New mom denied breast-feeding time during doctor test

Source: Boston Herald

BOSTON - A new mother cannot have extra break time during her nine-hour medical licensing exam so she can pump breast milk to feed her 4-month-old daughter, a judge ruled Wednesday.

Sophie Currier, 33, sued after the National Board of Medical Examiners turned down her request to take more than the standard 45 minutes in breaks during the exam. She said that if she does not nurse her daughter, Lea, or pump breast milk every two to three hours, she risks medical complications.

Norfolk Superior Court Judge Patrick Brady said Currier has other options, beyond asking the board to change its rules for her.

"The plaintiff may take the test and pass, notwithstanding what she considers to be unfavorable conditions. The plaintiff may delay the test, which is offered numerous times during the year, until she has finished her breast-feeding and the need to express milk," he said.

Read more: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/general/view.bg?articleid=1032684

Women must do this, and men and their institutions must make accommodation, or we are doomed as a species.

the Boston Herald is very much like the New York Post--it does anything it can to rile people up. It'll give outrageous headlines, and if they get their facts wrong, so what? They'll print a retraction on the obituary page a week and a half later, when no one will see it or care anymore.

The Boston Globe is a much better newspaper, and has been somewhat left-leaning consistently. I know too many people who get pissed off through the years reading the Herald, partly because they're not getting the whole story.

... so you are equating being a lactating female with a disability?

I just don't see how we are "doomed" if women have to abide by the same rules that men do. It was her choice after all to have children.

Congratulations. You have absolutely ZERO clue when it comes to the subject you're talking about. Want a special hat?

Here's someone having to compromise their own health issues to become a medical health professional. Yes, of course there should be test regulations, and no, this does not fall under ADA. But, are you not seeing the irony?

I'm wondering about your sincerity.

She's not disabled.

in the Globe, and there is a lot more to it than this piece. This woman has already been given several concessions, and there have been other women with newborns who have done all right with the breaks that already exist. In addition, this woman has been given a humongous break by being allowed to take the test over TWO days, unlike all the other test takers.

For crying out loud--I'd hate to be a patient of hers--shit, I'd be dying before she got her fucking act together. In addition, the test is given several times a year--if she fucks up, like it sounds she will anyhow, she can take it again at a later time when she's not in dire need of another fucking break. If I were one of the others taking the test at the same time she is, I'd be outraged that she was getting so many concessions.

Another excerpt from the article from the Boston Globe:



This kind of shit makes me very, very angry. And yet these are the kinds of things which happen every single day, and makes those of us with real problems and handicaps seem like whiners.

On edit: added link to the Boston Globe article

She has already received a number of accommodations.

So she's testing over 2 days instead of on one day, but is only getting one day's worth of breaks to pump her breasts? I think she has a point. Unless you have breast-fed, you can't begin to understand how uncomfortable it is to be engorged. She's already got ADHD, and she's supposed to concentrate while she feels like her breasts are going to explode and with milk running down her chest?

Oh, and what to you mean that she doesn't have a "real problem"? I hope you are not one of those folks who assumes that invisible disabilities are fake.

are not getting by taking the exam over two days.

She needs to cowboy up and just take the exam (and this is from someone who is dyslexic and has ADD).

to take the test.

Because obviously they can't or won't accomodate her breastfeeding, and it's not something that can be "put aside". She's not "making up a problem". If you need to pump, you need to pump. And it's NOT reasonable to say she should STOP breastfeeding her baby (not pumping can stop the milk supply for good) so she can take the test.

She can take it later in the year, maybe after the baby starts solids, so I understand the judge's reasoning. But it's clear to me that a lot of people in this thread have NO clue what breastfeeding an infant exclusively entails.

She does need to wait, if breastfeeding her infant exclusively is what she wants to do. It's not like she has not already completed her schooling, the exam can wait 3-6 months.

:hi:

The judge cited that other mothers with newborns were able to comfortably take the test in the 9 hour single session. This whacko is taking the test over a two day period, and should be just as capable with that massive concession as any of the other mothers who have taken it.

