# Rant-the new TSB rules about bringing breast milk on plane



## *caitlinsmom* (Jul 21, 2006)

Yesterday, as most of us know, the TSB ordered that no liquids could be brought onto a plane in carry-on luggage, due to heightend security measures. Exceptions have been made for juice, formula or BM, IF you are traveling with a child.

But what about mothers like me, who are nursing, pumping business travelers, who don't have their child with them?

here's what happened to me yesterday at Hobby Airport in Houston, Texas. I went therough the security check point and was "taken aside" by a TSB employee who told me he had to search my breast pump bag. I told him to go ahead. At that point, I had not yet pumped any milk, but I did have a small insulated cooler with two little, frozen blue ice packs to keep the pumped milk cold. The TSB employee told me he would have to confiscate the cold packs! I objected, but he said, "well, they'll melt and then they will be liquid and you can't have them!" (keep in mind that these blue ice packs came with the pump and are factory sealed)I said, what about keeping my pumped breast milk cold?" He said, "you can't have it. You'll have to dump it." I was so upset, I was about to cry. I told him, "but you make an exception for formula?" He said, "yes." I grabbed the pump, now without my cold packs, and stomped off. I went to go pump in a rest room and called my husband, told him what happened, and asked him to give me the number for our congressional representative. I called our rep and explained my predicament to his staff. They promised to look into my issue and hopefully can do something to change the current rule. I also called the local news media in Houston and alerted them to what was going on. Hopefully, in the next few days, the TSB will announce that working, pumping mothers won't be forced to dump their breast milk before getting on plane!

I should have made that surly faced TSB emplyee (male, naturally!) watch me pump so he could verify that I had breast milk and not some dangerous liquid explosive! I'm sure it would have made him most uncomfortable!

Sorry for the length, but I needed to rant! My child's need for food trumps your little security problem!!!







:


----------



## Boobs (Apr 17, 2004)

I'm sorry you had the go through that. I'm also sadly sure you aren't the only one. Good for you for calling your representative!


----------



## JeDeeLenae (Feb 5, 2006)

Sorry to hear of your troubles. Hopefully they'll do something about it.


----------



## pumpkin (Apr 8, 2003)

This was the first thing I thought about when they announced the ban, what about mother's who are bringing milk home to their children. I think its dispicable. Anyone who has suggestions about what to do to get this changed, I'd really appreciate it.


----------



## Mama Poot (Jun 12, 2006)

I saw on my local news last night that exceptions ARE being made for breastmilk. Perhaps not all airport workers have received the message? So sorry you had a bad experience


----------



## TanyaS (Jun 24, 2003)

The exceptions are being made for the breastmilk, but she didn't have to discard breastmilk. She had to discard the small ice packs that came with the pump, which just seems silly to me.


----------



## kalisis (Jan 10, 2005)

That stinks - I'm so sorry you had to go throught hat.








for doing something about it tho. Way to go Mama!


----------



## pumpkin (Apr 8, 2003)

Actually, the TSA website says the exception is made for breastmilk only if you are traveling with a small child. so you can bring on milk for the baby to drink during the flight.


----------



## *caitlinsmom* (Jul 21, 2006)

The exception for Breast milk is only applicable if you are traveling with a child! Of course, my DC was back in Austin at daycare! Basically, the TSB thinks that lactating moms might try to smuggle liquid explosives on a plane in a baggie or bottle of breast milk!

As if! Guess we nursing moms are officially a threat to national security!!!

To avoid going through this again, I rented a car and drove back toAustin, after my meeting, rather then go through airport security again. I probably got home faster too, given how bad the delays were yesterday.


----------



## Benji'sMom (Sep 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pumpkin*
This was the first thing I thought about when they announced the ban, what about mother's who are bringing milk home to their children. I think its dispicable. Anyone who has suggestions about what to do to get this changed, I'd really appreciate it.

First thing I thought of too. I'm contacting my Congress-persons (or whatever they are called.)







:


----------



## *caitlinsmom* (Jul 21, 2006)

And, please, everyone, contact your elected representative today and ask that they do something about this!


----------



## Quagmire (Sep 27, 2005)

This just sucks


----------



## AllyRae (Dec 10, 2003)

I'm so sorry mama....

The other thing I thought of is what if a dad or other relative was travelling with a child and the bottle of breastmilk--in order to go through security, the adult would have to taste the breastmilk in front of the security guard, and many dads and aunts/etc. would probably not want to do that....


----------



## ColoradoMama (Nov 22, 2001)

I wonder if they realize that it's possible to take something TOO FAR. Dh said (sarcastically, of course), "So, now a woman's breasts are filled with an explosive substance? Good grief." I couldn't have said it better.


----------



## MarcyC (Jul 4, 2005)

Maybe we need to have a "pump in" at our local airports! These people totally need an education!!!


----------



## stockingup99 (Jun 3, 2005)

I guess the measurements of rocket fuel in our breastmilk were understated.


----------



## TanyaS (Jun 24, 2003)




----------



## mamajessica (Sep 15, 2004)

You know, I can see that they want to "follow the rules" because that is what they were hired to do. HOWEVER, they should be willing to make some concessions. If that means giving pumping mothers airport ice packs, then so be it. The answer should not be to dump mama milk that children really need. What if it was for a newborn? Would you even be able to pump enough later to make up for that? If it was me, that answer would be no.


----------



## Elowyn (Nov 3, 2003)

That's horrible. I'm worried about the pumping & travelling (from here to Vietnam) in my future, fortunately not for a few months.

I'm sorry you had to deal with that $#&#%.


----------



## rozzie'sma (Jul 6, 2005)

What crapolla. It's pretty easy to tell if breastmilk from a bomb.


----------



## EviesMom (Nov 30, 2004)

Not allowing pumped breastmilk is ridiculous. And if they won't let you take it on the plane, then I think the airlines should have to pay to ship it to your house in the special refrigerated packs that donor milk comes in. That would make sense to me.

I wonder, though, what's in the ice packs, factory sealed or not. I recall they were saying an explosive could be made from liquids that were not, individually, dangerous. Maybe the ice pack stuff could be an ingredient? Or it could be opened, replaced with something dangerous and resealed and refrozen? I don't necessarily mind if you can't take the packs on the plane provided there's some other way to keep the bm cold and/or ship it to you that is funded by the airlines.


----------



## jarynsmom06 (May 21, 2006)

to you..I am so sorry for you that you had to go thru that. I just wrote a big long e-mail to my congressman about it. This is just getting ridiculous. I tell you, if it had been me, I would have made the biggest seen. I probably would have pulled out both boobs and started pumping right in front of the security and said" well now that you know it is not hazardous liquid, I will be taking my milk on and off the plane to my baby" I bet that would have shut them up in a hurry. I just hope this doesn't last very long.


----------



## True Blue (May 9, 2003)

OK honestly, they are doing what they have to do to keep us safe. I understand taking the cold packs away, I am certain one could reseal them to look factory done. You actually could have pumped your milk no problem and travelled without it on ice, it's good for at least 8 hours at room temp.

If you have pumped milk prior to going through security, you could also put it on ice in your checked baggage.

Yes, the new rules will make things difficult. But how would a security guard know it was milk without it being tested? As a passenger, I would NOT happy to know they let someone through with stuff just because they "said" it was milk. I trust NO ONE when it comes to my and my children's safety.

Also, remember this all happened yesterday as an emergency situation. They haven't exactly had time to work out the kinks just yet!!!








