Mother defends breastfeeding baby while driving (followup on idiot)

WKYC-TV/DT Cleveland ^ | 6.17.03 | Vic Gideon

[mhking]

Mother defends breastfeeding baby while driving

Reported by Vic Gideon
POSTED: Monday, June 16, 2003 5:06:15 PM
UPDATED: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 12:20:52 PM

PORTAGE COUNTY -- A mother traveling from Detroit to Pittsburgh got into trouble in Portage County while trying to drive and breastfeed her baby at the same time.

Twenty-nine-year-old Catherine Donkers had fed the baby before she left Detroit but said her seven-month-old daughter was hungry again.

"I knew I was doing nothing wrong when I was breastfeeding her," Donkers said.

Donkers doesn't consider her actions excessively dangerous.

"I think there are lots of things we do when we put ourselves at risk, just by the very fact that I'm in a car and there's lots of car accidents every single day," she said. "I think it would be reasonable to say even that's a danger."

A truck driver apparently saw it as a danger and called the highway patrol. But Donkers wouldn't pull over for police until she got to a tollbooth.

"I've directed her to, that when she doesn't feel safe, she goes to a public place," said her husband, Brad Barnhill.

At the tollbooth, Donkers didn't give the trooper a driver's license. She instead pulled out an affidavit as identification and got cited for not having a license.

The couple also claims she did nothing wrong, saying Michigan law has an exemption to its child restraint law for nursing mothers.

They claim that since the turnpike is an interstate, drivers can follow the laws of their home state. But the highway patrol says that as long as the stop occurred in Ohio, they have to abide by Ohio laws.

The couple has done extensive research on the law and believes in a strict adherence to them. Donkers is facing child endangering and child seat violations among other charges. Her and her husband say they plan to fight all charges and will file a counter suit.

[Catspaw]

Roads are paid for by gasoline taxes, and in the case of the turnpike, by tolls. If you buy gas, you paid for the roads.

Not in my state. Although some of the roads may be paid for by gasoline taxes, we do not have toll roads. Wisconsin's legislature has budgeted approximately $6 billion over the next 30 years out of the general fund for freeway work in southeast Wisconsin (primarily Milwaukee). Freeways are, for the vast majority of them, interstates (I-43, I-94). http://www.jsonline.com/news/Metro/jun03/146821.asp

[An Old Man]

"Man, is this place going downhill fast."

Yup, it kinda looks that way. On the brighter side not all is lost. Way back in this long list of posts Howlin did expound on the best way to transport one of those little rats on a rope that pass for dogs nowdays.

[Dog Gone]

I just note it's mighty convenient to repudiate, even attack, all parts of our system except the parts that are useful to them.

Excellent and insightful post.

[cpdiii]

The woman was stupid. However, do not the cops have some real criminals to chase.

[honeygrl]

"You're right, honeygirl. Statistically speaking, the back seat is the safest spot, but you have to be practical, too. IMO, this is probably why the escape provisions I've noted were added to the child restraint laws."

Another thing I was thinking of this morning. If these people against her here were to put themselves in her shoes and think about it for a while, I'm not so sure they would do it much different than she. I mean, after being raped twice by a cop, are you going to sit alone at a rest stop if no one else is around? Are you going to pull over in an isolated area for a cop? If she had to drive a while to find a public area then it sounds like she was pretty isolated. I'm not saying it was a good idea. I am just saying that I can totally see why she did it after hearing about the cop rape thing.

[honeygrl]

"If you have ever read some of the parenting boards on the internet you would realize that this woman is emboldened by women who think it is their right to breastfeed everywhere and anywhere they choose."

Are you one of those prudes who think women should go in a dirty bathroom to breastfeed their baby so you don't have any chance of seeing skin while your eat dinner?

[honeygrl]

"Yup, it kinda looks that way. On the brighter side not all is lost. Way back in this long list of posts Howlin did expound on the best way to transport one of those little rats on a rope that pass for dogs nowdays. "

LOL He would just die if he saw the dog that use to live in our town that rode on top of the tool bin in the back of his owners pickup truck all around town. If I remember right it was some sort of bulldog. You always just sat and watched for it to slip off the edge but it never did. This is a high traffic town too so it wasn't like he was doing out in the country. The dog was famous around town in a way while he was here.

[ChemistCat]

And wouldn't any judgment awarded them be taxable?

Whups, time for that social security number again.

[ChemistCat]

I don't fault her at all for not pulling over till she felt safe about it. Every woman should know THAT. It's basic common sense in a dangerous world. A PCJ could be anywhere.

I fault her for putting her baby between her body and a steering wheel in order to make trouble for other people--to prove a point. That's all. A 7 month old is a wiggly creature. One minute she's a snuggly bundle, but then suddenly she'll decide she wants down NOW to crawl and she's like a greased pig.

Had the woman been a passenger I'd question her judgment nursing in a moving vehicle but I wouldn't urge criminal charges--just a physics course and a review of some gory driver's ed videos. (Dear lady, you might reconsider leaning over that carseat to nurse yours--a minor accident could lead to babies with no mommy all too easily. Make your husband stop the car. Build that stop-time into your travel. And to heck with the prudes!)