I checked over at the Globe boards on this, and it appears she's been begging for accommodations since she first took the test in April and failed. Come on, now--she sat the test back then, and fucking well knew what the test entailed, and she should have gotten her shit together before this test if she intended to try to pass it this time around. But no, she brings her story to the press to make it sound like the judges and judiciary are really bad people and she's just a struggling new mommy. She already has a 22 month old, so she's really pushing her luck.

In addition, I grew up in Brookline, Mass. a long time ago, and nowadays there is no one poor in the town--it's pretty much for rich people nowadays. What makes me think that she's an American Princess who has always believed she's somehow better than others? For the first time in her life, she's been told "no" to something, and she needs to start crying "unfair" when she's been more privileged than 99% of the others taking the test. Boo, hoo.

on edit: clarified a word

But beyond that, it's clear to me from some of the responses in the thread that some people have no grasp of what breastfeeding an infant entails - not even including the people who take it upon themselves to cluck about how folks really shouldn't breed in the first place :eyes: - and notwithstanding the details of this specific case.

As far as breastfeeding is concerned, I have no personal experience with it, and for that I'm very happy. (Don't flame me because I never wanted to have kids--I DO have kids, only they're four-legged and furry.) Regardless of the facts of breatfeeding, I suggest that she could take care of that situation in another way, and not use it as a crutch to get extra time to take the test.

Speaking just on the virtues of this woman alone, it's not really even a matter of her breastfeeding--it's about her getting far more leeway and breaks than all the other test-takers, and then acting all whiney about not getting yet another break she wanted. Dyslexia could slow her down, but as I said elsewhere the ADHD can be managed, and yet she STILL gets two days to sit the test unlike all the others who take it in one.

Knowing that she already sat it in April and failed, makes me even more suspicious of all her carrying on about taking breaks. She could hire a nanny for the day who would take care of the baby while she's testing, and then go to the bathroom to feed the baby during those breaks. Or she could feed the baby just before she left to take the test, and then feed it again when she gets home. She's NOT spending the 9 hours doing it, she's got two days to do it.

My wife did actually do an extended rant just the other day about people who say
"I don't have kids, but I have dogs and my dogs are my kids"
...but I'm not going to go there. :hide:

Let's just say to each his or her own. One thing I will say is, pretty much everyone who has kids once didn't. So I remember, and I can honestly say on a lot of stuff, I really didn't get it. Certainly, breastfeeding. It's not that I was anti-breastfeeding, but I for sure didn't see what the big deal was. Watching my wife deal with that, particularly while juggling work, business travel, etc.. I meant it when I said that any woman who pulls it off for a full year has my respect like she's a one-legged man climbing up kilimanjaro. It's far more complicated than just "put boob in baby's mouth", which was pretty much all I saw it as, before.

The whole experience really opened my eyes-- like, Bill Maher's spiel on breastfeeding the other night.. I agree with Maher a lot of the time on a lot of subjects, but he was way off base there. For instance, on the idea that women who breastfeed in public are doing it because they 'want the attention' and want to 'show off' that they 'made a baby'. Er, no. I can safely say that no woman breastfeeds in public with the thought of impressing other people or making it a spectacle. They do it because babies, particularly little ones, need to eat when they need to eat, and lots of them may not be willing to do it under a blanket. That's just the way it goes. And breastfeeding is SO MUCH better for babies than any other alternative. The other day I saw a woman in a take out place giving a baby a bottle.. and I thought, would any of these anti-breastfeeding folks have a problem with THAT? Probably not. But because it's a boob, they get all hung up. Never mind that a boob is designed for babies to eat- that's what they're for.

But none of that bears on the case in the OP. I think enough accommodations were given to this woman, and like you say, I think there were other, deeper issues going on.

She's been given more fucking breaks than any other test taker, and yet she still can't manage without crying for extra attention?

I know a lot of people with far more than dyslexia keeping them disabled. ADD in adults can be managed. There are blind people, deaf people, people with aphasia, people with cystic fibrosis, people with Chrohn's, people who cannot walk, schizophrenics, people with amputations, people with cancer--some like my sister-in-law with colorectal cancer and a colostomy, my best friend, before she died, who was tied to an oxygen tank 24/7 and was particularly susceptible to stasis ulcers on her legs--and none of these people expected such huge accomodations as this woman.

And last time I looked, breat-feeding was not a handicap. This woman needs to get over herself, period.

