Only thing I can think of is because he's not a lap child, she's going with all the pax have to be seated/ buckled. Which technically is correct since he's not marked as a lap child.
This is the problem. On the manifest, which is what the FA must go by, the child was not listed as as a “lap baby”, but as a seat occupant, encumbering him/her to the rule cited above. Technically, the FA was correct.
With that said, and with all of my travels with various children, I’ve never met such a cruel and inconsiderate intersection of interpretation and attitude. This was just a draconian personality getting off on following the rules. I am sorry for OP.
"Cruel and draconian?" You must be living a charmed life if a flight attendant instructing a mother to put her baby in his car seat for take off and landing is cruel and draconian.
All the authorities including the FAA say that the safest place for a baby to be on a plane is strapped into a car seat. So holding a baby on your lap is more dangerous. It looks like the flight attendant wanted to do the right thing.
A baby isn't going to die because they can't breast feed during takeoff and landing -- a pacifier or a bottle if the baby is used to bottles -- can serve the same purpose of regulating air pressure. But a baby might die or be injured if the plane hits turbulence while he's being held on a lap.
[This scene](https://youtu.be/RUBaRqY_NqA?si=eASJWUYbnoW_MjGS) from a 1990s movie about a plane crash illustrates that point so well (it’s not gory, it’s touching as Jeff Bridges shows a guilt -ridden mother that she couldn’t have held onto her baby in the crash, at great personal cost to himself).
I think it was the United airlines DC 10 accident in 1989 in Iowa? Lap children are safer in a seat. Several died that would not have had they been in a seat. The purser of that flight made it her life’s work to advocate everyone be seated.
Agree or disagree with that- if you chose to pay for a seat when you don’t actually have to for safety I see no reason why this is a rule…. When the child could have been a lap child anyway.
Is it a “covering up” thing? I’m a man and I couldn’t care one way or another if mothers nurse anywhere like - look away if it bothers you.
Have you been to a beach? You’ve seen worse shirtless authorities than a newborn feeding.
Doesn’t affect me reading Reddit in the airport or on board - I just don’t have to focus on it… nor would I… it’s weird people even care. I assume the new capsules are for the mother’s privacy if she prefers that.
(Realized I made this whole post not assuming it could be bottle feeding)
What’s the name of the movie? It sounds like his character is based off of the same chief FA on that flight. She did an interview on the Air Disasters episode for that flight which I think was United 232 - and I literally cried. She had to tell parents with lap children (as was United’s clearly defined policy at the time) to put lap children on the floor for a possible emergency landing.
Not to be depressing but if you’re a safety enthusiast the documentary is really good but really sad at the same time. We learned from it though and such an incident has not reoccurred to my knowledge.
I’d love to watch the movie also. And also Jeff Bridges is great - I saw him on broadway in To Kill a Mockingbird- simply epic.
Exactly, take off and landing combine for what, 45 minutes of mandatory seatbelt time?
OP would be the FIRST to sue saying the FA failed to instruct then properly if there was an injury.
Exactly. People who insist on doing unsafe things, even (maybe especially) because a person in an authority position tells them not to do it, always seem to be the first to complain or sue when their defiant choice results in a bad outcome.
You aren't wrong, but the fact is the general flying public looks down on crying babies and parents who don't intervene. A one-year-old is young enough that soothing can be complicated, and this family is trying to do the right thing by buying them a seat in the first place, so it's unfortunate this was the outcome. Maybe the baby doesn't take a bottle or a pacifier, who knows. I can totally understand why OP was embarrassed; a crying baby is literally a biological stressor, and that's before you add the social pressure of an entire plane having to listen to your kid's screams.
A baby crying never hurt anyone. I fly all the time and crying babies don’t bother me. I can barely hear them with my headphones on.
I’m much more annoyed by babies in laps, especially if have to sit next to the adult and baby and most annoyed by undisciplined toddlers and children and parents who do nothing about that.
It’s nice to have someone say they aren’t bothered by screaming/crying children, but you do understand that you’re in the minority in this sub, correct?
People in here are constantly complaining about crying kids (especially on long haul over night flights), to the point that they say young children and babies shouldn’t be traveling with their families. I’ve seen small children referred to as crotch goblins, crib rats, and all kinds of other things. People complain about kids not having their own seat, and when they do in here. Knowing this is a pretty common point of view from people that fly, of course OP felt embarrassed
I'm not bothered by crying babies, either, esp on take-off.
It bothers me more when it's a 5 year old who screams incoherently for half an hour. Or if the person next to me doesn't fit into their seat.
You should be mad at the airline for that last thing. They're selling seats that don't accommodate the passenger who bought the ticket. So be sure to complain to the upper echelons of the airline in that instance.
To be clear — not bothered by crying babies.
Am bothered by screaming children, especially because it’s usually the parent’s fault that the child is screaming.
Also, there’s no guarantee that OP’s child wouldn’t cry even if she could hold him and breastfeed him. In any case, a little crying seems like a fair tradeoff for the child being safer.
And a baby crying with a breastfeeding parent *does* hurt someone, as biologically they will start to produce which is embarrassing for the parent, and the child can be soothed during this time by doing this since they’re too young to chew gum like an older child can, and too young to understand that swallowing will help with this feeling.
I’ve watched my wife breastfeed during landing and takeoff with our infant in arms over 20 times. It’s common practice. That FA was an ass, who cares if they bought a seat or not.
In Europe they have infant seat belt attachments. Why the USA doesn’t, I have no clue. And a pacifier or bottle doesn’t compare to the real thing.
The issues isn’t breastfeeding. It’s holding a baby on your lap when the baby has its own seat. Try to keep up with the thread. This has been clarified multiple times.
That’s wrong though. FAA rule doesn’t specify anything about seat purchases, only what rules apply to children under two (see the other comment with the specific rule). She had every right to hold her baby regardless of whether she purchased a seat because of the child’s age.
So you’re the defending the parent’s right to put their child in a more dangerous situation, instead of thanking the flight attendant for helping the child stay safe? Got it.