:







:







:


----------



## MiamiMami (Feb 1, 2005)

I am sorry you had to deal with that. I do see the need nto remove the ice packs though. One thing mamas in this situation could do is just ask for a baggy of ice on the plane. That should hold them over for a few hours.

Now, the issue of not allowing breastmik on board unless you have a child is absolute sh#t!







:


----------



## *caitlinsmom* (Jul 21, 2006)

I appreciate all of the support from (most) all you great mamas out there.
The point that needs to be made here, and it was lost on the TSA employee I dealt with, is that If I had a can of powdered formula, there would have been no problem. I would not have been questioned, nor would anyone have batted an eyelash. But, because I secrete a bodily fluid that nourishes my child, I could potentially be a terrorist.
Furthermore, this is an issue that all women should be concerned about, whether you BF or FF. Only women lactate. Regardless of whether you do or not, because only women lactate, only women are subject to this scrutiny. That means that this policy discriminates against women, regardless of the fact that it is gender blind on it's face.
Finally, as true blue pointed out, the BM might stay good for 8 hours unrefrigerated, but, I was gone longer than that(10.5 hours). without my ice packs, what then? It would have spoiled. And, I am not about to check my breast pump and the milk and give the airline the opportunity to lose it. My daughter's nutrician depends on it an I am not about to trust that to the airlines.







:


----------



## JeDeeLenae (Feb 5, 2006)

Did they think the ice packs were going to melt during the flight?? If they're frozen solid, they shouldn't melt that fast, right?


----------



## tash11 (Mar 12, 2006)

I think they should allow milk if you have a baby and/or a pump with you. maybe not the ice packs, but at least hte milk. they could tell you to expect to taste it, and to bring ice that you dont mind being thrown away and they will give you more ice after the check (then they know where it came from).


----------



## kalirush (Jun 14, 2005)

This whole thing is stupid.

The thing is, there HAVE to be exceptions made- babies need formula (the ones that are ff, I mean), diabetics need insulin, etc. And what's to stop a terrorist from faking one of the acceptable excuses? It's just too wide an opening, and there's no way to close it, because you CAN'T tell a diabetic he can't have his insulin, you know?

They're just doing this so people feel "safer", and it seems like they're doing something.

Julia


----------



## hawkfeather (Jan 18, 2005)

that is absolute crap..
I am so sorry yuor precious milk went to waste because of the ignorance and fear being projected there! GRRRRRRRRRRR


----------



## cinnamonamon (May 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by **caitlinsmom**
The point that needs to be made here, and it was lost on the TSA employee I dealt with, is that If I had a can of powdered formula, there would have been no problem. I would not have been questioned, nor would anyone have batted an eyelash. But, because I secrete a bodily fluid that nourishes my child, I could potentially be a terrorist.

But powdered formula is not _liquid._ It would be punitive to take formula away if it wasn't a threat -- just to make it even -- NO babies get food on this plane! I would guess that if it was the premixed liquid formula they would have confiscated that as well.

Quote:


Originally Posted by **caitlinsmom**
Furthermore, this is an issue that all women should be concerned about, whether you BF or FF. Only women lactate. Regardless of whether you do or not, because only women lactate, only women are subject to this scrutiny. That means that this policy discriminates against women, regardless of the fact that it is gender blind on it's face.

Okay, so if it's discriminatory, lets start asking men if they are breastfeeding & check for breastpumps. Would that make it fair? They already have their baggage scanned (just like women) so what additional steps would you have them take?

Maybe I don't understand what additional scrutiny you are refering to. They aren't asking "do you breastfeed" to every woman and doing a squeeze test -- their issue is with expressed milk (which has become a liquid that is sitting in a container that you claim is safe -- you -- a stranger). Should they discriminate in your favor because you say you're a mother & because you lactate?

Quote:


Originally Posted by **caitlinsmom**
Finally, as true blue pointed out, the BM might stay good for 8 hours unrefrigerated, but, I was gone longer than that(10.5 hours). without my ice packs, what then? It would have spoiled. And, I am not about to check my breast pump and the milk and give the airline the opportunity to lose it. My daughter's nutrician depends on it an I am not about to trust that to the airlines.







:

I don't blame you for not checking your breast milk & pump. But I liked the idea about getting a bag of ice as soon as you got on the plane and upon exiting (or more often if it melted on a long flight). Then you could retrieve your ice packs from your checked bag when you got off the plane.

Then again -- do explosives freeze? From my limited knowledge, I'm thinkin not. So (once they straighten out this emergency change in rules) they will hopefully start accepting fully frozen ice packs through security as the fact that they are frozen will prove they aren't explosives.

I'm not meaning to be rude, but I really hate it when causes that I support use (what I consider) bad reasoning/examples. I think it makes us come off in a less than favorable light & be taken even _less_ seriously. You should have been allowed to take your ice packs, or they should have offered you ice once on board (and told you that). You should not have been made to dump breastmilk that you had excreted once through security. I wonder if you could have pumped after you went through security, then put it in your bag while in the bathroom (or wherever you pumped) -- how would they check at the gate? Or if you pumped ON the plane (I can only imagine how difficult THAT would be, though).

I really do agree with your side, just not your reasons, lol. Good luck!


----------



## SimonsMamma (Jan 12, 2004)

wow, ok here's my two cents..

first of all, this security thing is not a personal attack on all breastfeeding mothers everywhere.. it's not a way to "get us" cause we choose to nurse.. Not any more so that not allowing nail files on a plane is a direct attack on all people who file their nails.. I agree with the rules about frozen liquids and liquids not required for the flight (i.e. form, bm for traveling child..)

further more, i would be angered to have this happen to me, but I certainly would not make this a case for "all breastfeeding moms" in America.... there's enough bad press out there for us..

take up your cross, but remember that not everyone is in agreement with you.. i also agree that safety comes before my principles..

just my two cents.. nothing personal

Karen


----------



## pumpkin (Apr 8, 2003)

I'm just flabbergasted that people believe that
1) the liquid ban is rational and actually positively impacts our safety
2) that said ban should be at the expense of people with a real need to transport liquids - in this case it happens to be breastmilk - but there are other legitimate needs


----------



## cinnamonamon (May 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pumpkin*
I'm just flabbergasted that people believe that
1) the liquid ban is rational and actually positively impacts our safety
2) that said ban should be at the expense of people with a real need to transport liquids - in this case it happens to be breastmilk - but there are other legitimate needs

I believe the situation was that there was a group of people in Europe who were trying to board different planes to the US with liquid explosives disguised as inocculous things (beverages, presumably -- my dh told me the story I haven't read it yet). So now there is a total ban until they can find another way to check for this. I understand that it seems ridiculous & is irritating, but should they just not make any effort since we can never be 100% sure to catch everything?


----------



## Sharondio (Apr 27, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cinnamonamon*
But powdered formula is not _liquid._ It would be punitive to take formula away if it wasn't a threat -- just to make it even -- NO babies get food on this plane! I would guess that if it was the premixed liquid formula they would have confiscated that as well.

Well, what do the moms mix the formula with? And what if they are using liquid formula for any reason? What if the formula is premixed (like a lot of parents do before they go out?) What if the formula/pumped breastmilk bottle needs to be kept cold on a long flight?

I think we should all just have to fly naked. It would certainly make NIPing easier.


----------



## coloradoalice (Oct 12, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pumpkin*
I'm just flabbergasted that people believe that
1) the liquid ban is rational and actually positively impacts our safety
2) that said ban should be at the expense of people with a real need to transport liquids - in this case it happens to be breastmilk - but there are other legitimate needs

ITA!!