Now let the chaos resume.

if that will be her consistent bedside manner.

I too will never go to this doctor (if she ever does pass the test). She doesn't get that they have to be fair to ALL the test taker not just her.

Hah? Men don't breast feed, so i don't understand what it is being argued here.

It's what her lawyer evidently said during the filing of the suit.

I know it's not necessarily pleasant, but I think that it's unfair that she be given more concessions than everyone else.

sorry about that

our planet, and hence our species.

First off, on the subject AT HAND, I actually think that, because she can take the test later on, the judge has a point.

But... "having less children?" So--- we should screw breastfeeding moms and not let infants eat because you, personally, have taken it upon yourself to be the arbiter of when and which other people should be permitted to reproduce?

Good grief. Yeah, a debate about how much accomodation to give a breastfeeding mom is really the place to take out that anti-breeding axe and grind it. Wheeeeeeee!

Perhaps you should do a little research on where the population problem actually IS. Which countries. Which part of the world. Because, um... The advanced first world- places where people have access to birth control and a modicum of that control over their OWN lives that drives control freak busybodies so nuts- does NOT have a population problem. Dig? Give people access to contraception, a decent standard of living and the right to think for themselves and run their own lives, and they limit their population on their own.

Without lectures from self-righteous, alleged "liberals", even! :wow:

And, a little news flash to some of the clueless clowns in this thread- breastfeeding moms DO NEED some accomodation, maybe not in this specific instance, but certainly in most work or school circumstances. It's hard enough to exclusively breastfeed an infant for the recommended 6 months without the pinhead parade bitching about "special treatment" because a woman gets the privilege of disappearing into a broom closet for 15 minutes to pump. (I'm sure, this is the same gang who would wail like wounded alleycats if they were actually forced to be in the same room with the dreaded breast performing its dreaded natural function. They might even have to -gasp!- look away)

If you ask me, in this society, any woman who can pull off breastfeeding for a full year is like a one-legged man climbing Kilimanjaro. And breastfed babies are healthy babies, which -even if you absolutely positively HATE babies- one must acknowledge will, over their lifetime, incur fewer health costs on that society that parents are stubbornly refusing to keep child-free for your convenience.

You know what we need less of? We need less self-righteous control freaks who feel entitled to lecture other people on how to live their lives- THAT'S what this planet needs fewer of.

if I could recommend a post!

:)

if they don't breast feed or pump?

What are the possible medical complications?

Would medical complications result in the lack of breast feeding or pumping for a 9 hour period?

What do women do with lactation (or whatever it is called) when they bottle feed instead of breast feed?

It is quite common to develop infection from engorgement. And, seriously, you can't think of anything but your swollen breasts and your baby when you are engorged, so even if infection (which would put a halt to breast feeding) didn't occur, being able to focus would be impossible.

One possible solution would be to let her have the baby with her, or close by, while she tests. Four months is still a young enough infant that it is feeding nearly hourly and sleeping a great deal of time. Seriously, if women had designed the traditional testing for young women instead of men designing it for young men back when dinosaurs ruled the earth, nursing would have been taken into account.

Women who decide to bottle feed instead of nurse can take a shot to stop lactation. It doesn't work real darn well. My sister decided not to breast feed, and even with the shot, it took her a week of great pain to stop lactating. I nursed my daughter for two years, and a year after she was fully weaned, I was still lactating, though much less. This isn't something we can just turn off and on.

She may not want to do that. It's far better for babies to breastfeed for AT LEAST the first 6 months of life.

It also threatens the milk supply, which is more precarious in some women than others.

What the hell is she gonna want next, to be able to bring her baby into surgery and have everybody including the patient "hang on" while she needs time to change diapers?




Thank you Judge.

(edited-spellchk is ur friend)

As a former nursing mother that pumped at work and breastfed exclusively for the first year (two kids), this woman is being unreasonable,IMO.

First, there is no reason that she can't pump in 45 minutes

Second, she was offered accomodations for the breastfeeding, which she rejected.

Finally, some of the responses I'm seeing here are not exactly on the mark...

...engorgement, though extremely uncomfortable, is not dangerous
...not pumping for one day is not going to cause lactation to stop
(putting aside the fact that she could pump)
...again, though uncomfortable, an infection does not mean that breastfeeding has to stop


She doesn't seem interested in reasonable accomodation - she's rejected that. She wants extraordinary accomodation.

