Opportunity and Employment Commission's website (EEOC).  The very first thing to notice is that Title VII covers employes with 15 or more employees, NOT smaller companies.

      Facts About Pregnancy Discrimination

      The Pregnancy Discrimination Act amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Discrimination on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions constitutes unlawful sex discrimination under Title VII, which covers employers with 15 or more employees, including state and local governments. Title VII also applies to employment agencies and to labor organizations, as well as to the federal government. Women who are pregnant or affected by pregnancy-related conditions must be treated in the same manner as other applicants or employees with similar abilities or limitations.

      Title VII's pregnancy-related protections include:

      • Hiring
      • Pregnancy and Maternity Leave
      • Health Insurance
      • Fringe Benefits 
      It is also unlawful to retaliate against an individual for opposing employment practices that discriminate based on pregnancy or for filing a discrimination charge, testifying, or participating in any way in an investigation, proceeding, or litigation under Title VII.



      3. In Canada they get a year off of paid maternity leave.  It is much better than the US.
      Well I'm no expert on Canada, and while I agree they DO have a better system going on over there, their maternity leave laws are also complicated and women there DO NOT get one year of paid maternity leave.  They get a certain number of weeks paid and then can take UNpaid time off for up to I believe 2 years.  But again I know nothing about Canada law, I just know that you can't take off a year and expect to be paid the whole time there either. 
      Read more about Canada's maternity leave laws IF you wan to read for half an hour...http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/eng/lp/spila/wlb/wfp/11maternity_leave.shtml



      4. Under FMLA I can take off 12 weeks of paid maternity leave.
      First of all the Family and Medical Leave Act is a Federal law that basically provides employees that fall under a certain category, the right to take up to 12 weeks of job-protected UNpaid leave during any 12 month period.  It does NOT entitle any employee to paid time off.  Now I don't know about any of you, but UNpaid time off isn't all that great.  How will you pay bills with NO paycheck for 12 weeks? Most people cannot afford to do this.


      And by the way the FMLA is not specifically meant as paternal leave.  It just happens to be that birth and taking care of a child fits under the act.  It is also meant for anyone who needs to care for an immediate family member or for the care of your own health condition. 


      Now you have to see if you actually qualify for protection under the FMLA.  Here are the basics:
      • Private Sector employees:
        •  If you work in the private sector your employer must employ 50 or more employees
          • in other words private small businesses are NOT regulated by FMLA
      • Public Sector employees: 
        • The good news? FMLA covers ALL public agencies (state and local governments) and local education agencies (like schools- public OR private).
      • Eligibility:
        •  To be eligible you must have worked for the employer for a total 12 months and have worked at least  1,250 hours.
          • just started your job? too bad. no FMLA protection for you.
      • Vacation time/sick leave? 
        • If you have vacation or sick leave you can use it and it is substituted for unpaid FMLA time so usually you don't get 12 weeks PLUS your sick leave/vacation pay!  
        • In fact your employer can require that you take all of your accrued sick days/vacation pay and it counts against the 12 weeks you receive.  
        • So when you go back to work after your marvelous 12 weeks of UNpaid leave you will have NO sick days or vacation days left!
      Still not sure if you're covered? read here!


      And the WHOLE act for fun, is here: http://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/statutes/fmla.htm
      5. I can just apply for Short Term Disability and get paid during maternity leave.
      Sort of.  First you have to know about the different kinds of STD.  There are short term disability benefits provided by the state you live in IF they provide STD benefits. 


      A. Short Term Disability offered by state:


      -California
      -New York
      -New Jersey
      -Rhode Island
      -Hawaii


      B. Private Short Term Disability Insurance:


      Then you have to find out if your employer provides STD benefits of some kind, also known as private STD insurance.  Sometimes your employer may have better benefits than your state or FMLA.  Don't forget you will probably have to exhaust all of your vacation leave and sick leave before you get to use this benefit.


      Either way STD will usually only pay you 50-75% of your pay for a certain amount of time.  This is still better than unpaid leave under FMLA.


      C. Other disability laws by state: 


      Finally, the state you live in might have their own disability laws granting you some kind of benefits.  Here is a wonderful report that goes through each state's stance on parental leave.  I urge everyone to read through it and do additional research if needed. 



      Other misc. issues:
      Did you know that:


      -If you and your partner work for the same company you're only entitled to a combined 12 weeks of parental leave between the two of you?!


      -apart from Federal and State laws some cities may actually have a law that protects certain employees.  Here in Chicago, our mayor recently announced the city's first maternity leave policy granting PAID maternity leave for certain city workers! It's a great step in the right direction!


      http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/mayor/press_room/press_releases/2011/september_2011/mayor_emanuel_announcescitysfirstmaternityleavepolicy.html


      So are you still confused about the parental leave you are entitled to and perhaps a little angry?



      I agree it is overly complicated.  Here's what you should do:
      • Talk to your HR department hopefully there is an experienced person at your job that can explain to you the policy in place at your employer.  Consider your accrued vacation and sick leave and see if you can use this in combination with any leave under FMLA or STD. 
      • Research the FMLA and your state laws by reading through the articles above.


      and finally do you REALLY want to be depressed?


      Here is what good old wikipedia has to say about global parental leave:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_leave


      To summarize:
      -Central European countries are the most dedicated countries in the world regarding parental leave, the US? not so much.


      Here is some final food for thought:

      According to wikipedia, only 4 countries (in the WORLD) have no national law mandating time off for new parents:
      LIBERIA, a tiny poor country in western Africa.

      PAPAU NEW GUINEA, a tiny country in the Pacific ocean.

      SWAZILAND, a REALLY tiny country in southern Africa.

      and yes,

      the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA




      Looking for the some of the best maternity leave?




      Sweden: 16 months paid leave
      Switzerland: 16 weeks at 100% paid
      Austria: 16 weeks at 100% paid
      Bulgaria: 1 YEAR at 100% paid
      Denmark: 52 weeks at 100% paid
      France: 16 weeks at 100% paid
      Norway: 56 weeks paid leave
      Estonia: 18 months paid leave


      hec, even my mom's little country of Colombia in South America offers 12 weeks of paid maternity leave.

      Thursday, August 25, 2011

      How to prepare for a vacation- lawyer style

      View of the ocean in Puerto Rico taken by me in 2008
       

      As we get ready to depart for our trip to Puerto Rico this weekend my crazy lawyer brain has me thinking of things like making sure everything is perfectly packed, that our house is taken care of, that we make sure we take the car seat, the stroller, the baby carrier, etc., that we have our insurance cards, that I know what kind of blood type we all are, and of course thinking about the macabre possibility of dying in a terrible accident and leaving our daughter orphaned.  Yes it's a crazy thought but these thoughts run through my mind now that I'm a mother. 

