[RgnadKzin]

If she stops at the rest stop, changes the child's pants, feeds her some applesauce, puts the nursing pillow in her lap, latches the child on, then proceeds, there is no distraction.

The question is again: Do we care what the law says or do we ignore it?

[mhking]

latches the child on, then proceeds, there is no distraction.

In your estimation.

The officer on the scene is the only one truly able to make that determination. If she were able to pull over at the rest stop to take care of everything else, then she could just as easily feed the child the milk at the rest stop. Your point is moot.

Do we care what the law says or do we ignore it?

We do care what the law says. And, fine. The legal charge of child endangerment gets thrown out as a result.

However, at the same time, the standard of the best interest of the child is better served by the child welfare authorities in the jurisdiction in question. And that in turn becomes a separate issue, not covered by the laws you cite.

Oh, and by the way, if the child had died, would you still crusade so strongly to get the mom off?

[Howlin]

Since you apparently know her and obviosly arrived here at FR today to defend her, exactly how did she get the baby out of the carseat while she was flying down the interestate?

Carseats for infants are required BY LAW to be in the back seat of the car.

So how did she remove a baby from a five point belt in a carseat REQUIRED BY LAW from the backseat into the front seat while she was flying down the interstate?