I’d prefer the kid not be on the flight altogether but the FAR you’re not familiar with says she can hold the babe in arms. See my other comment about this becoming in cabin FOD in severe turbulence.
The issue is blind rule following with no nuance from people like you. What are you, some kind of breastfeeding police? Try to have some common decency and empathize with a mother.
Again. It has zero to do with breastfeeding. It’s about the baby sitting in the safest place.
If the mom could manage to breast feed the baby while they were both buckled in, that would be fine.
It’s kind of weird that you’d choose to die on the hill of flying infants not being in the safest seat.
Kinda weird to choose to die on the hill of “safest” when the parent could have chosen to fly with this 1yo as a lap child. If the rules allow children under two to be lap children, then the rules are allowing the parent the choice. Purchasing a seat for the child shouldn’t remove that choice from the parent. You can disagree with the parent’s choice, but the rules shouldn’t changes simply because the parent bought a seat for the child. The conflict in the rules is the issue here.
I have an infant. Do you? It’s actually super weird to be so into policing this thread - do you even have children? Are you female? If she wouldn’t have brought car seat or bought the extra seat, infancy in arms is the way it is. So your argument is that infant in arms isn’t safe?
FAR (14 CFR) § 121.311 is the applicable statute. I believe the FA was just misinterpreting it.
> (b) Except as provided in this paragraph, each person on board an airplane operated under this part shall occupy an approved seat or berth with a separate safety belt properly secured about him or her during movement on the surface, takeoff, and landing. A safety belt provided for the occupant of a seat may not be used by more than one person who has reached his or her second birthday. Notwithstanding the preceding requirements, a child may:
>
>(1) Be held by an adult who is occupying an approved seat or berth, provided the child has not reached his or her second birthday and the child does not occupy or use any restraining device;
So basically, a plain language reading might seem that you aren’t allowed to hold a child who paid for a seat.
However, it appears that the intent of the law is to make sure you aren’t holding a car seat with the child inside; it would be too bulky and heavy and would hit someone. It’s something you might try if they’re a sleeping infant and you don’t want to move them. Holding them with the seat buckled up next to you should be just fine.
I... am also reading it like you are.
"A child may be held by an adult ... provided the child ... does not occupy ... any restraining device."
It makes sense why that would be the case but I find it a little awkwardly written. In fact, it doesn't even really read to me that the mother couldn't hold the actual car seat with the child inside of it (just that she can't hold the child while it's in the car seat... unless the interpretation is that the seat/child become one once the child is buckled in.../shrug)
I'm not a lawyer nor in the law field, but my field does use formal logic (academic).
I want to know the outcome of this issue. u/Mother_Professor_290 , please update us when you get a resolution.
Maybe I've just hung out with too many lawyers over the years... but this reads perfectly clearly to me. "Notwithstanding the preceding" means the stuff below is an exception to the preceding rules.
A child under two can be in arms instead of their assigned seat. They have to be in arms, not somehow in a seatbelt.
This was the explanation I got on my last flight. My daughter had her own seat, but she is under 2 so the FA said she will need to either be held in arms OR restrained in her seat for taxi, takeoff, and landing and that I would need to pick one and stick with it and more or less not just be moving her around a bunch.
Great find. I think along with the [CDC recommendation that you nurse during landing and take off](https://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/infantandtoddlernutrition/breastfeeding/travel-recommendations.html#:~:text=Nurse%20your%20baby%20during%20takeoff,whenever%20your%20baby%20is%20hungry) tells me that logically you have to be correct. You can hold the baby itself to nurse but not the carrier holding the baby.
They could simply add that clarifying line. But life isn’t that easy I bet.
I can't find any FAA specific rule on breastfeeding during taxi, takeoff, or landing.
If any rule was to apply here, it would be the seatbelt rule. The general rule is "each person on board an airplane operated under this part shall occupy an approved seat or berth with a separate safety belt properly secured about him or her during movement on the surface, takeoff, and landing"
Now there is an exception for children under two, however, the exception also requires that the child does not have a restraining device (i.e. car seat), The actual rule being:
"Notwithstanding the preceding requirements, a child may:
(1) Be held by an adult who is occupying an approved seat or berth, provided the child has not reached his or her second birthday and the child does not occupy or use any restraining device"
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/121.311
The FAA also has a circular that goes into more detail, AC 120-87C. The circular calls out in several places that when a restraining device isn't available a child under 2 can be held, but does go on to say that "aircraft operators still have overall responsibility to ensure that the CRS is properly secured to a forward-facing seat, the child is properly secured in the CRS and does not exceed the weight limit for the CRS, and that the CRS bears appropriate labels or markings (§ 121.311(b)(2)(iii))."
https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/advisory_circular/ac_120-87c.pdf
Now I will say these rules could be made clearer, they don't specifically call out your situation. You could also argue they aren't "using" the car seat when you are holding them, but you can just as easily argue it the other way. It's possible the flight attendant was being stricter than required, but in researching this there are a number of other posts from parents who encountered the same situation as you on various airlines, so its certainly not an isolated interpretation. However, I don't see a definitive ruling from the FAA on this very particular situation (where a child has a seat, has an approved CRS available, but the parent wants to hold them during taxi).
If you would like a more definitive ruling, you can write an actual on-paper letter to the FAA's office of the chief counsel requesting a legal interpretation of the specific regulation(s) and mail it to their office. They do respond, but it will be slow. You'll need to be as specific as possible in the letter if you do, including references to the regulation in question.
The baby being held also isn’t just a danger to the baby, but other people in the cabin. They become a flying projectile which can hurt other people. It’s less rare in planes but no different than what we are taught in drivers ed about seatbelts
That's why I always thought it was kind of weird that children under two didn't need their own seat and could fly on their parent's lap. It's such a massive liability to the child, parent, and anyone else that shares the cabin with them. Hell, I've been on flights with such bad turbulence that if I hadn't been wearing my seatbelt I would've been thrown from my seat and I'm a grown ass adult. Turbulence like that could definitely turn a child into a dangerous projectile.