      So instead of dwelling on these thoughts I figure the best I can do is make sure we are prepared for our vacation to go as smoothly as possible.

      How to prepare for a vacation when you have a baby and are a crazy lawyer:

      1. Make sure you have boarding passes printed and have "checked-in" properly with the airlines.
      Yes this sounds obvious enough, but I only recently learned that when traveling with a baby on your lap you still have to make sure she has a boarding pass (for some airlines) and you actually have to place a call to each airline you are traveling with to give them the baby's full information before you actually travel.  Not to mention we STILL had to pay $110.00 worth of taxes for our daughter to travel (only when you are going to the U.S. Virgin Islands or Puerto Rico of course).

      2. Make sure you are properly packed.
      I have always been a great packer before but packing with a baby is crazy.  We need to make sure we check in our car seat and stroller and pack a whole slew of other little things "just in case".
      For example, since she is now getting her molars in (a whole new level of teething) we are taking the oragel and baby tylenol.  Then since she still takes a bottle once in a while (especially to sleep) we have to take lots of bottles.  We need to pack snacks for the plane for her.  I usually don't take my netbook when we travel because my iPhone is usually enough, but we are afraid that our daughter will act up on the plane so we are taking my netbook with the movie "Rio" for her to watch on the plane if she acts up.

      3.  Make sure you have somewhere for the baby to sleep while on vacation.
      I actually almost forgot about this.  I wouldn't mind if she slept with us while on vacation, but we are staying with family for a few days and I just remembered that their guest bedroom only has a small full sized bed.  There is no way my toddler can sleep with us in that tiny bed.  She tosses and turns and we would definitely squish her or she would end up on the floor.  So I thought we would just take the pack n' play (yes on top of the stroller and car seat) but we would have to pay for this as a carry-on item, which we don't want to do.  So thankfully a friend of our family is lending us a pack n' play for her to sleep in while we are there.

      If you are a staying in a hotel they usually have pack n' plays available but you still have to call to reserve one. That reminds me to call the hotel we will be staying in at the end of the week to make sure to reserve one.

      4. Make sure your life insurance policy is paid up.  You know.  Just in case....Or actually first make sure you HAVE LIFE INSURANCE.  

      You have no idea how many clients I meet that pay $500.00 each month or MORE for their car payments but don't have at least a simple term life insurance policy to protect their families.  This is UNACCEPTABLE.  Let me just clue you in on something.  You WILL die.  I guarantee it and bet my life on it! Ha ha.  Hopefully you won't die during the life of your term policy, at least that's what the life insurance companies want.  Otherwise if you do die during the term of your life insurance policy then you win of course.  Or lose.  However you want to see it.
      5. Make sure you have a will and trust set up in case both you and your partner die.


      Seriously, you don't want to both die and have your estate be tied up in probate court forever.  You need to make sure you talk to an attorney to devise a will and set up a trust and trustee to manage your finances if you pass away.  Not to mention your will has to designate a guardian for your child/children in case both parents die.  You do not want your family members fighting over custody of your child.  The trustee can be a  family member who is RESPONSIBLE with money especially if you have big insurance policies, or you can designate an unrelated third party professional trustee.  For more details, see a wills and estates lawyer!

      Then you're pretty much ready to go on vacation and enjoy the beach.


      From our honeymoon in the Riviera Maya in 2009



      Tuesday, August 23, 2011

      Curfew Laws in Chicago

      At the end of July the Chicago City Council passed a stricter curfew law for kids 12 and under.  The new law goes into effect on September 18, 2011.


      For a little background, you can find the current curfew laws in Chicago in the Chicago Municipal Code Chapter 8-16 section 020 known as "Curfew hours for minors".   You can access the code here.  I recommend that you check out the code for fun if you live in the Chicago by the way.  Ok, maybe it would only be "fun" for a lawyer, but still interesting nonetheless.


      So according to the Code:
      (1)     “Curfew hours” means:
                     (A)     10:00 p.m. on any Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday until 6:00 a.m. of the following day; and
                     (B)     11:00 p.m. on any Friday or Saturday and until 6:00 a.m. of the following day.
      These rules apply to minors, or any person under 17 years of age.  

      These laws will stay in effect, but now a stricter curfew law will go into effect in September for children under the age of 12 that makes the curfew 8:30 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 p.m. on weekends.  Children between the ages of 12-16 still have to abide by the original curfew law stated above.

      Personally I think it's a great idea, since I don't believe kids under the age of 12 really have any business being outside after 8:30 p.m. on a weekday.  But of course, this probably depends what the kids are doing outside and what neighborhood the kids live in.  Not to mention what they're doing outside.

      You have to remember that these curfew laws only apply when a minor is unaccompanied by an adult, and there are of course several defenses to these laws.  Such as when the child is:

                     (A)     Accompanied by the minor’s parent or guardian;               (B)     On an errand at the direction of the minor’s parent or guardian, without any detour or stop;               (C)     In a motor vehicle involved in interstate travel;               (D)     Engaged in an employment activity, or going to or returning home from an employment activity, without any detour or stop;               (E)     Involved in an emergency;               (F)     On the sidewalk abutting the minor’s residence or abutting the residence of a next-door neighbor if the neighbor did not complain to the police department about the minor’s presence;               (G)     Attending an official school, religious, or other recreational activity supervised by adults and sponsored by the city, a civic organization, or another similar entity that takes responsibility for the minor, or going to or returning home from, without any detour or stop, an official school, religious, or other recreational activity supervised by adults and sponsored by the city, a civic organization, or another similar entity that takes responsibility for the minor;               (H)     Exercising First Amendment rights protected by the United States Constitution, such as the free exercise of religion, freedom of speech, and the right of assembly; or               (I)     Married or had been married or is an emancipated minor under the Emancipation of Mature Minors Act, as amended.
      Those are a LOT of defenses.  But you also have to know that the parents are liable only if they "knowingly" permit a child to be violating the curfew, so no liability if your kids "sneaks" out.  Interestingly as well, owners, operators or employees of an establishment are also subject to the law if they knowingly allow a minor to remain on their premises during curfew hours.  Well I could see how that could be a problem.

      And what about the defense that if the child is "on an errand on the direction of a parent or guardian" then it's ok that he/she is outside? So if the parent sends the kid to the liquor store/convenience store on the corner to get chips and a pop at 10:00 p.m. at night unaccompanied then there's no problem???