There are so very many many things that can be used to take a plane down if someone wanted to. Focusing on liquids actually makes it easier for someone who is trying to get a plastic explosive or a powder through. It's a bunch of hype for nothing. It's designed to give travelers the impression you are safer when you are not. My dad was just talking to me last night about how you can build a bomb with matches, a small bottle of alcohol (which they serve on planes) and some fabric. All things that are "legal". (Did you know you are allowd to carry up to 6 books of matches???) This is a stupid knee jerk reaction and it makes me furious at the waste. Did you see the trash cans full of stuff? It's ridiculous. Waste of perfectly good materials, costing you, the consumer, money that you should not have to spend. And don't blame the airlines. This is not their fault or their rules. It is the government. These are government mandates. The TSA is a government agency, they do not work for the airlines.

This is not an inconvenience that is making you safer, it is just an inconvenience. Sorry, but you are no safer flying today than you were 3 days ago.

Unfortunately we have tickets to travel in September and I can't do anything about it. But unless we are going to a foreign country this will be the last time we fly. I am sick of it.

OK, rant over!


----------



## coloradoalice (Oct 12, 2005)

Oops.....

To the OP, I'm sorry you had to deal with that. It's stupid and wrong and pointless. It isn't fair and you and every other pumping mom out there should not be treated like that and have to throw out your babies precious food. You don't deserve that kind of treatment.


----------



## cinnamonamon (May 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sharondio*
Well, what do the moms mix the formula with? And what if they are using liquid formula for any reason? What if the formula is premixed (like a lot of parents do before they go out?) What if the formula/pumped breastmilk bottle needs to be kept cold on a long flight?

I think we should all just have to fly naked. It would certainly make NIPing easier.
























flying naked. hehe

Seriously though, you can get water to mix the formula with in-flight. Still do-able, as is ice to keep your bottle cold. Probably premixed formula would be allowed if you have a child in tow (same as breastmilk already is). Otherwise there isn't much need for it to be premixed, right?

I think I'm getting kinda obsessed, so I'm going to step away from the computer for a bit.


----------



## hawkfeather (Jan 18, 2005)

Sorry. but while safety comes first, I have to say that supporting pupming mohers is paramount to supporting breastfeeding to me, and the safety issues concerned with *not* supporting breastfeeding are just _so_ much more dangerous and relevant to me than any possible risk from a liquid on a plane. When i look at trying to change public perceptions of breastfeeding it is about supporting nursing mothers in what ever way needed where ever they are so that more women are inclined to make healthier choices for thier children. I understand no one is arguing the cause..but the logisitics of dis-allowing storage of breastmilk on flights has a direct affect on breastfeeding rigths.

But I am also not American and not so deeply immersed in the fear of terroroism as some.


----------



## shobizgirl (May 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by **caitlinsmom**
But, because I secrete a bodily fluid that nourishes my child, I could potentially be a terrorist.

Oh. my. god. That is not what the TSB is saying at all. Good grief. They are trying to protect us from another 9/11. They are being extra cautious, perhaps too cautious, but in this case, I say an ounce of pretension is worth a pound of manure.

Just think - if they weren't banning all liquids, and they made a little exception here, or another exception there, and God forbid, something did happen, there would be an outcry as to why they hadn't done more to ban all liquids. I actually feel sorry for the TSB. They can't win.


----------



## Pandora114 (Apr 21, 2005)

That's stupid.

Sorry. Most hazzardous liquids are acctually CLEAR! The reason why most chemical solvents sold for household use have colouring added to them is so they aren't mistaken for water.

True hazzerdous chemicals are clear as the rain that falls from the sky.

TSB is going overboard on this...


----------



## HeatherHeather (Jan 7, 2004)

The liquid ban is stupid - even though the terrorists planned to sneak the explosives onboard that way.

First, they are allowing exceptions as a PP pointed out b/c they have to. A diabetic must have the insulin and babies/small children need liquids. A terrorist could easily masquerade as a diabetic, or bring a child on board.

As for tasting the liquids, that is equally stupid. If a person were willing to blow themselves up to bring down a plane, they will certainly be willing to take a small sip of an explosive to get it on the plane.

Also, while they search carry ons, they do not search every person. I could easily fashon some gel-explosive inserts and put them in my bra and no one would be the wiser. Or I could get some test-tube type things and fill them with explosive and shove them up my nether regions. I could give you at least 5 more ways off the top of my head.

The bottom line is that if you want to get the explosive onboard, you are going to be able to do it. We just have to hope that the "talk" and "planning" that go on before the event will be noticed, so that the attack can be prevented. ITA with the PP who stated that it is a measure to just make us *feel* safer.

BTW, this situation is likely to get worse as two of the people arrested were a very pregnant woman and a woman with a newborn.


----------



## jarynsmom06 (May 21, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sharondio*
I think we should all just have to fly naked. It would certainly make NIPing easier.
























:







laughup

That was just great....I think I peed my pants just now...


----------



## tallulahma (Jun 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Pandora114*
That's stupid.

Sorry. Most hazzardous liquids are acctually CLEAR! The reason why most chemical solvents sold for household use have colouring added to them is so they aren't mistaken for water.

True hazzerdous chemicals are clear as the rain that falls from the sky.

TSB is going overboard on this...

from the report i heard, they were using average everyday chemicals that they were going to mix after boarding. A study was done over twenty years ago saying that this mode of attack was a threat and nothing was done about it then because it seemed "absurd" to ban liquids. Now, they have an actual case and actual proof with arrests and people are complaining. Im sorry, but as someone who flies often. i would do anything to decrease my chances of blowing up. Yes, people will figure out a way to hide things and sneak them on. Doesnt mean we should make it easier for them to do so.


----------



## AuntNi (Feb 26, 2003)

Quote from an AP story today:
"As in the current situation an exception was made for baby formula, even though in powdered form it could easily disguise explosives."

This scared the crap out of me. And it makes your situation, OP, even more aggravating. Anti-terrorism experts know that powdered formula could "easily disguise explosives," but you were made to dump your milk.









Quote:

BTW, this situation is likely to get worse as two of the people arrested were a very pregnant woman and a woman with a newborn.
How awful! I hadn't yet heard that.


----------



## jarynsmom06 (May 21, 2006)

I totally agree with Heather, there are several ways someone could bring an explosive on a plane and as she said if they are willing to blow themselves up why would they not drink something and giving specifics as to what can be brought on the plane such as formula, in my opinion is giving the terrorists leverage. Because, as she said the people that were arrested were pregnant and had a baby. I don't think it is fair to say.."ok you can bring your powdered forumla on the plane" but then turn around and tell a mother that she can't bring her pumped milk onboard. I'm sure they could come up with something powdered that would blow up. They should have cracked down on security a long time ago and we probably wouldn't be in the shape we are in now, but that's a whole other ballgame.


----------



## shobizgirl (May 31, 2006)

Wait a second. Did I misread something here? The author of the OP wasn't made to dump her pumped breast milk; she had to discard the ice packs, correct?


----------



## jarynsmom06 (May 21, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *shobizgirl*
Wait a second. Did I misread something here? The author of the OP wasn't made to dump her pumped breast milk; she had to discard the ice packs, correct?

Correct, however they told her if she did pump she would have to discard that milk


----------



## tallulahma (Jun 16, 2006)

im not too sure about the drinking the chemicals things..... but i do know I have taken care of patients who have drinkin bleach, ammonia, antifreeze. Sure there are long term effects- death., But that stuff is highly corrosive to tissue. It would immediately begin to destroy all mucous membranes it contacted (i.e. your tongue, mouth, throat) it would be pretty obvious almost immediately that you had drank a chemical and not a beverage.