I'm also of the belief that infants (children under one year old) should be in car seats when flying and therefore will need their own seat on an airplane. At the very least, they should be secured to the parent in a wearable baby carrier during taxiing, take off, and landing.
I agree. Now if it’s a situation where I have to take my young baby on a trip and can’t afford the seat I’d think different (think family emergency) but otherwise I’d probably opt for a car seat. If they had a seat I wouldn’t nurse them during those times because I’ve watched too many episodes of air craft disaster and know their safety is more important than crying and would explain that to anyone who says something.
Thank you for taking the time to provide a very astute answer, I appreciate that! It is definitely looking like there isn’t a clear cut, easy answer. Great advice to write to the FAA, didn’t even think of that being an option, and because it doesn’t seem to be an isolated issue, it would make sense for them to clearly define everything across the board to make a very sensitive topic objective instead of subjective.
It is clear-cut, though. In order to be held by an adult during takeoff, the child must be (a) under 2, so you're good there, but also (b) nit child occupying a seat/using a restraining device (i.e. not a lap-child). Your situation unfortunately doesn't fit part (b). The FA still should have been polite about it, but they were enforcing the law.
It’s extremely common for children to breastfeed into toddlerhood and even the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends breastfeeding until 2. Literally none of your business unless it’s your boobs.
Something about babies in arms during taxi and take off came up a while back but I couldn’t find it.
I think I saw the rule that said something about how babies have to be if they have their own seat during landing and take off.
I searched and searched and found nothing. However I expanded the search here:
https://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/infantandtoddlernutrition/breastfeeding/travel-recommendations.html#:~:text=Nurse%20your%20baby%20during%20takeoff,whenever%20your%20baby%20is%20hungry.
The CDC is literally saying nurse during take off and landing here.
>The thought of traveling with your breastfeeding baby can feel overwhelming, but breastfeeding provides several benefits to parents and children traveling together. Breastfeeding can provide a source of comfort for babies whose normal routine is disrupted due to travel. In addition to providing the ideal nutrition for your baby, breast milk keeps babies hydrated. Breastfed babies under 6 months do not need to drink water or any other liquids, even in hot weather.
>By planning ahead, you can successfully continue to nurse and/or express milk for your baby.
>Nurse your baby during takeoff and landing when traveling by airplane. This will help to protect your child from ear pain due to cabin pressure changes.
This makes me think it is allowed.
Further I recommend you reach out to [Senator Tammy Duckworth](https://www.duckworth.senate.gov) as well as the DOT and ask for a clear ruling on this. (Duckworth is named here for advocacy in airline travel access for all and because as the first senator to give birth to a child while a senator she might care)
Asking and getting are not the same thing (I asked the state department specific website corrections and additions and never got it) but I think this issue might get more attention from DOT than I got.
The CDC's recommendations are irrelevant to the FAA. The CDC doesn't have the responsibility to consider the possibility of hitting clear air turbulence during landing and your baby being violently thrown around the cabin because of not being properly secured.
I did not say the CDC controls the FFA. In fact I said that they should reach out to various government officials and agencies for clarity.
However the OP already made clear that agencies saying exactly opposite things is not an impossibility.
However as others have noted several times lap infants ARE ALLOWED. And [still others pointed out that](https://www.reddit.com/r/delta/s/A564lAN1Xv) what it seems to be saying is that you can have the infant on your lap but not the car seat itself which might be confusing.
This is actually really irresponsible advice from the cdc. Babies are safest buckled in their car seat on the plane. I can’t comment on faa regulation or delta policy, but I work in transportation safety and the idea that our public health department is advocating against safety restraints for babies on flights is shameful.
I just flew delta with my kids, and my 1.5yo has ear problems. I nursed her throughout much of the flight, but I made sure she was buckled for taxi, takeoff, landing, and turbulence. We used Tylenol and ibuprofen to manage ear pain, and sipping liquids and applesauce from a syringe to try to keep the Eustachian tubes open.
If I could love this comment, I would. Thank you. I too found the CDC recommendation which would make me think that surely (insert skepticism lol) two government entities would have the same stance on a subject. Thank you so much for the recommendation on reaching out to Senator Duckworth. I really appreciate you!
Are you an Illinois resident? Don't reach out to Tammy Duckworth otherwise. Even then, it's unclear what you expect her to do. You should understand by now that the issue wasn't breastfeeding. The issue was the required safety of putting your baby into its car seat, buckled in, during takeoff and landing.
Babies scream all the time on planes for a whole bunch of reasons. Your baby could have cried even if he was still being held by you and being fed. I assume you fed him before you got on the plane, so he wan't crying because you waited until getting on the plane to feed him.
Upvoting and agreeing with you that this type of contact is appropriate, regardless of whether you are a resident of the State from which the Senator is elected, if you have a question or concern related to an area of policy particularly of interest to that Senator.
How many children have you breast fed? They do not cry, it's like the most comforting thing for them that exists. Breastfed babies also digest milk very quickly, so even if she fed him before she got on the plane it's likely he'd be hungry or ready for more by the time the plane was taking off. Hope this helps.
Reign in the outrage. I never said breastfeeding wasn’t healthy or beneficial.
But holding a baby on your lap when there’s the option of him sitting in his own seat is dangerous. And no baby ever died from crying a bit because they are uncomfortable or hungry.
This mom also should have had other things to help the baby clear his ears, like a pacifier. It sounds like she was very prepared for the flight and an attentive parent, so I’m sure her baby was fine, even if a bit hungry and disoriented by the flying experience. Many adults feel the same way when flying.
Greed and indifference for human life are the reasons for the Chevron ruling. Agencies have many checks and balances and steps in their review processes before creating rules. Do inconsistencies still occur? Address those individual issues instead of throwing the baby out with the bath water.
It is allowed, but the rule requiring a baby req in its assigned seat and buckled in also applies.
It's hard to breastfeed a child who is buckled into a car seat and it's far more dangerous to take a child out of its car seat to breast feed than it is for the child to not be breast fed for the 15 minutes or so during take off.