      And then we have the fines that will be ridiculously hard to enforce against a likely poor parent to start with:
           (e)     Penalties. A person who violates a provision of this chapter is guilty of a separate offense for each day or part of a day during which the violation is committed, continued, or permitted. Each offense, upon conviction, is punishable by a fine not to exceed $500.00.
       
      So while I do believe that in theory these new curfew laws are a good idea (as in we don't want young kids out at night unsupervised), I think that enforcement could be a problem and as a lawyer I'm not too crazy about holding owners and even mere employees of an establishment liable under these new laws.

      Let's see some scenarios:

      Scenario #1:
      A child is at a 7-11 store at 10:00 p.m. The child appears to be maybe 12-13 (but you can't be sure of course) and is buying some gum.  The store owner sells him the gum.  Then the police raid his store and arrest him for knowingly permitting a minor to be in his store after curfew.  Well it seems very hard to prove that the store owner knew the child was a minor, since most minors don't have any forms of identification showing their age.  So I'm not all that worried for the store owner's liability in this scenario.  But what does this mean for store owners? Do they have to ask a child who appears to be under 12 for an ID after curfew hours? Should he call the police? What if the child is on an "errand" which is a clear defense to the statute? What if the child's parents are just outside and he is not unaccompanied? What a mess.

      Scenario #2:
      A hard working single mom is at work during the night shift and leaves a few of her kids between the ages of 10-12 at home with say, their grandmother.  The grandmother goes to sleep at 8:30 p.m. and the kids go outside to play just down the block (remember one of the exceptions is that they are in front of their house or a neighbor's house and they aren't causing trouble).  A police officer sees them and takes them into custody for violating the curfew laws.  Is anyone liable here? What about the grandmother who fell asleep? Or the mother at work?  I suppose you could argue there was no "knowledge" about the kids being outside, but how many times do police officers have to take small children into custody before it's clear that they are not being watched?  And do we really want police officers in our busy crime-filled city to become baby-sitters for these unattended children?

      There are many more scenarios I can come up, but I think it's clear that the new curfew laws clearly do NOT address the real problem here:  BAD PARENTING.
        
      All parents should know where their children are at all times and should be home with their kids every night or have a responsible care giver with their children.  But we know that just isn't the case. So is the solution to fine irresponsible parents who probably can't pay anyway?  Some people may think so, but I sense that enforcement of this law will be sketchy at best.

      A police officer friend recently commented to me that the curfew laws give the police officers a good reason to investigate young kids who are unsupervised and could be getting into trouble- and that is important.  I agree with this and I do hope the laws make a positive difference.

      Either way, here are some very good reasons that SOMETHING has to be done about the crime affecting young kids in Chicago today:


      1-year-old girl shot in head in South Chicago

      http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-one-hurt-in-south-chicago-shooting-20110823,0,2978813.story
      Incident date and time: Tue. 8-23-11 @ 8:11 a.m.
      This case was especially sad since my daughter is also one.  Luckily she didn't die, but she's in critical condition.  She was outside walking a dog with her aunt early in the morning when she as caught in cross-fire.  While this didn't happen during curfew hours it still involves a small child.


      Boy, 14, shot dead execution-style in Austin neighborhood

      http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-boy-14-killed-in-west-side-shooting-20110821,0,3466214.story
      Incident date and time: Sun. 8-21-11 @ 2:00 p.m.
      This boy, according to police was affiliated with a street gang.  Again, this occurred during broad day light.


      6-year-old killed, two hurt in Englewood shooting
      http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-6yearold-killed-two-hurt-in-englewood-shooting-20110807,0,6912832.story
      Incident date and time: Sun. 8-7-11 @ 6:00 a.m.
      Well this little girl was INSIDE either her own home or a family member's home when someone walked up to the house and fired shots into the living room window ...Nothing that a curfew law would have helped.  But the real problem was a 17 year old who allegedly entered the home around 4 a.m.  Again, over the age of those targeted by the new curfew laws.


      16 year old shot dead
      There were no other details available for this story (that just goes to show how common this violence is). Just that he was found shot dead with multiple gunshot wounds to his body.  Incident date and time: Sun 8-7-11 @ 12:35 a.m.

      Boy, 13, gunned down playing basketball: 'He died doing what he loved to do'
      This was also an especially sad story since the boy was just playing basketball at a neighborhood park when he was shot in what appears to be a drive by shooting.  Once again, in broad day light. 

      That makes FIVE shootings and FOUR homicides of children under the age of 16 in the month of August alone here in Chicago! 
      This has been a particular sad month for children in Chicago.
      For more homicide statistics see the Red Eye Homicide Tracker here: http://homicides.redeyechicago.com.


      I really had a point to this blog post when I started.  I wanted to talk about the curfew law, enforcement issues and the fines.  But I ended up being depressed by the number of children affected by gun violence in this city.  By the way, I believe all the victims from predominantly low-income minority neighborhoods.  But that is a whole other blog post.

      So while stricter curfews for minors seem to be a great idea I think they miss the mark in actually helping save young lives.  Only time will tell if they will make some kind of difference.  

      Tuesday, August 16, 2011

      Breastfeeding Laws!

      Did you know that almost every single state has a law that protects breastfeeding mothers' right to nurse in public?  Most states also offer nursing mothers breaks at work and they can usually be excused from jury duty.

      Laws vary by state and I urge all nursing mothers to know their rights in their state.  I'm sure you've all heard the recent stories in the media about mothers being asked to get off a public bus while breastfeeding, or kicked out of a restaurant, or told to "cover up" while in a public location.  I still do not understand the general public's adverse reaction to breastfeeding a child in America.  America of all places! America, the land that brings us Sports Illustrated Swim Suit Edition:


      and Calvin Klein models:


      and Victoria's Secret models like these seen here modeling in Vanity Fair magazine:



      This is the same America who is shocked by a mother breastfeeding in public?


      Well clearly I can see why.  That is a racy picture after all. 

      In all seriousness.  If you are a nursing mother you should know your rights when breastfeeding in public.  Some states also offer at least unpaid breaks for pumping at work.  While other states allow you to be excused from jury duty if you are nursing.  Illinois recently passed a law that states just that. 

      Here is a great chart courtesy of the National Conference of State Legislatures that lays out each state's position on breastfeeding in public and other issues.