----------



## momo7 (Apr 10, 2005)

I swear on a stack of dead cats.....I would have pulled out that pump and started pumping away right in the middle of the airport, I would have raised such a stink they wouldn't have flown plains out of there for a month! What ignorant @#$%$ ! That guy would have felt like a complete







. I think you were very good to have held your temper and managed the situation as well as you did. I'm glad that you are trying to change the situation....but it seems to me that they are barking up the wrong tree when they start messing with mommas who are clearly NOT a threat to "national security".


----------



## pumpkin (Apr 8, 2003)

On the subject of drinking chemicals - there is an article on Slate right now explaining that people could take a drink and not suffer immediate obvious symptoms with many of the chemicals - and if they are going to die on the plane they certainly don't care about long term effects.


----------



## aisraeltax (Jul 2, 2005)

this threat has been around for over 10 years (they twarted a plan about 10 years ago in the US).
this is just ridiculous. if theya re going to put limitations in place, they need to THINK! thats one thing that the US doesnt do when it comes to airline safety. they are so reactionary.
i have flown very little since 9/11 b/c i just got really tired of their reactionary stances. its easy to prove you are a lactating mom with bm. give me a break!
good for you for contacting your rep's!


----------



## jessjgh1 (Nov 4, 2004)

I heard that the actual containers contained a false bottom so the plotters COULD take a sip if asked.

See, they already thought of THAT.

Jessica


----------



## moonfirefaery (Jul 21, 2006)

I understand the liquid ban is for security; however, they cannot decree that no breastmilk, formula, and prescription medications that are necessary for survival of a person be disallowed. That's like disallowing all persons with illnesses or who are young from traveling, even those who may have a real need to fly somewhere. They just didn't think it through very well. They need to allow necessities, not just food and medication.


----------



## prettypixels (Apr 13, 2006)

It's been driving me CRAAAAAAAZY that the rules are constantly being reported as "Formula for babies and insulin are still allowed." They NEVER say anything about breastmilk. ARGGGHHHH!!! I'm so sorry you went through this!

The truth too is that if you want to make a liquid bomb you can bring it on in a powder form and then mix it with water in the bathroom. Do you think they'll turn off airplane bathrooms next???? This is so ridiculous...and it IS letting the terrorists win by making all of us so miserable!


----------



## jessjgh1 (Nov 4, 2004)

I've been listening to NPR and every time they brought it up they mentioned breastmilk is allowed (adding...as long as accompanied by a young child).

In fact the first time I recall hearing it they only mentioned breastmilk and didn't mention formula at all.

Jessica


----------



## Charles Baudelaire (Apr 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by **caitlinsmom**
I appreciate all of the support from (most) all you great mamas out there.
The point that needs to be made here, and it was lost on the TSA employee I dealt with, is that If I had a can of powdered formula, there would have been no problem. I would not have been questioned, nor would anyone have batted an eyelash. But, because I secrete a bodily fluid that nourishes my child, I could potentially be a terrorist.

I'm sorry, but your logic here is faulty. What you're doing is what's called the "straw man" approach, which is to take a position, exaggerate or change it until it is absurd, and then attack it on the basis of its absurdity.

You're not a terrorist because you make milk. That is an absurd statement.
Terrorists, however, could theoretically pretend to be nursing mothers.

That's the point.
It's not that breastmilk is bomb fluid, it's that bomb fluid could theoretically look like breastmilk.

Moreover, since breastmilk IS being permitted if you have an accompanying baby, it's not even about whether breastmilk looks like or could look like bomb fluid. It's really about whether the mystery chemicals in your ice pack are actually bomb fluid.

This is not a lactivism issue. Sorry, but it's not. From the data you gave me, I strongly believe the transportation security employee would have made a FF mom who was carrying liquid baby formula cooled by ice packs empty the ice packs.


----------



## Charles Baudelaire (Apr 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EviesMom*
Not allowing pumped breastmilk is ridiculous.

They do allow it, just as long as you've got a baby with you. If you don't have the baby, then check your baggage. Caitlin'smom was unwilling to do that. It was her choice. I agree, baggage can and does get lost, but if it were a choice between taking the minor risk my pumped milk would get lost in Baggage Heaven or the certainty that my pumped milk would get dumped out at the security checkpoint, I know which option would be the more logical of the two to take.


----------



## SimonsMamma (Jan 12, 2004)

Yes, yes yes... I totally agree!!!!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Charles Baudelaire*
I'm sorry, but your logic here is faulty. What you're doing is what's called the "straw man" approach, which is to take a position, exaggerate or change it until it is absurd, and then attack it on the basis of its absurdity.

You're not a terrorist because you make milk. That is an absurd statement.
Terrorists, however, could theoretically pretend to be nursing mothers.

That's the point.
It's not that breastmilk is bomb fluid, it's that bomb fluid could theoretically look like breastmilk.

Moreover, since breastmilk IS being permitted if you have an accompanying baby, it's not even about whether breastmilk looks like or could look like bomb fluid. It's really about whether the mystery chemicals in your ice pack are actually bomb fluid.

This is not a lactivism issue. Sorry, but it's not. From the data you gave me, I strongly believe the transportation security employee would have made a FF mom who was carrying liquid baby formula cooled by ice packs empty the ice packs.


----------



## moonfirefaery (Jul 21, 2006)

About the ice packs...

Coudln't you have just brought a minicooler, put some ice in it, dumped the ice at the airport, then asked the flight attendant if you could store the milk in the fridge on the flight, have some ice, etc? They do have ice and refridgerators on planes. I don't know if they would have cooperated, but I doubt the milk would have gone bad in the time it took you to get through security, get on the plain, and get some ice from the attendant.


----------



## aymie (Aug 11, 2006)

Hello,

This is my very first post here but I would like to tell you about a conversation I had with my mom today. She is a senior TSA agent in Boston. TSA and the airlines are getting it from all sides with these new security directives and a security screener stopped my mom today and mentioned how quickly formula goes bad once it is mixed, and how hard that is on moms since water is a no-no now. I'm sure the screener had probably been told that in some not-so-nice terms from a traveler or two. My mom told her that was a great point and that's exactly why more moms should breastfeed and why society should make moms more comfortable doing so when and where the need arises. I'm going to copy and forward your post to my mom. I don't know if it will change anything but at the very least she can bring it up on the next telecon with D.C. I feel like I am 12 years old, "I'm telling my mom" lol, but maybe it will at least call attention to this very important issue.

There are a hundred and one ways each of us could spout off to carry out a terrorist attack, not all of which can be prevented. However, the agencies putting out these security directives are not happy about doing so, they have to fight the airlines and travelers, and in the end, they really are just trying to keep us as safe as possible. I love the comment about flying naked, going to suggest that to my mom too, lol.
Amy


----------



## lml41981 (Jun 14, 2006)

I think the point about being able to transport pumped milk if you have a baby or a pump is valid. You don't make milk only when your baby is with you, you make it wherever you are. Therefore, you need to be able to transport it wherever you may go.

I agree with making you get rid of the gel packs. I don't think it would be unreasonable to expect to be given ice to ensure your milk does not go bad.

Last, I went to Best Buy and got an APC power converter. It works in a cigarette lighter in a car and it also works on planes (provided the individual plane has a jack for it to plug in). If it were up to me, I would wait until I was on the plane to pump, that way the milk would not go bad.

Though I think they should, I cannot see flight attendants being willing to put human milk in the fridge.