So let me get this straight...you purchased a seat for your child (which is the safest thing to do), but didn't want him restrained in said seat during the riskiest parts of the flight?
Taxi, takeoff and landing are the last times when you would want to be breastfeeding. Wait until you are actually climbing out, for everyone's safety
Breastfeeding during takeoff and landing reduces ear pain in babies because the suction clears their ears, which is something babies can’t do on their own.
I also find this very odd, literally during the most dangerous part of any flight you don’t want your infant to be secured into a seat? If you fly a lot as OP states, it’s pretty obvious that they take the seatbelt requirement seriously during these phases of the flight and if you have a seat you need to be in it and buckled in. Seems like such an unnecessary risk.
Flight crew here. It doesn't matter if your kid has a seat or not if they are the appropriate age(under 2) they can be a lap child. Some people even buy their babies seats just to have the extra room . Regardless, taxi, take off and landing are the most critical phases of flight and the safest place for a child is always in their own seat and seat belt fastened(even if that's in a car seat). So the flight attendant was probably just looking out for safety and not comfort for your child. But you are well within your rights to breastfeed during any phase of your flight. Edit to add: flight crew love saying FAA regulations when telling a passenger something. I'm convinced that the FAA words things so that they're a little murky and hard to understand so that they can be interpreted for either side to think they're right.
My oldest child is 19 now. We always purchased seats when they were babies and I was consistently told that if the child was a passenger with a seat, as opposed to a lap baby, then the child must occupy the seat during taxi, takeoff, and landing. We flew a lot with our kids so I just came prepared with pumped milk for takeoff.
It’s really a bad idea to be breastfeeding at any of those times, if you ask me, for safety reasons. That is the most likely time for there to be an emergency. Why on earth would the CDC say that’s the best time?
The issue is you bought a seat for the baby making the baby a full blown individual passenger which Delta has a duty of care to, and who must individually comply with all FAA safety regulations.
If there is an incident or turbulence, you could hold Delta liable for not informing you of or enforcing the FAA's safety regulations by claiming contributory negligence etc...
When you carry a lap-child, you are assuming the risks for your lap baby. You can't really turn around and sue Delta because you chose to carry a lap-child and it went flying through the air due to turbulence or another incident. That's your fault and you accepted the risk.
It's not that there is a specific FAA link for this circumstance, it's that your one year old was a ticketed passenger subject to all FAA rules and restrictions.
Imagine if you sat on your husbands lap during takeoff. It is the exact same thing legally.
Imagine if you tried to seat belt a bag in to a seat next to you. You would not be allowed to do that unless you had declared it as an oversized object (like an instrument). You had a carseat on the seat without a baby in it.
I am not sure why you are referring to the CDC here, that has nothing to do with anything.
Nothing about this should be confusing to you, and I do not understand why he would be screaming/crying regardless. You could give him a bottle or pacifier, or have any multitude of options to calm him.
The specific FAA guidelines are, your 1 year old is a ticketed passenger. The rules that apply to you apply to him. Period.
Fully supporting a woman's right to breast-feed her child is not the opposite of what you were told on the plane. They gave you a technically correct PR related answer. They can fully support a woman's right to breast-feed a child, but also fully support compliance with FAA regulations, fully support their flight attendant, fully apologize that you felt it was inappropriate, etc... without actually contradicting what happened to you.
You were in violation of federal law.
It's also not relevant that other people were coming up to you at baggage claim apologizing for the flight attendants behavior. People are crazy, emotional, and illogical. The flight attendant was correct, you were wrong.
It is not the same thing as if OP was sitting in someone's lap.
The statute is crystal clear, contrary to some interpretations here:
Basically what it says is that everyone needs to be in their own seat except a child under 2 may be held. It doesn't say that a child under 2 is treated like everybody else when they have their own seat. It says they may be held. FA was wrong.
This is the correct interpretation. As a seated passenger, the baby needs to be buckled in and follow the same rules as other passengers during landing/takeoff, etc.
The FA was a jerk about though. They could have handled it more kindly
Kindness is honestly irrelevant in these types of interactions. It’s a command / order. There is no negotiation and kindness can leave it open to interpretation. The OP was clearly pushing back and not getting it. Has come on here to focus on getting the specific FAA rule and still believes she was correct. This is absolutely when you use command voice. Kindness is for your friends.
the risk does not rise to the level of needing to take the most strict interpretation of conflicting regulations. what should have happened is FA says “it’s safer in the seat, delta wants ur kid in the seat because it’s available, but because we allow lap children which society and government say is safe enough, i’m going to recommend the seat, but if u disobey my recommendation, i will note that warning was given, and get some woodford to the FC cabin, which i usually avoid because it’s easier to throw water bottles on the seat, and i feel i’m underpaid, and enforcing draconian rules makes me feel more important”
Not breastfeeding specifically but I have been told similar with a hysterical toddler during turbulence - I was told I couldn’t hold her while the seat belt sign was on because she had her own ticket/seat, but if she’d been a lap child I could have. FA was a total asshole about it, said it was federal law. I assumed he just meant how federal law mandates complying with signs and crew orders.
It's because the child has its own seat and is a separate passenger and it creates a liability issue if there were turbulence and the baby went flying. You would be able to sue and say, well the flight attendants didn't say anything— so basically claiming contributory negligence.
If you treat the child as a lap baby, then you are assuming the risk. If you treat the child as a passenger, then Delta has obligations to the baby as a passenger.
Wrong. The statute recited above doesn't say that a child under 2 is treated like everybody else when they have their own seat. It says they may be held.
Why in the world would you want to hold a child in your arms and not have them in a seat belt during turbulence?… you’re not strong enough to hold them in your arms if it gets very severe. adults die, and have very recently, due to turbulence when not buckled in. Turbulence is also getting more prevalent and severe. Being an asshole by the FA is sometimes necessary to protect people’s safety. I’m a parent and my kid could be screaming bloody murder but they’re not moving, safety is always the priority.
I’m gonna give some benefit of doubt, and I think the FA was having a bad day.