      For more information on other maternal and child health issues please visit their website

      States
        Summary of Statutes     
      Alabama
      Ala. Code § 21-1-13 (2006) allows a mother to breastfeed her child in any public or private location. 
      American Samoa

      Alaska
      Alaska Stat. § 29.25.080 and § 01.10.060 (1998) prohibit a municipality from enacting an ordinance that prohibits or restricts a woman breastfeeding a child in a public or private location where the woman and child are otherwise authorized to be. The law clarifies that lewd conduct, lewd touching, immoral conduct, indecent conduct, and similar terms do not include the act of a woman breastfeeding a child in a public or private location where the woman and child are otherwise authorized to be. (SB 297)
      Arizona
      Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann § 41-1443 (2006) provides that indecent exposure does not include an act of breastfeeding by a mother and entitles a mother to breastfeed in any public place where the mother is otherwise lawfully present.
      Arkansas
      Ark. Stat. Ann. § 5-14-112  (2007) defines indecent exposure and specifies that a woman is not committing indecent exposure for breastfeeding a child in a public place or any place where other individuals are present. (2007 Ark. Acts, Act 680; HB 2411)
      Ark. Stat. Ann. § 11-5-116 (2009) requires an employer to provide reasonable unpaid break time each day to an employee who needs to express breast milk for her child and requires an employer to make a reasonable effort to provide a private, secure and sanitary room or other location other than a toilet stall where an employee can express her breast milk. (2009 Ark. Acts, Act 621, HB 1552)
      Ark. Stat. Ann. § 20-27-2001 (2007) allows a woman to breastfeed a child in a public place or any place where other individuals are present. (2007 Ark. Acts, Act 680; HB 2411)
      California
      Cal. Civil Code § 43.3 (1997) allows a mother to breastfeed her child in any location, public or private, except the private home or residence of another, where the mother and the child are otherwise authorized to be present. (AB 157)
      Cal. Code of Civil Procedure § 210.5 (2000) requires the Judicial Court to adopt a standardized jury summons for use, which must include a specific reference to the rules for breastfeeding mothers. 2000 Cal. Stats., Chap. 266 (AB 1814) created the law and directs the Judicial Council to adopt a rule of court to allow the mother of a breastfed child to postpone jury duty for a period of up to one year and that after one year, jury duty may be further postponed upon written request by the mother.  See California Rules of Court, Trial Court Rules, Rule 2.1006.
      Cal. Health and Safety Code § 1647 (1999) declares that the procurement, processing, distribution or use of human milk for the purpose of human consumption is considered to be a rendition of a service rather than a sale of human milk. (1999 Cal. Stats., Chap. 87; AB 532)
      Cal. Health and Safety Code § 1648 requires a hospital that collects, processes, stores or distributes human milk collection from a mother exclusively for her own child to comply with the standards for collection, processing, storage or distribution of human milk by the Human Milk Banking Association of North America unless the department of health approves alternate standards. No screening tests are required to be performed on human milk collected from a mother exclusively for her own child.
      Cal. Health and Safety Code § 123360 et seq. and § 1257.9 require the Department of Public Health to include in its public service campaign the promotion of mothers breastfeeding their infants. The department shall also develop a training course of hospital policies and recommendations that promote exclusive breastfeeding and specify staff for whom this model training is appropriate.  The recommendation is targeted at hospitals with exclusive patient breastfeeding rates ranked in the lowest twenty-five percent of the state. To the extent that funding is available, the law requires the Department of Public Health to expand the breastfeeding peer counseling preogram at local agency California WIC sites. The law also requires all general acute care hospital and hospitals providing maternity care to make available a breastfeeding consultant or provide information to the mother about where to receive breastfeeding information. (2007 Chapter 460, SB 22)
      Cal. Labor Code § 1030 et seq. (2001) provides that employers need to allow a break and provide a room for a mother who desires to express milk in private.
      Cal. Assembly Concurrent Resolution 155 (1998) encourages the state and employers to support and encourage the practice of breastfeeding by striving to accommodate the needs of employees, and by ensuring that employees are provided with adequate facilities for breastfeeding and expressing milk for their children. The resolution memorializes the governor to declare by executive order that all state employees be provided with adequate facilities for breast feeding and expressing milk.
      Colorado
      Colo. Rev. Stat. § 25-6-301 and § 25-6-302 (2004) recognize the benefits of breastfeeding and encourage mothers to breastfeed.  The law also allows a mother to breastfeed in any place she has a right to be.  (SB 88)
      Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-13.5-101 et seq. (2008) require an employer to provide reasonable break time for an employee to express breast milk for her nursing child for up to two years after the child's birth.  The employer must make reasonable efforts to provide a place, other than a toilet stall, for the employee to express breast milk in privacy.  The law also requires the Department of Labor and Employment to provide, on its website, information and links to other websites where employers can access information regarding methods to accommodate nursing mothers in the workplace. (2008 Colo., Sess. Laws, Chap. 106, HB 1276)
      Connecticut
      Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-40w (2001) requires employers to provide a reasonable amount of time each day to an employee who needs to express breast milk for her infant child and to provide accommodations where an employee can express her milk in private. (HF 5656)
      Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46a-64 (1997) prohibits places of public accommodation, resort or amusement from restricting or limiting the right of a mother to breastfeed her child. (1997 Conn. Acts, P.A. 210)
      Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 53-34b provides that no person may restrict or limit the right of a mother to breastfeed her child.
      Delaware
      Del. Code Ann. tit. 31 § 310 (1997) entitles a mother to breastfeed her child in any location of a place of public accommodation wherein the mother is otherwise permitted. (Vol. 71 Del. Laws, Chap. 10; 1997 HB 31)
      District of Columbia
      D.C. Code Ann. § 2-1402.81 et seq. amend the Human Rights Act of 1977 to include breastfeeding as part of the definition of discrimination on the basis of sex, to ensure a woman's right to breastfeed her child in any location, public or private, where she has the right to be with her child.  The law provides that breastfeeding is not a violation of indecent exposure laws.  The law also specifies that an employer shall provide reasonable daily unpaid break periods, as required by the employee, so that the employee may express breast milk for her child.  These break periods shall run concurrently with any break periods that may already be provided to the employee.  Requires that an employer make reasonable efforts to provide a sanitary room or other location, other than a bathroom or toilet stall, where an employee can express her breast milk in privacy and security.  The location may include a childcare facility in close proximity to the employee's work location.  (2007 D.C. Stat., Chap. 17-58; B 133)
      Florida
      Fla. Stat. § 383.015 (1993) allows a mother to breastfeed in any public or private location. (HB 231)
      Fla. Stat. § 383.016 (1994) authorizes a facility lawfully providing maternity services or newborn infant care to use the designation "baby-friendly" on its promotional materials. The facility must be in compliance with at least eighty percent of the requirements developed by the Department of Health in accordance with UNICEF and World Health Organization baby-friendly hospital initiatives. (SB 1668)
      Fla. Stat. § 800.02 et seq. and § 827.071 exclude breastfeeding from various sexual offenses, such as lewdness, indecent exposure and sexual conduct.  
      Fla. Stat. § 847.0135 (5) (d) (2008)  excludes a mother breastfeeding her baby from the offense of lewd or lascivious exhibition using a computer. (2008 Fla. Laws, Chap. 172, SB 1442)
      Georgia
      Ga. Code § 31-1-9 (1999) states that the breastfeeding of a baby is an important and basic act of nurture which should be encouraged in the interests of maternal and child health and allows a mother to breastfeed her baby in any location where the mother and baby are otherwise authorized to be. (1999 SB 29, Act 304; 2002 SB 221
      Ga. Code § 34-1-6 (1999) allows employers to provide daily unpaid break time for a mother to express breast milk for her infant child. Employers are also required to make a reasonable effort to provide a private location, other than a toilet stall, in close proximity to the workplace for this activity. The employer is not required to provide break time if to do so would unduly disrupt the workplace operations.
      Guam