----------



## ohiomommy1122 (Jul 7, 2006)

you guys probably wont like my respose but a hijacker could easily say they were a lactating mother and carry a pupm w/ them and have explosives in the bottles. I think tighter security is better for our safty but yes it is very inconvienent. I agrre w/ the new policy, i think we just have been spolied so long, I am sorry you had to go thru that though I would have been an emotional wreck!


----------



## moonfirefaery (Jul 21, 2006)

It is true that someone could indeed pretend to be a BFing mom, but someone who truly does BF could also sacrifice herself and her child. It happens. We are not fighting enemies that fear death, self-sacrifice, or even the sacrifice of children for their cause. We've got to allow breastmilk, formula, and medicines and the like. A terrorist who needs a medical prescription could be carrying liquid exposives. A formula-feeding mother could be a terrorist in disguise. Anyone could be. But we still have to keep the flights going or we're just giving in to terror.


----------



## cjuniverse (Sep 22, 2005)

What moonfire said. OP, I am so sorry you had to go through that. I would've been hysterical, and probably ended up in trouble for it. I think you are absolutely in the right to complain, alert the media, and in general make a bit ole' stink of it.

What's good for the formula feeding goose should be good for the breastfeeding gander. Simple simple.

I understand the TSA is in a difficult position, but they still have to be reasonable. Banning necessities out of reactionary fear is not reasonable, and they are rightfully going to get an earful for it, from travelers and airlines alike.

As some previous posters have mentioned, these restrictions do NOT make flying safer. They just make it seem safer to a select few and a hell of a lot more inconvenient to the majority.

Been on one plane in my life. Scared me to death. Huge fear of flying.

Now, I'll be avoiding this mess like the plague it is until it isn't. Which might just be not in the foreseeable future because of this nonsense.

Ack ick uck.


----------



## Melany (Aug 9, 2005)

This stinks.









I just wrote a note to my state representative. I wonder if they would allow you to use dry ice? I'm not looking forward to my upcoming trip.

Isn't this all working moms need, another thing to make it harder to breastfeed.

-Melany


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ohiomommy1122*
you guys probably wont like my respose but a hijacker could easily say they were a lactating mother and carry a pupm w/ them and have explosives in the bottles. I think tighter security is better for our safty but yes it is very inconvienent. I agrre w/ the new policy, i think we just have been spolied so long, I am sorry you had to go thru that though I would have been an emotional wreck!

Well sure - but wouldn't it be easier and more common to claim they were a diabetic and needed insulin? I think the point is, not enough people understand how important BM is or the fact that nursing mothers can and do travel without their children. The insulin is allowed, heck, formula is allowed, but not the BM?!


----------



## tallulahma (Jun 16, 2006)

formula is not allowed in liquid form.
and though it might be easier to claim you were a diabetic and need insulin the insulin bottle is very tiny, only holding 20 ml at most.

If you needed to get a lot of chemicals or liquids on board- that would not be the smart option.


----------



## talk de jour (Apr 21, 2005)

If you can't have formula on board without a child to feed it to, they can't make an exception for having BM on board without a child to feed it to.

I agree with CB - I don't think this is a lactivism issue.


----------



## lml41981 (Jun 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *inchijen*
formula is not allowed in liquid form.
and though it might be easier to claim you were a diabetic and need insulin the insulin bottle is very tiny, only holding 20 ml at most.

If you needed to get a lot of chemicals or liquids on board- that would not be the smart option.

When they develop the technology to make breastmilk powdered (and for us to be able to do it at the airport, no less), then it will be an equal situation. Until then, I don't see it as the same. It is comparing apples to oranges.

As for the amount of insulin in a vial...my vials from my pregnancy days contain 100 mL of insulin. I had two different kids of insulin and I kept both with me at all times. One was clear, one was cloudy. I would imagine a determined terrorist could empty out a vial and fill it with whatever clear or cloudy liquid explosive component he wanted. So, yes, I suppose a terrorist could pose as a nursing mother and bring a pump and faux breastmilk aboard. But a terrorist could also pose as a diabetic. We still allow insulin on the plane...


----------



## tallulahma (Jun 16, 2006)

i understand mothers away from their dc need to bring pumped milk home. i believe it can be checked. if not, then yes....something needs to be changed so that breastmilk can be brought with us. Breastmilk in powder form. funny, and unnecessary. bm is already more convenient for travel since it goes where the breasts are. ready made.

im also unsure about the bottles of insulin being allowed. most prescription bottles are 10-20mls. there are 100 Units/ml, but as a RN ive never seen a 100ml bottle.


----------



## santosha (Mar 15, 2002)

I'm not going to go into my opinions on the validity of this terror threat, but I do have to comment on what caitlinsmom said right here.

Quote:


Originally Posted by **caitlinsmom**

Sorry for the length, but I needed to rant! My child's need for food trumps your little security problem!!!







:


While I understand you are angry and probably wrote this in full on mama-bear mode, and while I also do not generally invoke September 11th- I cannot let this comment slide. As a New Yorker, as a friend of someone who lost their husband on the Pentagon flight, and as someone whose husband flies reguarly, I can say with confidence that your child's need for pumped breastmilk does NOT trump the security needs of the rest of the country.

It's plainly offensive, self centered, and obnoxious.


----------



## lml41981 (Jun 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *inchijen*
im also unsure about the bottles of insulin being allowed. most prescription bottles are 10-20mls. there are 100 Units/ml, but as a RN ive never seen a 100ml bottle.

I double-checked my leftover bottles to make sure I was not mistaken, and I was, indeed, given 10mL. I'm sorry, I was wrong.


----------



## runes (Aug 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SimonsMamma*
wow, ok here's my two cents..

first of all, this security thing is not a personal attack on all breastfeeding mothers everywhere.. it's not a way to "get us" cause we choose to nurse.. Not any more so that not allowing nail files on a plane is a direct attack on all people who file their nails.. I agree with the rules about frozen liquids and liquids not required for the flight (i.e. form, bm for traveling child..)

further more, i would be angered to have this happen to me, but I certainly would not make this a case for "all breastfeeding moms" in America.... there's enough bad press out there for us..

*take up your cross, but remember that not everyone is in agreement with you.. i also agree that safety comes before my principles..*

just my two cents.. nothing personal

Karen

i'm sorry, but what a scary way to live. it's the express track to giving away your freedom and rights.

our freedom as we know it will be chipped away at, all in the name of our 'safety'...i will not stand idly by and allow that to happen.


----------



## runes (Aug 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *santosha*
I'm not going to go into my opinions on the validity of this terror threat, but I do have to comment on what caitlinsmom said right here.

While I understand you are angry and probably wrote this in full on mama-bear mode, and while I also do not generally invoke September 11th- I cannot let this comment slide. As a New Yorker, as a friend of someone who lost their husband on the Pentagon flight, and as someone whose husband flies reguarly, I can say with confidence that your child's need for pumped breastmilk does NOT trump the security needs of the rest of the country.

It's plainly offensive, self centered, and obnoxious.

no, it's not.

and please read the ua.

as someone who watched the towers fall in living color...you're missing the point. they need to have a better way of discerning what is safe and what is not.

would you go on a board that was for support for insulin dependant diabetics and tell them that their need for their injections doesn't trump national security and that it's obnoxious, self-centered and offensive? come on now.


