No breastfeeding in shul

As you may have heard, a professor at American University breastfed her child during a lecture and made the front page of the Washington Post. I predict the lactivists among us are going to say the professor has every right to feed her kid whenever she wishes, and the rest of us should just Get Over It. A commenter at Slate, however,  makes some valid counterarguments.

The last time this topic came up here, I argued that women may have a right to breastfeed, but its not almost smart, or sensitive or considerate to excise that right. For instance, I don't think its wrong or unreasonable for a women to take her child to a private place if one is available. I also think a synagogue has a right to set its own rules for decorum and can decide that certain activities - breastfeeding included - must take place outside of the sanctuary. My operating assumption in making these suggestions is that breastfeeding women have no wish to defend or disturb other people, and will avoid doing so whenever possible.

However, the counterarguments in the Slate piece are so compelling, I am going to go a step further and apply some of what the writer said to argue that women should not breast feed in shul, under any circumstances.  Here's the relevant bit:

I sympathize with Pine’s struggle to maintain her career while serving as a single mother. Young children require 24/7 care, and if you don’t have a spouse or childcare provider available when you want to engage in something else, then you face a choice—neglect your child or neglect that something else (in Pine’s case, her job). Pine made the correct decision—she put her child ahead of her students—but in doing so, she refused to acknowledge her choice to shortchange her class.

Her job at American University requires her to focus on her students for 75 straight minutes. It’s not a lot to ask, but she failed. The reality that Pine dismisses is that you cannot give your full attention to your child and your work at the same time. Instead, she gave both her divided attention. It was a selfish choice that allowed her to feel as if she was doing it all, while in reality she was falling down on both jobs

It’s dishonest for Pine to act as if she had no options....

Pine had the right to take time off to care for her feverish baby. Instead, she chose to expose her 40 or so students to a sick child. Her daughter wasn’t allowed at daycare, because sick babies are notorious germ vectors, so why did Pine think it was ok to expose her students?

Now, let me rewrite this to make my own point:

I sympathize with women who try to participate in services while serving as a mother. Young children require 24/7 care, and if you don’t have a spouse or childcare provider available when you want to engage in something else, then you face a choice—neglect your child or neglect that something else (in this case, your prayers). The reality that that you cannot give your full attention to your child and your prayers at the same time. Instead, both will get your divided attention. You may feel as if you are "doing it all", but in fact you are falling down on both jobs. And it dishonest to act as if you have no other options. As my wife said, when we discussed this here last April:

According to Jewish law, taking care of my child is more important than praying or attending shul. If a kid needs me, all positive commandments are canceled. So a woman who complains that nursing causes her to miss shul has her religious priorities backwards. If she's interesting in serving God, the rule is clear: kids first.

If your kid needs you, your obligation to pray is canceled, meaning that if your kid needs you there is no religious reason to remain in shul. If the kid wants to eat you have both a right and an obligation to skip services and feed her.

Search for more information about breastfeeding  at4torah.com