      Hawaii
      Hawaii Rev. Stat. § 367-3 (1999) requires the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission to collect, assemble and publish data concerning instances of discrimination involving breastfeeding or expressing breast milk in the workplace. The law prohibits employers to forbid an employee from expressing breast milk during any meal period or other break period. (HB 266)
      Hawaii Rev. Stat. § 378-2 provides that it is unlawful discriminatory practice for any employer or labor organization to refuse to hire or employ, bar or discharge from employment, withhold pay from, demote or penalize a lactating employee because an employee breastfeeds or expresses milk at the workplace. (2000 Hawaii Sess. Laws, Act 227; HB 2774)
      Hawaii Rev. Stat. § 489.21 and § 489-22 provide that it is a discriminatory practice to deny, or attempt to deny, the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodation of a place of public accommodations to a woman because she is breastfeeding a child.  
      2010 House Concurrent Resolution 158 urges the Department of Human Services and the Department of Health to develop a program to encourage breastfeeding among mothers who receive assistance from Medicaid.
      Idaho
      Idaho Code § 2-212 (2002) provides that a person who is not disqualified for jury service under § 2-209 may have jury service postponed by the court or the jury commissioner only upon a showing of undue hardship, extreme inconvenience, or public necessity, or upon a showing that the juror is a mother breastfeeding her child. (2002 HB 497
      Illinois
      Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 20 § 2310/442 (1997) allows the Department of Public Health to conduct an information campaign for the general public to promote breastfeeding of infants by their mothers. The law allows the department to include the information in a brochure for free distribution to the general public. (Ill. Laws, P.A. 90-244)
      Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 705 § 305/10.3 amends the Jury Act; provides that any mother nursing her child shall, upon her request, be excused from jury duty. (Ill. Laws, P.A. 094-0391, 2005 SB 517)
      Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 720 § 5/11-9 (1995) clarifies that breastfeeding of infants is not an act of public indecency. (SB 190)
      Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 740 § 137 (2004) creates the Right to Breastfeed Act.  The law provides that a mother may breastfeed her baby in any location, public or private, where the mother is otherwise authorized to be; a mother who breastfeeds in a place of worship shall follow the appropriate norms within that place of worship. (SB 3211)
      Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 820 § 260 (2001) creates the Nursing Mothers in the Workplace Act.  Requires that employers provide reasonable unpaid break time each day to employees who need to express breast milk. The law also requires employers to make reasonable efforts to provide a room or other location, other than a toilet stall, where an employee can express her milk in privacy. (SB 542)
      2011 Ill. Senate Resolution 170 recognizes the unique health, economic, and societal benefits that breastfeeding provides to babies, mothers, families and the community and resolves the state of Illinois to work to ensure that barriers to initiation and continuation of breastfeeding are removed and that a women's right to breastfeed is upheld.
      Indiana
      Ind. Code § 16-35-6 allows a woman to breastfeed her child anywhere the law allows her to be. (HB 1510)
      Ind. Code § 5-10-6-2 and § 22-2-14-2 (2008) provide that state and political subdivisions shall provide for reasonable paid breaks for an employee to express breast milk for her infant, make reasonable efforts to provide a room or other location, other than a toilet stall, where the employee can express breast milk in private and make reasonable efforts to provide for a refrigerator to keep breast milk that has been expressed.  The law also provides that employers with more than 25 employees must provide a private location, other than a toilet stall, where an employee can express the employee's breast milk in private and if possible to provide a refrigerator for storing breast milk that has been expressed. (2008 Ind. Acts, P.L. 13, SB 219)
      Iowa
      Iowa Code § 135.30A (2002) a woman may breastfeed the woman's own child in any public place where the woman's presence is otherwise authorized.
      Iowa Code § 607A.5 (1994) allows a woman to be excused from jury service if she submits written documentation verifying, to the court's satisfaction, that she is the mother of a breastfed child and is responsible for the daily care of the child.
      Kansas
      Kan. Stat. Ann. § 43-158 allows a mother breastfeeding her child to be excused from jury service and allows jury service to be postponed until the mother is no longer breastfeeding the child. (2006 HB 2284)
      Kan. Stat. Ann. § 65-1,248 provides that it is the public policy of Kansas that a mother's choice to breastfeed should be supported and encouraged to the greatest extent possible and that a mother may breastfeed in any place she has a right to be.
      Kentucky
      Ky. Rev. Stat. § 29A.100 (2007) directs judges at all levels of the court to excuse women who are breastfeeding or expressing breast milk from jury service until the child is no longer nursing. (SB 111)
      Ky. Rev. Stat. § 211-755 (2006) permits a mother to breastfeed her baby or express breast milk in any public or private location. Requires that breastfeeding may not be considered an act of public indecency, indecent exposure, sexual conduct, lewd touching or obscenity. Prohibits a municipality from enacting an ordinance that prohibits or restricts breastfeeding in a public or private place. (2006 SB 106)
      Louisiana
      La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 46. 1409 B 5 prohibits any child care facility from discriminating against breastfed babies. (HB 233)
      La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 51. 2247.1 (2001) states that a mother may breastfeed her baby in any place of public accommodation, resort, or amusement, and clarifies that breastfeeding is not a violation of law, including obscenity laws. (2001 HB 377)
      La. House Concurrent Resolution 35 (2002) establishes a joint study of requiring insurance coverage for outpatient lactation support for new mothers.
      2008 La. Senate Resolution 110 requests the Department of Health & Hospitals to study and/or consider a provision of providing non-emergency transportation for new mothers to allow them to visit the hospital and bring their breast milk for their babies.
      Maine
      Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 5, § 4634 (2001) amends the Maine Human Rights Act to declare that a mother has the right to breastfeed her baby in any location, whether public or private, as long as she is otherwise authorized to be in that location. (Me. Laws, Chap. 206; LD 1396)
      Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 26, § 604 (2009) requires an employer to provide adequate unpaid or paid break time to express breast milk for up to 3 years following childbirth. The employer must make reasonable efforts to provide a clean place, other than a bathroom, where an employee may express breast milk in privacy. The employer may not discriminate against an employee who chooses to express breast milk in the workplace. (2009 Me. Laws, Chap. 84, HB 280)
      Maryland
      Md. Health-General Code Ann. § 20-801 (2003) permits a woman to breastfeed her infant in any public or private place and prohibits anyone from restricting or limiting this right. (SB 223)
      Md. Tax-General Code Ann. § 11-211 exempts the sale of tangible personal property that is manufactured for the purpose of initiating, supporting or sustaining breastfeeding from the sales and use tax.
      Massachusetts
      Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 111 § 221 (2008) allows a mother to breastfeed her child in any public place or establishment or place which is open to and accepts or solicits the patronage of the general public and where the mother and her child may otherwise lawfully be present.  The law also specifies that the act of a mother breastfeeding her child shall not be considered lewd, indecent, immoral or unlawful conduct and provides for a civil action by a mother subjected to a violation of this law. (2008 Mass. Acts, Chap. 466, SB 2438)
      Michigan
      Mich. Comp. Laws § 41.181, § 67.1aa and § 117.4i et seq. (1994) state that public nudity laws do not apply to a woman breastfeeding a child.
      Minnesota
      Minn. Stat. Ann. § 145.894 directs the state commissioner of health to develop and implement a public education program promoting the provisions of the Maternal and Child Nutrition Act.  The education programs must include a campaign to promote breastfeeding.
      Minn. Stat. § 145.905 provides that a mother may breastfeed in any location, public or private, where the mother and child are authorized to be, irrespective of whether the nipple of the mother's breast is uncovered during or incidental to the breastfeeding.
      Minn. Stat. § 181.939 (1998) requires employers to provide daily unpaid break time for a mother to express breast milk for her infant child. Employers are also required to make a reasonable effort to provide a private location, other than a toilet stall, in close proximity to the workplace for this activity. (SB 2751
      Minn. Stat. Ann. § 617.23 specifies that breastfeeding does not constitute indecent exposure.
      Mississippi
      Miss. Code Ann. § 13-5-23 (2006) provides that breastfeeding mothers may be excused from serving as jurors. (SB 2419)
      Miss. Code Ann. § 17-25-7/9 (2006) prohibits any ordinance restricting a woman's right to breastfeed and provides that a mother may breastfeed her child in any location she is otherwise authorized to be. (SB 2419)
      Miss. Code Ann. § 43-20-31 (2006) requires licensed child care facilities to provide breastfeeding mothers with a sanitary place that is not a toilet stall to breastfeed their children or express milk, to provide a refrigerator to store expressed milk, to train staff in the safe and proper storage and handling of human milk, and to display breastfeeding promotion information to the clients of the facility.
      Miss. Code Ann. Ch. 1 § 71-1-55 (2006) prohibits against discrimination towards breastfeeding mothers who use lawful break time to express milk.
      Miss. Code Ann. § 97-29-31 and § 97-35-7et seq. (2006) specifies that a woman breastfeeding may not be considered an act of indecent exposure, disorderly conduct, or disturbance of the public space.
      Missouri
      Mo. Rev. Stat. § 191.915 (1999) requires hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers to provide new mothers with a breastfeeding consultation or information on breastfeeding, the benefits to the child and information on local breastfeeding support groups. The law requires physicians who provide obstetrical or gynecological consultation to inform patients about the postnatal benefits of breastfeeding. The law requires the Department of Health to provide and distribute written information on breastfeeding and the health benefits to the child. (SB 8)
      Mo. Rev. Stat. § 191.918 (1999) allows a mother, with as much discretion as possible, to breastfeed her child in any public or private location.
      Montana
      Mont. Code Ann. § 39-2-215 et seq. specifies that employers must not discriminate against breastfeeding mothers and must encourage and accommodate breastfeeding.  Requires employers to provide daily unpaid break time for a mother to express breast milk for her infant child and facilities for storage of the expressed milk. Employers are also required to make a reasonable effort to provide a private location, other than a toilet stall, in close proximity to the work place for this activity.
      Mont. Code Ann. § 50-19-501 (1999) states that the breastfeeding of a child in any location, public or private, where the mother otherwise has a right to be is legal and cannot be considered a nuisance, indecent exposure, sexual conduct, or obscenity. (SB 398)
      Mont. Code Ann. § 3-15-313 (2009) specifies that the court may excuse a person from jury service upon finding that it would entail undue hardship for the person; an excuse may be granted if the prospective juror is a breastfeeding mother. (2009 Mont. Laws, Chap. 167, HB 372)
      Nebraska
      Neb. Rev. Stat. §25-1601-4 (2003) states that a nursing mother is excused from jury duty until she is no longer breastfeeding and that the nursing mother must file a qualification form supported by a certificate from her physician requesting exemption. (LB 19)
      2011 Neb. Laws, L.B. 197 specifies that a mother may breastfeed her child in any public or private location where the mother is otherwise authorized to be.
      Nevada
      Nev. Rev. Stat. § 201.232, § 201.210, and § 201.220 (1995) state that the breastfeeding of a child in any location, public or private, is not considered a violation of indecent exposure laws. (SB 317)
      New Hampshire
      N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 132:10-d (1999) state that breastfeeding does not constitute indecent exposure and that limiting or restricting a mother's right to breastfeed is discriminatory. (HB 441)
      New Jersey
      N.J. Rev. Stat. § 26:4B-4/5 (1997) entitles a mother to breastfeed her baby in any location of a place of public accommodation, resort or amusement wherein the mother is otherwise permitted. Failure to comply with the law may result in a fine.
      New Mexico
      N.M. Stat. Ann. § 28-20-1 (1999) permits a mother to breastfeed her child in any public or private location where she is otherwise authorized to be. (SB 545)
      N.M. Stat. Ann. § 28-20-2 (2007) requires employers to provide a clean, private place, not a bathroom, for employees who are breastfeeding to pump.  Also requires that the employee be given breaks to express milk, but does not require that she be paid for this time.
