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

Skip to comments.

Bartenders Can’t Refuse Pregnant Women Alcohol, New York City Says
New York Times ^ | May 9, 2016 | MIKE McPHATE

Posted on 05/10/2016 3:14:44 AM PDT by reaganaut1

It can be an awkward order for a pregnant woman: A glass of merlot, please.

But she is legally entitled to it, according to New York City.

For the first time, the city is explicitly prohibiting restaurants and bars from refusing alcoholic drink orders to mothers-to-be, with new guidelines that say doing so would represent discrimination under the city’s Human Rights Law.

“While covered entities may attempt to justify certain categorical exclusions based on maternal or fetal safety, using safety as a pretext for discrimination or as a way to reinforce traditional gender norms or stereotypes is unlawful,” the guidance released by the Commission on Human Rights on Friday says.

That would also apply to foods deemed risky during pregnancy, such as raw fish or soft cheese. But it’s alcohol consumption by pregnant women that has long driven the touchiest debates over private etiquette and public policy.

At least 18 states have laws that regard the use of intoxicants by pregnant women as child abuse, according to a survey by ProPublica. It was not clear how many jurisdictions have rules that specifically ban restaurants and bars from refusing alcohol service.

Several medical organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Surgeon General’s Office, discourage any alcohol consumption. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has gone even further, recommending that sexually active women who are not using birth control abstain from alcohol.

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


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: New York
KEYWORDS: alcohol; nyc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last
To state the obvious, bartenders want patrons to drink. If a bartender thinks a pregnant woman is drinking too much and wants to stop serving her, why should the government force him too? Two reasons, I guess:

(1) Unborn children must be thought of worthless clumps of cells, whose health does not matter. Otherwise the morality of abortion would be questioned.

(2) Women are a victim class, and any restriction on them, even to avoid ruining someone's life with fetal alcohol syndrome, must be avoided.

Get me a drink.

1 posted on 05/10/2016 3:14:44 AM PDT by reaganaut1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

I tell ‘em to sue me. I doubt any jury would buy this


2 posted on 05/10/2016 3:20:35 AM PDT by Fai Mao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Will New York City protect bartenders from being sued by pregnant women who drank too much and gave birth to a child with fetal alcohol syndrome? Probably not, that would be discriminatory.


3 posted on 05/10/2016 3:23:27 AM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao
This is insanity! It'll be "sue me" if they don't serve the woman and "sue the bartender" if the woman has a child with birth defects.

The sad thing is that it won't even have to go through the courts. An out-of-control judiciary might okay a regulation that mandates serving alcohol to pregnant women. Isn't that what happened to allow perverts to use Women's Bathrooms?

4 posted on 05/10/2016 3:24:33 AM PDT by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Hmmmmn.
But the CITY of New York CAN (and MUST) demand ALL NYC people be prohibited from drinking “Big Gulps” of extremely fattening non-alcholic drinks, right?

The CITY of New York CAN (and MUST) require ALL smokers to go outside and get sick in the cold, wet and rain and snow and wind, right?


5 posted on 05/10/2016 3:24:48 AM PDT by Robert A Cook PE (I can only donate monthly, but socialists' ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

I am guessing that minority women in New York are more apt to drink alcohol when pregnant than whites thus it becomes a Dem civil right’s issue.


6 posted on 05/10/2016 3:33:27 AM PDT by McCarthysGhost (We need to repeal and replace the Republican Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

I think this is one of those things the government won’t be able to enforce. The barkeeps will continue to tell them to go somewhere else.


7 posted on 05/10/2016 3:51:09 AM PDT by major-pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Bartenders Can’t Refuse Pregnant Women Alcohol, New York City Says

If they can not refuse a pregnant women then how can they refuse anyone even someone that “appears” to have drunk too much?


8 posted on 05/10/2016 3:55:53 AM PDT by 48th SPS Crusader (I am an American. Not a Republican or a Democrat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

This is actually a reasonable court decision. The woman is ultimately responsible for her own health, and that of her baby. Since when does society deputize bartenders to enforce a recommendation from some medical group? And besides... she’s sitting on the other side of a bar and unless she’s in her last couple of months who would know?

We need less blame-shifting, not more.


9 posted on 05/10/2016 3:58:33 AM PDT by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

When the law of man predominates, you eventually get laws that are sheer insanity


10 posted on 05/10/2016 4:04:15 AM PDT by ReaganGeneration2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

I disagree. This is an intrusion of the courts into a private matter.

The bartender has the Constitutional right to serve, or refuse service, to anyone for any reason or for no reason at all. (Freedom of assembly also includes the freedom to not assemble at all!!) What CONSTITUTIONAL authority does any court have to FORCE the bartender to assemble with a pregnant woman in a PRIVATE establishment?

EVERY anti-discrimination law is un-Constitutional.


11 posted on 05/10/2016 4:21:26 AM PDT by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fai Mao
I tell ‘em to sue me. I doubt any jury would buy this

The problem is that even though they are being forced to serve pregnant women, there is no doubt that if one has problems with the birth/baby, they can sue the establishment of their choice for serving them alcohol.....

12 posted on 05/10/2016 4:22:29 AM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Liquor, yes. 32 ounce soda, no.

Being a progressive means being able to hold mutually incompatible positions simultaneously.


13 posted on 05/10/2016 4:26:44 AM PDT by Senator_Blutarski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 48th SPS Crusader

It’s gender discrimination, women are singled out. That’s their logic, read the ordinance in the original post.

It’s mind blowing that NYC will micromanage every aspect of the populations life because they know whats best. But when it comes to a developing baby, we can’t discriminate against women. It could possibly hurt someone’s feelings by being judged and singled out by a bartender. Can’t have that.


14 posted on 05/10/2016 4:29:09 AM PDT by submarinerswife (Allahu FUBAR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
Several medical organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Surgeon General’s Office, discourage any alcohol consumption. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has gone even further, recommending that sexually active women who are not using birth control abstain from alcohol.

Hey, doesn't that make it "settled science?"

15 posted on 05/10/2016 4:46:36 AM PDT by NonValueAdded ("He's a winner in the process of winning. People like that." Scott Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

Maybe the bartenders don’t want to be targeted with suits when the babies are born with fetal alcohol. They have the right to protect themselves from being the target of suits to provide support for those babies or from being charged with harming the infants. Is the State going to indemnify them or is it an unfunded mandate?


16 posted on 05/10/2016 4:49:59 AM PDT by JayGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

Smoking is a different issue because the smoker is inflicting the smoke on others. In the case of drinking, the alcohol only goes into the bloodstream of the drinker. (And of the baby within, if the drinker is pregnant.)


17 posted on 05/10/2016 4:53:18 AM PDT by Nationale7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
At least 18 states have laws that regard the use of intoxicants by pregnant women as child abuse

the 18 states are a mix of red & blue states.
So the fetus IS a child.
18 posted on 05/10/2016 4:53:54 AM PDT by stylin19a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

As long as they can’t sue if the kid is born with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, I’m fine with it.


19 posted on 05/10/2016 5:06:16 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Card the kid, no ID? not 21?

NO DRINK.

Bartenders reserve the right to refuse unruly customers.

Bars can be sued hen a driver wrecks his or her car. I could see a father or child suing an establishment over fetal alcohol impairment.


20 posted on 05/10/2016 5:36:50 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Obama is more supportive of Iran's right to defend its territorial borders than he is of the USA's.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

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

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

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