Home | About | RSS Feed | Contact and Publicity Guidelines | Comment Policy the Law, the Universe, and Everything 

Search


Concurring Opinions is a
general-interest legal blog
operated by Concurring
Opinions LLC, a Pennsylvania
Limited Liability Corporation.

jr_114_9780195367195_bnr

jr_114_9780195383768_bnr

advertise-here4


FC-CO(SS)

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments

    • Mike Zimmer on From the other side at AALS . . .

    • Mike Zimmer on The Employer’s Strategy in Gross v. FBL Financials

    • Mike Zimmer on Drafting the 28th Amendment

    • M.G.M on Drafting the 28th Amendment

    • A.J. Sutter on Lawyers: Don’t Trade on Inside Information!

    • No Load Funds on Consumer Financial Product Safety?

    • grad student on Princeton and the Behavioral Revolution

    • Anon321 on The Passive Voice in Statutory Interpretation

    • Steven Kaminshine on The Employer’s Strategy in Gross v. FBL Financials

    • Alex Kreit on Politicians: Have you talked to your constituents about drug policy?

    • Alex Kreit on Election Night 2009

    • mikeb302000 on Election Night 2009

    • Neal Goldfarb on The Passive Voice in Statutory Interpretation

    • Orin Kerr on Politicians: Have you talked to your constituents about drug policy?

    • MYarnell on Curricular Reform Revisited

  •  

    Site Meter

Accommodating Breastfeeding Mothers

posted by Sarah Waldeck

mermaid.jpgBefore my guest visit at Concurring Opinions ends, I want to comment on a case that received media attention in September and October: Currier v. National Board of Medical Examiners. The Massachusetts appeals court granted a preliminary injunction ordering the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) to allow Sophie Currier additional break time so that she could pump breast milk during a medical licensing exam. The Supreme Judicial Court denied the NBME’s request for further judicial review. This was undoubtedly a victory for Currier, but what about for other breastfeeding mothers?

Over at slate.com, Dahlia Lithwick asked why more female columnists did not comment on Currier. She speculated that women are so beaten down by the Mommy Wars that they chose to remind quiet; or that some women silently wondered why a mother of two small children would start a medical residency; or that many women believed that because they breastfed and worked without accommodation, Currier should as well. I’ve found it difficult to discuss Currier, but not for any of the reasons that Lithwick suggested. I usually applaud policies and legal results that help women balance families and careers . But here I’m concerned that Currier’s legal victory will ultimately undermine the goal of widespread accommodation of breastfeeding employees.


Here are the facts, which lacked clarity in many media reports. Currier was scheduled to take a 370-question multiple choice test. The test is taken on a computer and questions are distributed in eight one-hour blocks; once the block ends, a student cannot revisit that portion of the test. Students have forty-five minutes of break time; they can allocate it between the blocks in any manner they choose. No food or drink is allowed in the testing room. Because Currier has learning disabilities, the NBME granted her double time and a separate test-taking room. Currier’s testing would thus take place over two days, with forty-five minutes of break time each day.

Currier, whose daughter was born on May 1, 2007, asked for an additional sixty minutes of break time each day for the purpose of pumping millk. The NBME refused this request and offered the following accommodations:

* permission to express milk in a private room at the testing center during the allotted break time;

* permission to bring food and drink into the testing room;

* permission to pump milk while in her separate testing room;

* the option to leave the test center to breastfeed during the allotted time.

The first two accommodations are worthwhile because they go to the heart of Currier’s problem; that is, they help ensure that Currier will have adequate time to pump, eat, and go to the bathroom during the course of the day. The second two are notable only for their utter worthlessness. Leaving the testing center would only increase Currier’s time crunch. Her separate testing room is video-monitored and has at least three glass walls, so enough said about the suggestion that she pump there! The NBME’s other proposed solution—that Currier delay testing until she no longer needs to pump milk—suggests that the licensing board is several decades behind the times.

But why weren’t the first two accommodations good enough? At the risk of sounding like Donald Rumsfield standing at his desk, what’s the big deal?

Currier said that she should pump at least once every three hours in order to avoid reduced milk supply, engorgement, blocked milk ducts, breast infection, and other horribles. Her expert’s affidavit stated that each pumping session would take about thirty minutes: five minutes to assemble the pump, 10 – 15 minutes to express milk, and five to 10 minutes to disassemble and clean the pump and to store the milk. On this record, Currier does need more than 45 minutes of break time over the course of an eight hour test.

But of course this record strains credulity for anyone familiar with pumping milk. When time matters, women preassemble most of the pump in advance and bring extra preassembled parts if they will pump more than once. “Storing” milk consists of placing it next to an ice pack already in the pump. All the mechanics take just a few minutes.