      2009 N.M. House Memorial 58 requests the governor's women's health advisory council to convene a task force to study the needs of breastfeeding student-mothers and make recommendations for breastfeeding accommodations in school environments.
      New York
      N.Y. Civil Rights Law § 79-e (1994) permits a mother to breastfeed her child in any public or private location. (SB 3999)
      N.Y. Correction Law § 611 allows a mother of a nursing child to be accompanied by her child if she is committed to a correctional facility at the time she is breastfeeding. This law also permits a child born to a committed mother to return with the mother to the correctional facility.The child may remain with the mother until one year of age if the woman is physically capable fo caring for the child. (2009 N.Y. Laws, Chap. 411; SB 1290) 
      N.Y. Labor Law § 206-c (2007) states that employers must allow breastfeeding mothers reasonable, unpaid break times to express milk and make a reasonable attempt to provide a private location for her to do so.  Prohibits discrimination against breastfeeding mothers.
      N.Y. Penal Law § 245.01 et seq. excludes breastfeeding of infants from exposure offenses.
      N.Y. Public Health Law § 2505 provides that the Maternal and Child Health commissioner has the power to adopt regulations and guidelines including, but not limited to donor standards, methods of collection, and standards for storage and distribution of human breast milk.
      N.Y. Public Health Law § 2505-a creates the Breastfeeding Mothers Bill of Rights and requires it to be posted in a public place in each maternal health care facility. The commissioner must also make the Breastfeeding Mothers Bill of Rights available on the health department's website so that health care facilities and providers may include such rights in a maternity information leaflet. (2009 N.Y. Laws, Chap. 292AB 789)
      North Carolina
      N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-190.9 (1993) states that a woman is allowed to breastfeed in any public or private location, and that she is not in violation of indecent exposure laws. (HB 1143)
      North Dakota
      N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-20-12.1 was amended in 2009 by Senate Bill 2344 to exempt the act of a woman discreetly breastfeeding her child from indecent exposure laws.
      N.D. Cent. Code § 23-12-16 allows a woman to breastfeed her child in any location, public or private, where the woman and child are otherwise authorized to be. (2009 SB 2344)
      N.D. Cent. Code § 23-12-17 provides that an employer may use the designation “infant friendly” on its promotional materials if the employer adopts specified workplace breastfeeding policies, including scheduling breaks and permitting work patterns that provide time for expression of breast milk; providing a convenient, sanity, safe and private location other than a restroom for expressing breast milk; and a refrigerator in the workplace for the temporary storage of breast milk. The law also directs to the state department of health to establish guidelines for employers concerning workplace breastfeeding and infant friendly designations. (2009 SB 2344)
      Ohio
      Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 3781.55 (2005) provides that a mother is entitled to breastfeed her baby in any location of a place of public accommodation wherein the mother is otherwise permitted. (SB 41)
      Oklahoma
      Okla. Stat. tit. 38, § 28 (2004) exempts mothers who are breastfeeding a baby from jury duty, upon their request. (2004 HB 2102)
      Okla. Stat. tit. 40, § 435 (2006) requires that an employer provide reasonable unpaid break time each day to an employee who needs to breastfeed or express breast milk for her child.  The law requires the Department of Health to issue periodic reports on breastfeeding rates, complaints received and benefits reported by both working breastfeeding mothers and employers. (HB 2358)
      Okla. Stat. tit. 63, § 1-234 (2004) allow a mother to breastfeed her child in any location that she is authorized to be and exempts her from the crimes and punishments listed in the penal code of the state of Oklahoma. (HB 2102)
      Oregon
      Or. Rev. Stat. § 109.001 (1999) allows a woman to breastfeed in a public place. (SB 744)
      Or. Rev. Stat. § 10.050 (1999) excuses a woman from acting as a juror if the woman is breastfeeding a child. A request from the woman must be made in writing. (SB 1304)
      Or. Rev. Stat. § 653.075, § 653.077 and § 653.256 (2007) allow women to have unpaid 30-minute breaks during each four-hour shift to breastfeed or pump. Allows certain exemptions for employers. (HB 2372)
      Pennsylvania
      Pa. Cons. Stat. tit. 35 § 636.1 et seq. (2007) allows mothers to breastfeed in public without penalty. Breastfeeding may not be considered a nuisance, obscenity or indecent exposure under this law. (SB 34)
      Puerto Rico
      1 L.P.R.A. § 5165 declares August as "Breastfeeding Awareness Month" and the first week of August as "World Breastfeeding Week" in Puerto Rico.
      3 L.P.R.A. § 1466 and 29 L.P.R.A. § 478a et seq. provide that breastfeeding mothers have the opportunity to breastfeed their babies for half an hour within the full-time working day for a maximum duration of 12 months.
      23 L.P.R.A. § 43-1 directs the Regulations and Permits Administration to adopt regulations, which shall provide that in shopping malls, airports, ports and public service government centers there shall be accessible areas designed for breastfeeding and diaper changing that are not bathrooms.
      34 L.P.R.A. § 1735h states that any woman breastfeeding her child under 24 months old and who presents a medical attestation to such fact is exempt from serving as a juror. (2003 SB 397)
      Rhode Island
      R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-45-2 (1998) specifies that indecent exposure-disorderly conduct laws do not apply to breastfeeding in public. (1998 HB 8103, SB 2319; 2008 R.I. Pub Laws, Chap. 183, SB 2616)
      R.I. Gen. Laws § 23-13.2-1 (2003) specifies that an employer may provide reasonable unpaid break time each day to an employee who needs to breastfeed or express breast milk for her infant child.  The law requires the department of health to issue periodic reports on breastfeeding rates, complaints received and benefits reported by both working breastfeeding mothers and employers, and provides definitions.  (2003 HB 5507, SB 151; 2008 R.I. Pub. Laws, Chap. 475, HB 7906)
      R.I. Gen. Laws § 23-13.5-1 and § 23-13.5-2 (2008)   allow a woman to feed her child by bottle or breast in any place open to the public and would allow her a private cause of action for denial of this right. (2008 R.I. Pub. Laws, Chap. 223 and Chap. 308, HB 7467 and SB 2283)
      South Carolina
      S.C. Code Ann. § 63-5-40 (2005) provides that a woman may breastfeed her child in any location where the mother is authorized to be and that the act of breastfeeding is not considered indecent exposure. (2008 HB 4747)
      South Dakota
      S.D. Codified Laws Ann. § 22-22-24.1 and § 22-24A-2 (2002) exempt mothers who are breastfeeding from indecency laws.