----------



## tallulahma (Jun 16, 2006)

well I think the point is that it wasnt a "LITTLE" security problem. It was the day they intercepted a plot to take down TEN PLANES.

not one person's "individual need" trumps that. sorry, but it doesnt.

i would say that in the first few weeks after, before concrete details are known and while the gov. and TSA get things figured out, we all may have to make some sacrifices for the safety of many.
This isnt v for vendetta.
No one is sitting by idly and watching our rights get stripped away. If you dont agree to the security regulations- then dont fly.
its that simple.
They are not telling us what we are allowed to have in OUR cars, they are telling us what we can have on THEIR planes. thats a big difference.


----------



## runes (Aug 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *inchijen*
well I think the point is that it wasnt a "LITTLE" security problem. It was the day they intercepted a plot to take down TEN PLANES.

not one person's "individual need" trumps that. sorry, but it doesnt.

i would say that in the first few weeks after, before concrete details are known and while the gov. and TSA get things figured out, *we all may have to make some sacrifices for the safety of many.*
This isnt v for vendetta.
No one is sitting by idly and watching our rights get stripped away. If you dont agree to the security regulations- then dont fly.
its that simple.
They are not telling us what we are allowed to have in OUR cars, they are telling us what we can have on THEIR planes. thats a big difference.

we're asked to make sacrifices but are not given reasonable accommodations in order to do so.

flying with a pump, expressed breastmilk and a freezer pack is not something that i need to do necessarily, but i do feel strongly about it that i'd like to stand up for those mama's rights.

it's all about perception...a 'small' sacrifice to YOU might be huge to another woman.

it's called compassion and empathy.


----------



## scoobers (Jun 24, 2005)

I have to agree with Charles Baudelaire and others who have said this is not a lactivism issue. If your child is with you, you are permitted breastmilk and/or formula. If your child is NOT with you, you are not permitted liquid formula or breastmilk. This isn't an attack on breastfeeding mothers, it's about addressing a valid security concern.

Chances are, if you are a breastfeeding mother you are not likely to be flying w/o your baby anyway. If you are, it's most likely a short flight, no? If you need to pump during the time you are past security/on the flight then you might just have to toss it and try to make up for it by pumping more later. Trust me, I know how painful that would be having had to pump A LOT (and having literally cried over having spilled milk) but if you aren't willing to do that then you either should bring your child with you, don't travel, or find another mode of transportation.

To say that a diabetic should have to discard their insulin while traveling because BF mothers travelling WITHOUT their children have to discard pumped milk is ridiculous. Their child is not going to end up in a coma because they didn't get that particular bottle of milk. Am I missing something here?


----------



## tallulahma (Jun 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kidspiration*
we're asked to make sacrifices but are not given reasonable accommodations in order to do so.

flying with a pump, expressed breastmilk and a freezer pack is not something that i need to do necessarily, but i do feel strongly about it that i'd like to stand up for those mama's rights.

it's all about perception...a 'small' sacrifice to YOU might be huge to another woman.

it's called compassion and empathy.

i never said the sacrifice was "small". I said we all may have to make "some sacrifices".


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

I agree, scoobers


----------



## runes (Aug 5, 2004)

ah yes...we're all guilty til proven innocent.

i can see where this is all going.

and it ain't good.


----------



## Selesai (Oct 26, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *scoobers*
Chances are, if you are a breastfeeding mother you are not likely to be flying w/o your baby anyway. If you are, it's most likely a short flight, no? If you need to pump during the time you are past security/on the flight then you might just have to toss it and try to make up for it by pumping more later. Trust me, I know how painful that would be having had to pump A LOT (and having literally cried over having spilled milk) but if you aren't willing to do that then you either should bring your child with you, don't travel, or find another mode of transportation.

This is just plain unfair, don't you think? Breastfeeding mothers DO travel, and they likely travel all types of distances. What about the working mother who is being sent from, say, the West Coast to the East Coast for business? She can't drive. She has to go. And even if she could drive those few days, or a shorter distance for a shorter trip, would her employer find that acceptable?

I have to add that I agree with pp. Terrorists will never run out of ways to bring explosives on the planes. I don't believe in these so-called safety measures, and I think they demonstrate that terrorism, whatever it is, has already gotten the best of us, our freedoms, and our values.

Ok-- end soapbox.


----------



## rubber_duckie (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *scoobers*
Chances are, if you are a breastfeeding mother you are not likely to be flying w/o your baby anyway. If you are, it's most likely a short flight, no? If you need to pump during the time you are past security/on the flight then you might just have to toss it and try to make up for it by pumping more later. Trust me, I know how painful that would be having had to pump A LOT (and having literally cried over having spilled milk) but if you aren't willing to do that then you either should bring your child with you, don't travel, or find another mode of transportation.

For a nursing mama who works outside the home and MUST travel for business (or potentially lose her job and means of supporting or helping to support her family) this is a major issue. It's not always a short flight, either!

What is a nursing mama who's a lawyer or engineer supposed to do when her boss tells her she MUST fly from Detroit to London for a 3 day conference? Oh, and BTW, company policy won't allow for the mama's DH/partner and her nursling to come along unless the employee pays for their expenses (which would potentially total thousands of dollars). Does she pump and dump, forcing baby to have formula? Must she suffer through an 8+ hour flight while engorged?

It's easy to say, "find another mode of transportation" or "don't travel" when making the mortgage payment isn't depending on having a job that requires occasional or frequent business travel. For many women who must travel for work, that is reality - either she agrees to travel periodically, or she's out of a job. If that woman happens to be a nursing mother, then that milk pumped during a business trip is a precious commodity for her little one.

IMO the TSA should allow breastmilk to be transported by a woman who is also bringing a breast pump on board the plane with her. If the gel ice packs cannot be allowed, then the airlines need to provide bags of ice en route. The reality is that there _are_ nursing mothers who must travel without their babies - for whatever reason - and TSA policy should be sensitive to the need to transport pumped milk (and keep it cold and safe for the journey).

I sincerely hope that the OP has filed a formal complaint with the TSA. If breast milk can be transported if a mama has her baby with her, then a mama with a breast pump should be able to bring her pumped milk with her as well.

ETA: I have contacted the TSA asking for clarification on whether or not breastmilk may be transported in the aircraft cabin by a woman whose infant is not accompanying her. When/if I get a response, I will post it.


----------



## scoobers (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Selesai*
This is just plain unfair, don't you think? Breastfeeding mothers DO travel, and they likely travel all types of distances. What about the working mother who is being sent from, say, the West Coast to the East Coast for business? She can't drive. She has to go. And even if she could drive those few days, or a shorter distance for a shorter trip, would her employer find that acceptable?

I have to add that I agree with pp. Terrorists will never run out of ways to bring explosives on the planes. I don't believe in these so-called safety measures, and I think they demonstrate that terrorism, whatever it is, has already gotten the best of us, our freedoms, and our values.

What is truly unfair about it, it's that a breastfeeding mother would be forced to go on a long trip w/o her nursling. That's something that should be addressed by the company or legislation.

The fact that terrorists will never run out of ways to bring explosives on planes doesn't mean we should stick our head in the sand and ignore a known threat.


----------



## runes (Aug 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *scoobers*
I have to agree with Charles Baudelaire and others who have said this is not a lactivism issue. If your child is with you, you are permitted breastmilk and/or formula. If your child is NOT with you, you are not permitted liquid formula or breastmilk. This isn't an attack on breastfeeding mothers, it's about addressing a valid security concern.

Chances are, if you are a breastfeeding mother you are not likely to be flying w/o your baby anyway. If you are, it's most likely a short flight, no? If you need to pump during the time you are past security/on the flight then you might just have to toss it and try to make up for it by pumping more later. Trust me, I know how painful that would be having had to pump A LOT (and having literally cried over having spilled milk) but if you aren't willing to do that then you either should bring your child with you, don't travel, or find another mode of transportation.