My wife nursed our 15 month old son on take off and landing, round trip this past March. No issues.
Sorry to hear this happened to you but I don’t think this is an FAA thing, but a FA causing a bad experience.
I think the FA should as trying to uphold the rules and keep everyone safe. Perhaps FA was applying those rules incorrectly, but people often assign evil intentions to those who disagree with them.
Thanks, I’m leaning towards that as well. I’ve nursed our kids on probably 40+ flights domestic and international and this is the only time I have ever had an issue.
We keep talking rules here, but we are taught that we are informers not enforcers. The FA can tell you your baby needs to be in their seat for TTL, however that’s where the conversation should have ended. It’s your choice what you decided is safe for your child.
I’ve had a child (probably about 4-5) occupy a D1 seat and wanted her dad. She would not stay seated and we were getting ready to land. She is not allowed to occupy a seat with someone else due to age restrictions, but it was safer for her to sit with her dad than it was to risk her standing as we land.
If your baby is under 2, she should have never even said anything to you. Buying a seat doesn’t change anything. I’m sorry she was so rude to you.
Planes are most likely to hit something or crash during taxi, takeoff and landing. Ergo, everyone with a seat needs to stay in it, and even a lapchild should be secured until a more calm status of flight is reached. Waiting a few minutes won’t kill or harm a hungry baby, if it cries it cries but imagine what would happen if the pilot slams on the breaks and hits full reverser in an aborted takeoff… that kid is going ballistic, what happens to a baby inside going 100 knots when the plane itself is slowing below 50? You want a dead baby? Bc that’s how you get a dead baby.
No, there is no FAA regulation which prohibits breastfeeding at any time on a flight. However, FAA regulations do require all passengers to be in their seats and buckled during takeoff and landing. So it’s one of those weird if/then situations, and to be honest, the interpretation of this rule as it applies to infants could probably vary. Assuming the rationale was because you purchased a seat for your infant, the infant needed to be buckled into the seat during takeoff and landing. Had your infant been a lap infant and not had a purchased seat, then it should not have been an issue to breastfeed during taxi/takeoff/landing. Is this consistently enforced across the board? No idea. Honestly doubt it.
https://www.faa.gov/travelers/fly_children
I understand that it’s frustrating because the FAA strongly encourages using a child safety restraint which can only be guaranteed if you purchase a seat for your child. However, the CDC recommends breastfeeding during takeoff/landing. The advice is a little contradictory/misleading if it is true that the infant must be buckled during takeoff/landing.
I don’t think you did anything wrong, and I’m sorry this happened to you. It sounds like you just got unlucky with someone who wanted to feel a little more powerful that day.
I totally respect regulations, I’m just having a hard time finding this specific regulation. I should add, a separate flight attendant told me as I was leaving that they all tried to find the regulation she “quoted” and couldn’t. Through the delta app, a representative clarified that I SHOULD have been allowed to nurse during those times, which is why I find it strange delta is telling me one thing but a flight attendant is telling me another.
If it’s a rule, let it be standard across the board, I’ll happily follow it. But, the other flight attendants couldn’t find the FAA regulation, and I can’t find it. I’m hoping someone here has seen it or can point me in the direction of where to find it.
This has been interesting and informative, thank you to OP and those who cited and analyzed relevant regulations.
I’ve read the comments and understand that the issue turns not on whether you were breastfeeding or whether it would have been permissible for the child to travel as an infant in lap, but whether the child was a ticketed passenger on the flight in question.
I’m curious as to whether the answer you received from the Delta App was correct for the question you posed.
When you communicated with Delta via the App, did you include that you bought the infant a seat, or did you omit that information because you didn’t understand that it might affect the answer?
The exact wording of your question and Delta’s response both are of interest to me, as an admitted law nerd (and generally a fellow rule-follower). Totally understand if you are over this already and don’t feel like going to the bother to indulge a stranger’s curiosity.
Happy and safe travels to all!
Because you purchased the ticket, he is a passenger on the airplane who is not in his seat. They cannot legally move the plane to taxi, take off, or land, with passengers not in their seats.
I do not know how much clearer that can be to you.
It may not make sense to you, but is legally the same as if you were sitting on your husband/partner's lap.
Thank you so much! Yes, I purchased a seat, but he is under two (17 months) so still technically considered an infant in arms. I elected to purchase him a seat.
And the minute you purchased him a seat, he became a passenger and no longer an 'infant in arms'. No matter what the age of your child, you may hold them DURING the flight. The age restriction of 2 and under is so that parents understand that their child older than 2, can be a lap child and therefore fly free.
If you want your baby going flying during one of the most dangerous parts of a flight do you. The flight attendants job is to try preventing that though
I flew several times with my child before she was 2 and bought her a seat. I always held her most of the time just wanted the extra space. This was with multiple airlines and no one cared.
What if you bought a seat for a 2 month old. They couldn’t stop you from holding such a young child
You weren’t deprived of breast feeding, first of all. You were asked to buckle the child during a very specific time, a rule applied to anyone with a seat. After those times, which are very limited (such as take off), you are able to breastfeed.
If you really wanted to calm your child, you have means available to you (a bottle, a pacifier, a toy, whatever) for take off, landing, etc.
I think you’re taking this whole breastfeeding thing a little far. You’re acting like the FA targeted you in some malicious way and you are deprived of some constitutional right. I also wonder if the FA asked you the first time and only became “rude” when you constantly argued and wouldn’t just comply.
I mean, those are the most dangerous times. Is breast feeding more important than your child's safety? You can't do it in the airport? Or after take off. It has to be during taxi, take off, and landing?
Like, those are your only time slots?
I mean, honestly the whole lap child thing is dangerous. If someone is unwilling to safely strap their child into a carseat and risk turbulence, aircrafts colliding while taxiing, and many othe possible accidents, just to save a buck, that's not great child care
It’s not about feeding him because he’s hungry, it’s that kids that young can’t pop their ears. Adults and kids old enough to be able to follow instructions can be told how to pop their ears during the portions of the flight where the altitude changes causing the pressure change, rather that be manually by opening and shutting your jaw, chewing gum, etc. To help younger kids pop their ears it is recommended for them to chew or suck on something, hence a child that is use to breast feeding being able to breastfeed, to pop their ears and relieve the pressure.