      Tennessee
      Tenn. Code Ann. § 68-58-101 et seq. (2006, 2011) permits a mother to breastfeed in any location, public or private, that the mother is authorized to be, and prohibits local governments from criminalizing or restricting breastfeeding.  Specifies that the act of breastfeeding shall not be considered public indecency as defined by § 39-13-511; or nudity, obscene, or sexual conduct as defined in § 39-17-901. This law (Tenn. Code Ann. § 68-58-101 et seq.) and § 39-13-511(d) were amended in 2011 by Tenn. Pub. Acts, Chap. 91 (SB 83) to remove a provision permitting mothers to breastfeed only infants 12 months or younger in any location. (2006 Tenn. Law, Chap. 617; HB 3582)
      Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-1-305 (1999) requires employers to provide daily unpaid break time for a mother to express breast milk for her infant child. Employers are also required to make a reasonable effort to provide a private location, other than a toilet stall, in close proximity to the workplace for this activity. (1999 Tenn. Law, Chap. 161; SB 1856)
      Texas
      Tex. Health Code Ann. § 161.071 (2001) requires the Department of Health to establish minimum guidelines for the procurement, processing, distribution, or use of human milk by donor milk banks. (HB 391)
      Tex. Health Code Ann. § 165.002 (1995) authorizes a woman to breastfeed her child in any location.
      Tex. Health Code Ann. § 165.003 et seq. provides for the use of a "mother-friendly" designation for businesses who have policies supporting worksite breastfeeding. (HB 340)  The law provides for a worksite breastfeeding demonstration project and requires the Department of Health to develop recommendations supporting worksite breastfeeding. (HB 359)
      U.S. Virgin Islands
      14 V.I.C. § 1022 specifies that a woman breastfeeding a child in any public or private location where the woman's presence is otherwise authorized does not under any circumstance constitute obscene or indecent conduct.
      Utah
      Utah Code Ann. § 17-15-25 (1995) states that city and county governing bodies may not inhibit a woman's right to breastfeed in public.
      Utah Code Ann. § 76-10-1229.5 (1995) states that a breastfeeding woman is not in violation of any obscene or indecent exposure laws. (HB 262)
      Vermont
      Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 9, § 4502 (j) (2002) and 2002 Vt. Acts, Act 117 state that breastfeeding should be encouraged in the interest of enhancing maternal, child and family health. The law provides that a mother may breastfeed her child in any place of public accommodation in which the mother and child would otherwise have a legal right to be. The law directs the human rights commission to develop and distribute materials that provide information regarding a woman's legal right to breastfeed her child in a place of public accommodation. (SB 156)
      Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21, § 305 (2008) requires employers to provide reasonable time throughout the day for nursing mothers to express breast milk for three years after the birth of a child.  Also requires employers to make a reasonable accommodation to provide appropriate private space that is not a bathroom stall, and prohibits discrimination against an employee who exercises rights provided under this act. (2008 Vt. Acts, Act 144, HB 641)
      2008 Vt. Acts, Act 203 directs the commissioner of health to convene a healthy worksites work group to identify priorities and develop recommendations to enhance collaborative learning and interactive sharing of best practices in worksite wellness and employee health management.  The work group shall examine best practices in Vermont and other states, including strategies to spread the adoption of workplace policies and practices that support breastfeeding for mothers. The commissioner is required to make recommendations in a report on healthy living initiatives to the legislature by January 15, 2009. (HB 887)
      Virginia
      Va. Code § 2.2-1147.1 (2002) guarantees a woman the right to breastfeed her child on any property owned, leased or controlled by the state. The bill also stipulates that childbirth and related medical conditions specified in the Virginia Human Rights Act include activities of lactation, including breastfeeding and expression of milk by a mother for her child. (HB 1264)
      Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-341.1 (2005) provides that a mother who is breastfeeding a child may be exempted from jury duty upon her request. The mother need not be "necessarily and personally responsible for a child or children 16 years of age or younger requiring continuous care during normal court hours." (2005 Chap. 195, HB 2708)
      Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-387 (1994) exempts mothers engaged in breastfeeding from indecent exposure laws.
      Va. House Joint Resolution 145 (2002) encourages employers to recognize the benefits of breastfeeding and to provide unpaid break time and appropriate space for employees to breastfeed or express milk.
      Washington
      Wash. Rev. Code § 9A.88.010 (2001) states that the act of breastfeeding or expressing breast milk is not indecent exposure. (HB 1590)
      Wash. Rev. Code § 43.70.640 (2001) allows any employer, governmental and private, to use the designation of "infant-friendly" on its promotional materials if the employer follows certain requirements. (2001 Wash. Laws, Chap. 88)
      Wash. Rev. Code § 49.60.30(g) provides that it is the right of a mother to breastfeed her child in any place of public resort, accommodations, assemblage or amusement. (2009 Wash. Laws, Chap. 164, HB 1596)
      Wash. Rev. Code § 49.60.215 states that it is an unfair practice for any person to discriminate against a mother breastfeeding her child in any place of public resort, accommodations, assemblage or amusement. (2009 Wash. Laws, Chap. 164, HB 1596)
      West Virginia

      Wisconsin
      Wis. Stat. § 944.17(3)§ 944.20(2) and § 948.10(2)(b) (1995) provide that breastfeeding mothers are not in violation of criminal statutes of indecent or obscene exposure. (AB 154)
      2009 Wis. Laws, Act 148 provides that a mother may breastfeed her child in any public or private location where the mother and child are otherwise authorized to be. The law specifies that in such a location, no person may prohibit a mother from breastfeeding her child, direct a mother to move to a different location to breastfeed her child, direct a mother to cover her child or breast while breastfeeding, or otherwise restrict a mother from breastfeeding her child. (2009 AB 57)
      Wyoming
      Wyo. House Joint Resolution 5 (2003) encourages breastfeeding and recognizes the importance of breastfeeding to maternal and child health. The resolution also commends employers, both in the public and private sectors, who provide accommodations for breastfeeding mothers.
      Wyo. Stat. § 6-4-201 (2007) exempts breastfeeding mothers from public indecency laws and gives breastfeeding women the right to nurse anyplace that they otherwise have a right to be. (HB 105)