To say that a diabetic should have to discard their insulin while traveling because BF mothers travelling WITHOUT their children have to discard pumped milk is ridiculous. Their child is not going to end up in a coma because they didn't get that particular bottle of milk. Am I missing something here?

yes.

by your argument, if a nursing mom doesn't wish to comply with the (ridiculous) security measures, then she shouldn't travel by plane, or she should bring her child with her...you are being blind to the fact that an entire segment of the population is being DISCRIMINATED against in the name of 'safety'.

bust out your history books, my friends...it's happened before. oh, how quickly we forget.


----------



## runes (Aug 5, 2004)

how nice if something like this would be the alternative to the scenario that the op wrote of...

"excuse me, ma'am, but as you know with the new security regulations, we are having to curtail the use of these frozen gel packs. however, if you wait here one moment, i will be happy to supply you with a bag of ice so that you can continue on your travels today without worrying about the milk that you've pumped for your child. please feel free to ask any airport concessionaire for a refill of ice if you need it. have a wonderful day and a great trip."

instead, we have mothers posting to this thread stating that pumping mamas shouldn't travel.

what is this world coming to?


----------



## chellemarie (Jan 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hawkfeather*
Sorry. but while safety comes first, I have to say that supporting pupming mohers is paramount to supporting breastfeeding to me, and the safety issues concerned with *not* supporting breastfeeding are just _so_ much more dangerous and relevant to me than any possible risk from a liquid on a plane. When i look at trying to change public perceptions of breastfeeding it is about supporting nursing mothers in what ever way needed where ever they are so that more women are inclined to make healthier choices for thier children. I understand no one is arguing the cause..but the logisitics of dis-allowing storage of breastmilk on flights has a direct affect on breastfeeding rigths.

But I am also not American and not so deeply immersed in the fear of terroroism as some.

The difference between you and the people running the air travel business is that their #1 objective should be getting their passengers from Point A to Point B (and all points in between) ALIVE. We have to keep that in mind. There were ways to deal with the confiscation of the cold packs. Hopefully. milk pumped in flight or while waiting in an airport isn't the last possible meal for your child.

There is a greater good. Your baby getting *that* particular 6 ounces of breastmilk is simply not as important as 200+ passengers arriving safely at their destination.

I think the ban was a bit overboard, but I don't work in that industry, nor do I fly on a regular basis and never to and from the biggest American cities. But the OP wasn't discriminated against. The rule was the rule for everybody. No liquids. Period. All it takes is one very charming sweet-talker with a special circumstance, you see, and there's a liquid on board. Why can't we bend a little here?


----------



## scoobers (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kidspiration*
yes.

by your argument, if a nursing mom doesn't wish to comply with the (ridiculous) security measures, then she shouldn't travel by plane, or she should bring her child with her...you are being blind to the fact that an entire segment of the population is being DISCRIMINATED against in the name of 'safety'.

bust out your history books, my friends...it's happened before. oh, how quickly we forget.

*Discrimination:*
n 1: unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice

I don't get that argument. Breastfeeding mother's aren't being singled out so how is this discrimination? If you are a formula feeding mother you can't bring your (liquid) formula on either unless accompanied by child. The idea is not to make BF mother's and their babes suffer, it's to make flying safer for EVERYONE.

Is it inconvenient? Yes, but there are ways to plan for it and deal with it as a BF-ing mother. In my book that's preferable to having 10 airplanes explode in the air CARRYING BF-ing mothers and their babies.

If she doesn't "wish to comply" then, yes, she needs to find other options than flying.

I'm curious, what history are you referring to?


----------



## runes (Aug 5, 2004)

think about it


----------



## runes (Aug 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *scoobers*
*Discrimination:*
n 1: unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice

I don't get that argument. Breastfeeding mother's aren't being singled out so how is this discrimination? If you are a formula feeding mother you can't bring your (liquid) formula on either unless accompanied by child. The idea is not to make BF mother's and their babes suffer, it's to make flying safer for EVERYONE.


your argument doesn't make sense.

you can purchase formula anywhere. i can't think of a circumstance when a formula feeding mother would need to bring it along on a flight without her babe with her.








:

in case you missed part of the story, the powers that be have known that the use of liquid explosives could be an eventuality for over 10 years.


----------



## Charles Baudelaire (Apr 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *moonfirefaery*
It is true that someone could indeed pretend to be a BFing mom, but someone who truly does BF could also sacrifice herself and her child. It happens. We are not fighting enemies that fear death, self-sacrifice, or even the sacrifice of children for their cause. We've got to allow breastmilk, formula, and medicines and the like. A terrorist who needs a medical prescription could be carrying liquid exposives. A formula-feeding mother could be a terrorist in disguise. Anyone could be. But we still have to keep the flights going or we're just giving in to terror.

Please bear in mind that they DO ALLOW "breastmilk, formula, medicines, and the like." They didn't allow _ice packs_. They still allow whatever liquids you want -- as long as they're not _in the cabin_.


----------



## Charles Baudelaire (Apr 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Selesai*
This is just plain unfair, don't you think? Breastfeeding mothers DO travel, and they likely travel all types of distances. What about the working mother who is being sent from, say, the West Coast to the East Coast for business? She can't drive. She has to go. And even if she could drive those few days, or a shorter distance for a shorter trip, would her employer find that acceptable?

Listen, several of you folks are acting as if the airlines have banned breastmilk.

No.

That is not the case.

Let me say it again: the airlines have NOT banned breastmilk.

If you've pumped a frickin' gallon of breastmilk, you can still take it on the plane.

You just *cannot have it in the cabin with you*. You can check it with your baggage. Yes, there is a risk of loss. Oh, well. Better than pump 'n' dump, don't you think? Let me point out that the same restrictions exist for FF mothers carrying on liquid formula: they get to check it or toss it just like BFing mothers do.

The ONLY reasonable thing I've heard so far about BFing mothers is the scenario in which a traveling BFing mother on a biz trip gets engorged on an 8-hour flight.

First off, that number's going to be pretty darn small.

Secondly, it seems to me perfectly reasonable to determine whether it is "legal" to pump _while on board the plane_ and to ask the steward for ice packs or cubes to keep it cold in the pump bag.


----------



## rubber_duckie (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Charles Baudelaire*
Let me point out that the same restrictions exist for FF mothers carrying on liquid formula: they get to check it or toss it just like BFing mothers do.

There's a clear difference between the scenario of a BFing mother who's pumped milk for her child while not traveling with the child, and a FFing mother bringing a can of formula along while not traveling with the child.

You can buy a can of Similac (or whatever formula is of choice) at just about any supermarket or convenience store. A FFing mom traveling on business without her child would have no NEED to carry liquid formula in an aircraft cabin. A BFing mom who's pumped milk may very well have such a need to carry expressed milk with her, even if her child is not present to consume it on the flight.

A pumping mother is in the unique situation of providing her child's exclusive or primary means of nourishment. She pumps it or she loses it. Yes, it could be packed in one's checked baggage, but then she runs the risk of having the bags breaking - losing her milk and soaking everything in her bag.

If parents traveling with an infant or toddler can bring EBM on a plane if the child is with them, subject to "inspection" by a TSA screener, then why can't a mother traveling with her breastpump and EBM bring that milk on a plane after being subjected to the exact same "inspection"? Given that a ban on liquids in-cabin does little or nothing to prevent terrorism, it seems as if this loophole should apply to the relatively few airline passengers who are indeed nursing/pumping mothers.