A lot of people have been really awesome providing an educated and cited response to my request regarding the guidelines, which I really appreciate. So I thought I would return the favor and answer your question of why some people breastfeed during those times of the flight.
The safety issue of in lap vs restrained is a whole other debate that I’m going to stay out of. Just wanted to pop in regarding the reasoning around those times.
Considering your child is already one and not a tiny 3 month old or whatever, you could have given them a sippy cup of water to drink for the same effect for the ears. There were options here.
“Nurse your baby during takeoff and landing when traveling by airplane. This will help to protect your child from ear pain due to cabin pressure changes.”
https://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/infantandtoddlernutrition/breastfeeding/travel-recommendations.html#:~:text=Nurse%20your%20baby%20during%20takeoff,whenever%20your%20baby%20is%20hungry.
I’m sorry I know the CDC says it’s ok but the CDC doesn’t specialize in aircrafts or flying. I imagine the FAA guidance would trump the CDC guidance in this regard. As a previous breastfeeding mother my child would’ve been in their seat until take off or landing was complete.
Sorry, my response probably doesn’t make sense since the poster edited their post. They had said that the CDC would never make a recommendation regarding breastfeeding while flying, so I was just trying to provide the source of where I got that information.
Unfortunately because you purchased a seat that child is no longer a lap child. If it was a lap child us flight attendants don’t mind. Breastfeed all you want. But because that child is now in a seat, that child has to follow FFA rules of being seated with a seatbelt during, taxi, takeoff and landing.
Breastfeeding Aside. You bough a seat for the child. So the child has to be in that seat. That’s it. That’s the end of the argument. The child even tho it’s considered an infant by age is not an INFT for delta since it has its own seat. And no other than an INFT maybe on the lap while taxi take off and landing. The breastfeeding doesn’t really mean much tbh.
Seriously you fly often and didn’t think of a plan B - like pumping ahead of time & bottle feeding while both of you remained in your seats? Shame on you!
Why would you risk your child’s welfare if the most dangerous times on a plane are taxi, takeoff and landing, it the only cost was some crying. Would you do it in a moving automobile too if someone else was driving?
She's did her job. Pushing back is also her job. He had a seat. By law they must go by the manifest. If. You want to breastfeed during takeoff and landing, you can't buy them a seat.
The issue is probably since the child isn't a lap baby they have to be seatbelted and secured during those times. It would be amazing for someone to comply with this rule by shooting their tiddie milk sideways into the seated child's mouth.
If plane makes a sudden stop as it’s moving on the tarmac
And you drop your child while breastfeeding
And gets injured
Ur not gonna sue the airline
Right?
My kids are 14 & 17 now but I was told the same thing 16 years ago. Because I brought a car seat for him, he had to be buckled in for taxi, takeoff, landing, and taxi. If I hadn't paid for the seat, I could have breastfed him.
🤷♀️
The CDC is now dictating breastfeeding guidelines? Not sure how or why that makes sense unless it’s only about Control.
I’m interested why Delta doesn’t have a policy in this situation since it’s very common.
If you have a car seat and bought a seat for the baby it is required and to be honest the safest place for an infant during takeoff and landing. In the event of an emergency or any incident, an infant will fly out of your arms like a ball.
I would much rather the baby be silent, if breast feeding facilities this, that’s a good thing. If we all have to be miserable because of a rule that is kind of meh…is it really a good rule.
That’s the time (taxi, take off and landing) you are most likely to have a problem and need to evacuate. The time it takes to get out is very limited. FAA requires plane to be evacuated in 90 seconds.
Wow i’ve always breastfed during those times and I have never had that issue. I would have buckled my child in and as soon as we took off i would have gotten him back out. 2 and under can sit in laps so that’s really odd she made such a big fuss.
Keep in mind the flight attendants are just following their rules and regulations. If it were me, I’d honestly just wait until we lined up on the runway then take the baby out.
There’s risk involved if the FA really wanted to be an ass, but in all likelihood they wouldn’t even notice.
Just my two cents.
That’s also very dangerous in an accident, but no, I believe it is more dangerous, because you are less prepared to evacuate even then you normally would be just holding an infant.
I found it under FAA rules for seating/restraint, and yes, if the child is under 2, you are allowed to hold them during takeoff and landing: [FAA Rules](https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/about/initiatives/cabin_safety/regs/acob949.pdf)
If he is old enough AND has a ticketed seat of his own, he must be buckled in that seat for taxi, takeoff, and landing.
If he is old enough to be permitted to travel as a ticketed passenger but is traveling as an infant in lap, OP is permitted to hold him during, taxi, takeoff, flight, and landing.
Your one year old IS a lap child and can be held during taxi, take off, and landing. The fact that you purchased an additional seat to put a car seat on it doesn't mean he has to sit on it. Now when that child turns two, the kid does have to be buckled on its own seat. In the mean time I would call Delta and let them know what happened and ask them how are they going to fix it. I belive it's not legal to tell a woman not to nurse a child anywhere so there is that too.
Infants as young as 0 months can be in a car seat. An approved car seat is safer onboard a flight than being a lap infant. So by your logic just no baby can breast feed if they can sit in a car seat 🥴🥴. This is a bad take.
The exact same thing happened to us. I wonder if it was the same flight attendant. She wasn't rude just to us, but everyone on the flight. It was especially shocking since we were sittingl first class.
I was sitting two rows behind my wife when it happened. When I stood up and called the flight attendant out she got more timid. She ended up sitting at the front of the plane, just talking to the passengers in the first row. She was trying as hard as she could to be nice to them but not talking to anyone else
She was a shorter Hispanic looking lady. Maybe in her thirties. I heard her talking about your time in the military. I just can't imagine her still being employed.
Could have been the same person honestly. I did get her name and I will be reaching out to Delta, I just wanted to make sure I had all the facts and wasn’t reacting with emotion.