Just my two cents.

...doesn't mean it's enough for all. I routinely needed at least an hour, if not more. And that was with a high-end pump, too, in relaxed conditions (not in the middle of a test).

The irony here is that this is the same profession that should be PROMOTING breastfeeding. WTF?

If she can't completely empty in 45 minutes, she can certainly pump enough to relieve the engorgement.

I'm a big fan of breastfeeding, though not what I would call a lactofascist ;) - however, asking for longer breaks when the standard 45 minute break would do is very unreasonable, IMO.

Damn those harlots making bare their womanhood!
Won't someone please think of the children?

I simply cannot fathom what part about breastfeeding that is natural and necessary people aren't getting??

She can breast feed all she wants. It's just not going to be during those extra breaks she wanted during the test, at least if this decision is upheld.

Maybe she should just get into another profession?

Life, and babies, are what happens when you are making other plans. The only reason she needs more breaks is because she asked for, and received, double time on the test due to other, permanent conditions. The board has already accomodated her permanent conditions, maybe she should choose whether to accomodate her temporary or her permanent conditions?

Is she waiting on this exam to be able to get a job? Babies are exepensive.

But she's going to have a hard time claiming she needs a residency to make ends meet, working 100+ hour weeks for $35k with two infants is not as lucrative, say, as working at starbucks. It's not a surprise she has to take this test, she's know about it for years, and has taken it once already.

it's not fair, always, but sometimes you have to choose between your family and your career path.

This is the heart of the matter. The rules were made without consideration of the differences between men and women. So they disadvantage women in many areas.

they disadvantage pregnant women or current breastfeeders. Face it, as a resident, you work 100+ hour weeks (just as rookie lawyers at big firms can do) you cannot work those hours and care for a child, you just can't do it reasonably. which means, if you are going to have children at that time, you need someone to care for them. Children are a full time job for one parent if the other is unavailable. Sorry, sometimes kids have to come first.

and, by the way, I know many men who have made career decisions with their family in mind. all the men in their 30s I know with children have made choices based on them, turning down promotions, refusing business trips, working fewer hours (for less pay) to spend time at home. Heck, I know two Mr. Moms, because their wives had more lucrative and promising careers. Men can't, of course, carry and deliver the fetus or breastfeed, but everything else is exchangable.

equality aside, there are some things that pregnant women, or those on a strict breastfeeding schedule, may not be able to do at that time. Luckily, pregnancy and breastfeeding are not permanent conditions, and therefore the delay factor comes into play.

but on the serious side, women sometimes just cannot "have it all..all at the same time"..

This young woman can take the test at a later time, and for her sanity, health and the health of her baby, that sounds like a good option for her.

Wanting to do something, and being able to do it are sometimes not in sync..

Of course there is a vested interest in this news-rag ..in getting people to see past the inferred accommodation for her, and the bloody shirt issue of being "denied" lactating- mother rights..

Keeping a roof over their heads while trying to pay back student loans may be part of this urgency to take the test. :(

It's a standardized test. You can't mess with the time constraints for a standardized test. And they did offer her a private room.

But not to the point of allowing additional accomodations for what is a temporary condition. Sometimes life just gets in the way of what we want to do, and we have to delay other plans. If she can't take her test, given the reasonable accomodations provided (surely, she's not the first breastfeeding mother to take her boards in Mass) then she needs to wait until she is physically capable of doing so, because she will be. In fact, my reading of this is that she needs additional accomodations for breastfeeding because she alreadt received accomodations for other, permanent conditions. She should choose, or delay until the temporary condition passes.

And i am sympathetic, but she also chose to have a child that would be being breastfed at this time (she's a phd/md, if this second child was an accident, that alone is reason to delay) as a minor comparison, the weekend before i took my SATs i broke my left, my writing arm, i took them anyway, granted the accomodation of more time (which i didn't end up using) doing everything with my off hand. So i am sympathetic, but not that sympathetic

It's about a woman who has overextended and overcommitted herself and who has also received significant concessions and ample accomodations asking for even more accomodations.

There are limits to everything.

:shrug:

Does she not know anything about family planning?