The number that really matters is how long it takes to express milk. But at 10 to 15 minutes (the numbers provided by Currier’s expert), she should have time to pump twice and still attend to other physiological needs, particularly since she can eat and drink in the testing room. And if she did have to pump less than the ideal, the most likely worst case scenario is that Currier would be a bit uncomfortable by the end of the day. Indeed, Currier’s victory is partially the fault of the NBME’s lawyers, as the appeals court specifically notes that on the state of the record, it was undisputed that Currier “would suffer physical pain from breast engorgement if she is not permitted additional time.”

What concerns me is that this case sends the message that accommodating breastfeeding mothers is difficult. It’s not. All women need is privacy to pump and the break time that many employees are already afforded during the course of an average day. But employers will understandably protest policies requiring accommodation if they believe that breastfeeding employees require one additional hour on top of what they usually receive.

While Lithwick is right that many commentators remained silent about this case, my own (admittedly unscientific) survey showed quite a bit of web chatter. Most comments were decidedly unsympathetic toward Currier. Indeed, I’ve declined to link to any posting beside Lithwick’s because some of the comments are so impolite. Undoubtedly some of the chatter has been influenced by the facts that Currier was already receiving accommodation for learning disabilities, and that she had failed the exam once before.

As academics have painstakingly documented, there is much that policymakers could do to help women balance families and careers. My fear is that Currier will end up as a poster child for those who oppose these efforts.


 November 28, 2007 at 3:49 pm   Posted in: Employment Law   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (2)

  1. sudoku - December 2, 2007 at 4:21 pm

    “My fear is that Currier will end up as a poster child for those who oppose these efforts.”

    She won’t. She failed the exam a second time in October, even with all of her ridiculous accommodations.

  2. Concurring Opinions Accommodating Breastfeeding Mothers | Uniform Stores - June 1, 2009 at 5:50 am

    [...] Concurring Opinions Accommodating Breastfeeding Mothers Posted by root 10 minutes ago (http://www.concurringopinions.com) Nov 28 2007 the option to leave the test center to breastfeed during the allotted time concurring opinions powered by wordpress Discuss  |  Bury |  News | Concurring Opinions Accommodating Breastfeeding Mothers [...]

Leave a Reply

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

Daniel J. Solove

Website
Understanding Privacy

Kaimipono Wenger

Website
SSRN Page

Dave Hoffman

Website
SSRN Page

Nate Oman

Website
SSRN Page

Frank Pasquale

Website
SSRN Page

Deven Desai

Website
SSRN Page

Danielle Citron

Website
SSRN Page

Lawrence Cunningham

Website
SSRN Page

Sarah Waldeck

Website
SSRN Page

Jaya Ramji-Nogales

Website
SSRN Page

Solangel Maldonado

Website
SSRN Page

Gerard Magliocca

Website
SSRN Page


Guests

Rachel Godsil
Alex Kreit
Anita Krishnakumar
Matthew Sag
Michael Zimmer






Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Ann Bartow
Francesca Bignami
Jeremy Blumenthal
Kathleen Boozang
Bruce Boyden
Donald Braman
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Jennifer Collins
Allison Danner
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
David Fagundes
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Jeffrey Harrison
Erica Hashimoto
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
John Ip
Kevin Johnson
Dan Kahan
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
Erik Lillquist
Jeff Lipshaw
Jonathan Lipson
Jacqueline Lipton
Joseph Liu
Michael Madison
Solangel Maldonado
Jason Mazzone
Linda McClain
William McGeveran
Salil Mehra
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Max Minzner
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Michael O'Shea
David Opderback
Kristen Osenga
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
David Post
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Susan Scafidi
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Sarah Waldeck
Melissa Waters
Alfred Yen
David Zaring
Timothy Zick
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Frank Wu
Corey Yung
Jonathan Zittrain

Blogroll

Above the Law
ACS Blog
Althouse
Balkinization
Becker-Posner Blog
BlackProf
BoingBoing
Chicago Law Faculty Blog
Conglomerate
CrimLaw
Crime & Federalism
CrimProf Blog
Crooked Timber
Discourse.net
Dorf on Law
Election Law
Emergent Chaos
The Faculty Lounge
Feminist Law Profs
43(B)log
Freakonomics Blog
Freedom to Tinker
Google Blogoscoped
How Appealing
Ideoblog
Info/Law
Instapundit.com
Juris Novus
Jurisdynamics
Law and Humanities Blog
Law and Letters
Law Librarian Blog
Legal Profession Blog
Legal Theory Blog
Legal Times Blog
Leiter Reports
Brian Leiter's Law School Reports
Lessig Blog
Madisonian Theory
Media Law Blog
Mirror of Justice
The Moderate Voice
National Security Advisors
Opinio Juris
Point of Law
PrawfsBlawg
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Property Prof Blog
Red Tape Chronicles
The Right Coast
Schneier on Security
SCOTUSBlog
Security Dilemmas
Sentencing Law and Policy
Simple Justice
Sivacracy.net
The Situationist
Susan Crawford
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf Blog
Tech & Marketing Law
Truth on the Market
Volokh Conspiracy
WorkPlace Prof Blog
WSJ Law Blog
Wonkette
The Yin Blog


© Concurring Opinions

Powered by WordPress