I think the issue is that you are viewing your child as a baby, while the FA views them as a toddler. 17 months old should not need you to be nursing during takeoff and landing. You are putting your child at risk by insisting on holding them instead of buckling them in. It’s actually wild that the FAA even allows lap infants these days with all of the safety issues that it brings. Protect your child and buckle them in. If that means their ears hurt and they cry, better that then putting them at risk to become a projectile if there was an aborted takeoff or something else that goes wrong.
it’s your kid and the government allows under 2 years old. I think you’re stupid not to strap the kid in for the most dangerous parts and then take the kid out in the air. But it’s not so dangerous that i think your parental rights and autonomy should be threatened and corporate or government actors should tell you what to do. So had u refused and fed the kid in your lap and gotten kicked off plane, i would find FA in the wrong.
Why would you buy your one year old a seat? Since you bought a seat for your toddler, the FAs were simply enforcing the policy that every passenger with a seat assignment needs to be seated. Sorry they were rude to you, but it sounds like they were just trying to cover their behinds.
Have you ever tried to spent hours containing a toddler on your lap? I have always bought my kids a seat, starting at like 3 months old. If you can afford to do it anything else is bananas.
She made up the part about breastfeeding. I have had FAs and TSA employees just make up stuff because they don't know the actual regulations and it doesn't matter if you are right because just by disagreeing with them gives them enough cause to stop you from continuing your trip.
The true answer is that legally the flight attendant was correct but from a practicality and hospitality perspective, was wrong. Rules are meant to be bent and broken all that, especially when they don’t affect anyone else but the mom/baby.
You perceive this as cruel to the baby but people on this sub will say you’re entitled because you brought a child on the plane and expected to be treated differently.
Those same people will also complain endlessly that you brought a kid on board at all. People on this sub believe children should be banned from flying, should be muzzled, stored in the cargo hold, etc.
Even in the age of being able to watch TV 100% of the flight with headphones, the same people that call you entitled will instantly pull their own entitlement card because they heard someone else on the plane make a noise. You won’t win on this sub.
Oh the great seat recline debate. Couple that with babies and loud screens and you have a trifecta of flight related posts for sure. Truly just needed the FAA guidance she quoted (thanks again to those who provided it!), and was told this was the place to come for it. Lol I know the audience and maybe shouldn’t have just copy pasted the post I had originally posted and instead just asked for the statutes surrounding the situation.
Only thing I can think of is because he's not a lap child, she's going with all the pax have to be seated/ buckled. Which technically is correct since he's not marked as a lap child.
This is the problem. On the manifest, which is what the FA must go by, the child was not listed as as a “lap baby”, but as a seat occupant, encumbering him/her to the rule cited above. Technically, the FA was correct. With that said, and with all of my travels with various children, I’ve never met such a cruel and inconsiderate intersection of interpretation and attitude. This was just a draconian personality getting off on following the rules. I am sorry for OP.
"Cruel and draconian?" You must be living a charmed life if a flight attendant instructing a mother to put her baby in his car seat for take off and landing is cruel and draconian. All the authorities including the FAA say that the safest place for a baby to be on a plane is strapped into a car seat. So holding a baby on your lap is more dangerous. It looks like the flight attendant wanted to do the right thing. A baby isn't going to die because they can't breast feed during takeoff and landing -- a pacifier or a bottle if the baby is used to bottles -- can serve the same purpose of regulating air pressure. But a baby might die or be injured if the plane hits turbulence while he's being held on a lap.
Babies in arms are cabin FOD in severe turbulence.
[This scene](https://youtu.be/RUBaRqY_NqA?si=eASJWUYbnoW_MjGS) from a 1990s movie about a plane crash illustrates that point so well (it’s not gory, it’s touching as Jeff Bridges shows a guilt -ridden mother that she couldn’t have held onto her baby in the crash, at great personal cost to himself).
This.
I think it was the United airlines DC 10 accident in 1989 in Iowa? Lap children are safer in a seat. Several died that would not have had they been in a seat. The purser of that flight made it her life’s work to advocate everyone be seated. Agree or disagree with that- if you chose to pay for a seat when you don’t actually have to for safety I see no reason why this is a rule…. When the child could have been a lap child anyway. Is it a “covering up” thing? I’m a man and I couldn’t care one way or another if mothers nurse anywhere like - look away if it bothers you. Have you been to a beach? You’ve seen worse shirtless authorities than a newborn feeding. Doesn’t affect me reading Reddit in the airport or on board - I just don’t have to focus on it… nor would I… it’s weird people even care. I assume the new capsules are for the mother’s privacy if she prefers that. (Realized I made this whole post not assuming it could be bottle feeding)
It was. I used to work for Hilton hotel near SEA. I waited on him on a few occasions. Very kind, unassuming guy. He lived nearby.
What’s the name of the movie? It sounds like his character is based off of the same chief FA on that flight. She did an interview on the Air Disasters episode for that flight which I think was United 232 - and I literally cried. She had to tell parents with lap children (as was United’s clearly defined policy at the time) to put lap children on the floor for a possible emergency landing. Not to be depressing but if you’re a safety enthusiast the documentary is really good but really sad at the same time. We learned from it though and such an incident has not reoccurred to my knowledge. I’d love to watch the movie also. And also Jeff Bridges is great - I saw him on broadway in To Kill a Mockingbird- simply epic.
Fearless. One of my husband’s favorite movies. It’s very moving.The real life pilot was Al Hayes.
He’s a very gifted thespian.
In that Iowa crash the FA actually told the moms to put the babies on the floor. There was just one that died because of this.
Yea that’s also my understanding. I actually watched the episode again just recently
Rosie Perez was the mom!
More pertinently, they could die or suffer severe injury during an incident on takeoff or landing ground roll.
Exactly, take off and landing combine for what, 45 minutes of mandatory seatbelt time? OP would be the FIRST to sue saying the FA failed to instruct then properly if there was an injury.