----------



## tallulahma (Jun 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rubber_duckie*
There's a clear difference between the scenario of a BFing mother who's pumped milk for her child while not traveling with the child, and a FFing mother bringing a can of formula along while not traveling with the child.

You can buy a can of Similac (or whatever formula is of choice) at just about any supermarket or convenience store. A FFing mom traveling on business without her child would have no NEED to carry liquid formula in an aircraft cabin. A BFing mom who's pumped milk may very well have such a need to carry expressed milk with her, even if her child is not present to consume it on the flight.

A pumping mother is in the unique situation of providing her child's exclusive or primary means of nourishment. She pumps it or she loses it. Yes, it could be packed in one's checked baggage, but then she runs the risk of having the bags breaking - losing her milk and soaking everything in her bag.

If parents traveling with an infant or toddler can bring EBM on a plane if the child is with them, subject to "inspection" by a TSA screener, then why can't a mother traveling with her breastpump and EBM bring that milk on a plane after being subjected to the exact same "inspection"? Given that a ban on liquids in-cabin does little or nothing to prevent terrorism, it seems as if this loophole should apply to the relatively few airline passengers who are indeed nursing/pumping mothers.

true, ebm should be allowed on, and im sure it will be. this just hapened.
but why again cant it be checked separattely? in a cooler with ice packs?
and im sure you could pump on the plane.


----------



## Charles Baudelaire (Apr 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rubber_duckie*
A FFing mom traveling on business without her child would have no NEED to carry liquid formula in an aircraft cabin. A BFing mom who's pumped milk may very well have such a need to carry expressed milk with her, even if her child is not present to consume it on the flight.

Really? Why?

Why can't she check it with her baggage?

The only situation I see where that's even possible is if she carried the milk in her boobs with her and then needed to express it due to engorgement. I see no reason why she "needs" to take it in the cabin with her as she gets on the plane.

Quote:


A pumping mother is in the unique situation of providing her child's exclusive or primary means of nourishment. She pumps it or she loses it. Yes, it could be packed in one's checked baggage, but then she runs the risk of having the bags breaking - losing her milk and soaking everything in her bag.
The formula mom faces that same situation. Moreover, if she's very poor, dumping liquid formula could mean that the child misses a meal -- or more than one -- just like with the BFing mother. Sorry, still not a lactivism issue.

Quote:

If parents traveling with an infant or toddler can bring EBM on a plane if the child is with them, subject to "inspection" by a TSA screener, then why can't a mother traveling with her breastpump and EBM bring that milk on a plane after being subjected to the exact same "inspection"?
If she has a child with her, there's no problem. Same with the FFers. If either one has no child, the milk or formula can't be in the cabin. Same treatment, no difference.


----------



## lml41981 (Jun 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *inchijen*
true, ebm should be allowed on, and im sure it will be. this just hapened.
but why again cant it be checked separattely? in a cooler with ice packs?
and im sure you could pump on the plane.

Because I'm not 100% sure, but I think the cargo hold is not temperature controlled. I would think ice packs will melt faster in the cargo hold and the milk will be susceptible to spoilage. In the cabin, the mom can keep an eye on whether or not her baggie of ice from Sbarro is still frozen and the milk is still cool and she can get more ice from a flight attendant. Maybe I am wrong... Maybe the cargo hold gets cold in flight due to altitude, I dunno. I do know that during hot weather, they don't let animals fly. I would imagine the temperature in the cargo hold would not be stable for the milk.

I might be wrong, though. Secondarily, the way the baggage handlers manhandle luggage would cause me to seriously question their ability to care for a cooler containing human milk. The cooler could come open and the milk could be lost.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

When I travelled I always sent by ebm by Fed Ex. They have an excellent service that assures temperature control. It wasn't that expensive, and could certainly be well afforded by the mother who travels regularly on business.


----------



## Kidzaplenty (Jun 17, 2006)

It's hard to blame the security man for doing his job. He can not give exceptions to anyone. Not to mention that many other countries would not bat an eye at using a lactating woman to carry explosives on to a plane. There are many suicidal crazy people out there that are out to get America. Plus, with 9-11 just around the corner, there have already been threats against the airlines and several hijackers caught in a plot to do a "9-11" again.

Although it is an inconvenience, I think they were only doing what they feel is necessary to try and keep us safe. Ice packs could be checked into baggage, and milk dumped, if necessary. For the safety of the entire plane, I can see how that mandate is not too harsh. They don't know you and they have rules to follow. Anyone would have had to dump milk, man or woman, formula or BM. So it is not singling out mothers, just liquid.

Now I will duck!







:


----------



## Kidzaplenty (Jun 17, 2006)

What I also don't get is the NEED to keep any EBM. If you are away from your child, then the child is already missing the meal and hopefully having it replaced by something else. And when you get to your child, you can always nurse your child at that time. So why can't one just express enough milk to make you commfy then nurse when they arrive? Why keep it, in these circumstances? Under normal circumstances, I understand, but this could be a reasonable exception.


----------



## Sharondio (Apr 27, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kidzaplenty*
What I also don't get is the NEED to keep any EBM. If you are away from your child, then the child is already missing the meal and hopefully having it replaced by something else. And when you get to your child, you can always nurse your child at that time. So why can't one just express enough milk to make you commfy then nurse when they arrive? Why keep it, in these circumstances? Under normal circumstances, I understand, but this could be a reasonable exception.

Well, speaking as someone who did work full time and pump, I'd have used freezer stash for the trip, but I would've needed that pumped milk to replace what I'd taken from the freezer stash. And this is a *big* deal to me. 100% breastmilk is 100%. I would've been carrying liquid gold with me. And seeing as it goes for $3.00/ounce or more from the banks, it's pretty near to the truth.

Personally I think the biggest part of terrorism is instigating stuff like this that causes hassles for us. It directly impacts industry and slows this country down while doing little to change the risks of terrorism in the air. Remember, 9/11 happened with box cutters. Do you think that someone could sneak a box cutter on board if they tried? Yeah, I think so too.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sharondio*
Remember, 9/11 happened with box cutters. Do you think that someone could sneak a box cutter on board if they tried? Yeah, I think so too.

I think it would be almost impossible to "sneak" a metal box cutter on board. Before and on 9/11 they were permitted so no need to "sneak". How do you think you'd get them past the x-ray/metal detector?????


----------



## scoobers (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sharondio*
Personally I think the biggest part of terrorism is instigating stuff like this that causes hassles for us. It directly impacts industry and slows this country down while doing little to change the risks of terrorism in the air. Remember, 9/11 happened with box cutters. Do you think that someone could sneak a box cutter on board if they tried? Yeah, I think so too.

Yes, it's possible that someone could sneak a box cutter on board but that's completely beside the point. 9/11 didn't happpen purely because they were able to get on board with box cutters. It happened because it wasn't within our (Americans) realm of thinking that something like that could occur. You couldn't get away with something like that now. The passengers and crew wouldn't allow it. Recall what happened with United Flight 93? Once the passengers and crew were aware of what had happened to the other planes they forced the hijackers to crash the plane. Pilots now have guns and the cockpits are locked not to mention that there are Air Marshals on some flights.

So, yeah, it IS safer to fly now but there will always be those who will seek a way around the safety measures. Should we just throw up our hands and say we don't want the terrorists to inconvenience us? They want to inflict maximum damage by killing as many people as they can, not irritate us by making our security lines longer or forcing us to check or throw out our lattes, shampoo and breastmilk.


----------