Since she was driving, unlicensed, unregistered, uninsured, and unaided by another adult--I can't see this as anything but deliberate and a high risk to everyone around her--including her baby and any other babies on the road around her.

My mom does some things while driving interstate that scare me. Putting hot sauce on and eating tacos! She also has driven 40+ years with no accident. In my opinion, it's just the happy side of statistics--"hunneds o' times ain't nuffin happened at all."

But that doesn't compare to nursing a 7 month old.

[justshe]

---

Breasfed babies don't usually need to be burped. My 2 never did. It's bottled that let in air. Boobies are air free.

---

My two must not have "latched on tightly enough" because I had to burp both of them. It wasn't the 'source' of the milk being without air, it was the WAY mine decided to partake....if that makes sense.

[justshe]

Hr>"... cliquish, mob mentality..."

---

Because many on this thread are in disagreement with your opinion, "cliquish, mob mentality" does NOTHING to further the discussion.

[bootless]

No, I am not assuming that state intervention is ALWAYS appropriate for contermand stupidity. If you read my post again, I am arguing against it.

What I'm saying is that it is incumbent upon us to act in a reasonable way to prevent unnecessary and stupid state intervention. That does not mean, however, that we can expect no state intervention - right or not - when we do something that is, to the reasonable person, out of the limits of normal and reasonable expectations with respect to safety.

Now my personal anecdotes, too. I never rode around in seatbelts as a young child because the cars didn't have them. My parents, however, didn't allow me to ride in the front seat at all until I was about 13. Yet somehow I survived, too. I drank out of streams, played in the street, etc. Didn't run with scissors, though.

OTOH, when I was a brand-new mom - constantly late - always going somewhere, it never ONCE occurred to me that breastfeeding while I was driving was an option. Yes, the language cited regarding "tending to the child's needs" does not specifically say "except while driving and breastfeeding, changing diapers, etc." Does it have to?

[bootless]

No, it varies from state to state. There is no blanket rule. According to North Carolina law, which I've posted above, you can be attending to a child's personal needs or driving a vehicle which is not legally require to be equipped with seat belts and still transport your children without being in violation of the their child restraint laws. How about that?

The North Carolina, which you cited, is what I was referring to - I was too tired to get more specific than that. As I wrote in the post just above, the law does not specifically say "except when changing diapers, breastfeeding, etc. WHILE driving." As I asked, does it have to? Are we going to take no responsibility for pushing this particular envelope and expect no further and UNWANTED intervention by the state?

There is a big difference between breastfeeding while driving and handing a package of crackers, a paper towel or a bottle to the toddler in the back seat. And as I mentioned before, I have a HUGE problem with placing a baby's delicate head between me and the steering column in a vehicle moving 70 miles an hour - hoping that nothing goes wrong within the vicinity on the freeway. And please, I don't equate it with the "Oh my God, we have to lock ourselves up in the house forever, or else we'll be in DANGER!" argument. That is an intellectually dishonest argue by many degrees.

[Xenalyte]

You should see how people travel their dogs downhere in GA. Inthe back of a pickup going 80 on the highway.

Good Lord. I won't even unroll the window all the way for the Dread Boston Salty - just enough to get his big square head out.

[bootless]

Thanks for your reasonable posts, glory. I hate to say it, but these "but she was being compassionate" arguments are not really about what being a responsible conservative is being about. Substitute something else - something less emotionally charged - for breastfeeding that would put the baby in the position of being an involuntary airbag, and see how it looks.

I shudder to think of some of the stupid things I've done in my past - fortunately, not too many, but still... And being a parent instills in a person the responsibility to make wise and safe decisions for another person who does not have the capacity to do so. But having the responsibility and freedom does not automatically instill the unlimited license to do ANYTHING and have it be unchallenged or even restricted.

I have known leftists and Democrats to want to have any action or statement remain unchallenged (see: Dixie Chicks), and will howl that their rights are being violated if we don't agree with them lockstep. I maintain that when you do or say something, that you must expect a challenge and disagreement. If you are surprised when that happens, well...

Taking it further down the line, there are parents who believe that beating a child is instilling "discipline". Is that statism, too?

[Xenalyte]

I might add that she is one DARLING little girl.

[Xenalyte]

I mean, after being raped twice by a cop, are you going to sit alone at a rest stop if no one else is around?

I'd buy a gun, myself.

[bootless]

Is that statism, too?

Oops - I meant to type a longer sentence: "Is it statism to want to make it unacceptable for parents to beat children?"

[ArneFufkin]

One of my pals dated a woman who claimed she never farted or burped. Ever.

I don't want to be around for that eruption.

[Poohbah]

As I understand the situation she did not have a drivers liscence but held an affidavit which is considered LEGALLY justifiable

No, she didn't have a driver's license. A notarized affadavit of identification is NOT a driver's license, it's a provisionally acceptable form of ID.