Exactly. People who insist on doing unsafe things, even (maybe especially) because a person in an authority position tells them not to do it, always seem to be the first to complain or sue when their defiant choice results in a bad outcome.
Yup.
You aren't wrong, but the fact is the general flying public looks down on crying babies and parents who don't intervene. A one-year-old is young enough that soothing can be complicated, and this family is trying to do the right thing by buying them a seat in the first place, so it's unfortunate this was the outcome. Maybe the baby doesn't take a bottle or a pacifier, who knows. I can totally understand why OP was embarrassed; a crying baby is literally a biological stressor, and that's before you add the social pressure of an entire plane having to listen to your kid's screams.
A baby crying never hurt anyone. I fly all the time and crying babies don’t bother me. I can barely hear them with my headphones on. I’m much more annoyed by babies in laps, especially if have to sit next to the adult and baby and most annoyed by undisciplined toddlers and children and parents who do nothing about that.
It’s nice to have someone say they aren’t bothered by screaming/crying children, but you do understand that you’re in the minority in this sub, correct? People in here are constantly complaining about crying kids (especially on long haul over night flights), to the point that they say young children and babies shouldn’t be traveling with their families. I’ve seen small children referred to as crotch goblins, crib rats, and all kinds of other things. People complain about kids not having their own seat, and when they do in here. Knowing this is a pretty common point of view from people that fly, of course OP felt embarrassed
I'm not bothered by crying babies, either, esp on take-off. It bothers me more when it's a 5 year old who screams incoherently for half an hour. Or if the person next to me doesn't fit into their seat.
You should be mad at the airline for that last thing. They're selling seats that don't accommodate the passenger who bought the ticket. So be sure to complain to the upper echelons of the airline in that instance.
To be clear — not bothered by crying babies. Am bothered by screaming children, especially because it’s usually the parent’s fault that the child is screaming. Also, there’s no guarantee that OP’s child wouldn’t cry even if she could hold him and breastfeed him. In any case, a little crying seems like a fair tradeoff for the child being safer.
I’d think you need to be in a lap with how much of baby you are about breastfeeding on a flight dawg.
And a baby crying with a breastfeeding parent *does* hurt someone, as biologically they will start to produce which is embarrassing for the parent, and the child can be soothed during this time by doing this since they’re too young to chew gum like an older child can, and too young to understand that swallowing will help with this feeling.
I’ve watched my wife breastfeed during landing and takeoff with our infant in arms over 20 times. It’s common practice. That FA was an ass, who cares if they bought a seat or not. In Europe they have infant seat belt attachments. Why the USA doesn’t, I have no clue. And a pacifier or bottle doesn’t compare to the real thing.
The issues isn’t breastfeeding. It’s holding a baby on your lap when the baby has its own seat. Try to keep up with the thread. This has been clarified multiple times.
That’s wrong though. FAA rule doesn’t specify anything about seat purchases, only what rules apply to children under two (see the other comment with the specific rule). She had every right to hold her baby regardless of whether she purchased a seat because of the child’s age.
What baffles me is why people like you are so vociferously defending the supposed right of the mother to engage in a more risky behavior.
It is up to the parent here though, so continue to remain baffled.
So you’re the defending the parent’s right to put their child in a more dangerous situation, instead of thanking the flight attendant for helping the child stay safe? Got it.
They just want the child to turn into a meat missile
I’d prefer the kid not be on the flight altogether but the FAR you’re not familiar with says she can hold the babe in arms. See my other comment about this becoming in cabin FOD in severe turbulence.
The issue is blind rule following with no nuance from people like you. What are you, some kind of breastfeeding police? Try to have some common decency and empathize with a mother.
Again. It has zero to do with breastfeeding. It’s about the baby sitting in the safest place. If the mom could manage to breast feed the baby while they were both buckled in, that would be fine. It’s kind of weird that you’d choose to die on the hill of flying infants not being in the safest seat.
Kinda weird to choose to die on the hill of “safest” when the parent could have chosen to fly with this 1yo as a lap child. If the rules allow children under two to be lap children, then the rules are allowing the parent the choice. Purchasing a seat for the child shouldn’t remove that choice from the parent. You can disagree with the parent’s choice, but the rules shouldn’t changes simply because the parent bought a seat for the child. The conflict in the rules is the issue here.
I have an infant. Do you? It’s actually super weird to be so into policing this thread - do you even have children? Are you female? If she wouldn’t have brought car seat or bought the extra seat, infancy in arms is the way it is. So your argument is that infant in arms isn’t safe?
Correct. An infant in arms isn’t nearly as safe as an infant in a car seat. This is basic knowledge about air travel.
So you think airlines and the FFA should ask reddit before enforcing rules? Yeah, that will go well.
Infant, sure, this baby was 1 year old (and how many months!) so technically a toddler
Children under two are infants.
All of these Reddit dudes are policing breastfeeding on flights. Bizarre world.
And apparently they have developmental psychology degrees and are pediatricians cause toddlers are one year olds now.
“Cruel”? Damn tell me about your charmed life because I must be getting tortured every damn day.
Actually, she paid for extra room.Not a requirement to buy the seat for the child. FA was in the wrong.
I get the impression the FA’s issue wasn’t your breastfeeding so much as it was that the child had their own seat.
This had me cursing once that I paid for a seat for my <2yo as I tried to stop them from getting up and roaming around during seatbelt light on times
FAR (14 CFR) § 121.311 is the applicable statute. I believe the FA was just misinterpreting it. > (b) Except as provided in this paragraph, each person on board an airplane operated under this part shall occupy an approved seat or berth with a separate safety belt properly secured about him or her during movement on the surface, takeoff, and landing. A safety belt provided for the occupant of a seat may not be used by more than one person who has reached his or her second birthday. Notwithstanding the preceding requirements, a child may: > >(1) Be held by an adult who is occupying an approved seat or berth, provided the child has not reached his or her second birthday and the child does not occupy or use any restraining device; So basically, a plain language reading might seem that you aren’t allowed to hold a child who paid for a seat. However, it appears that the intent of the law is to make sure you aren’t holding a car seat with the child inside; it would be too bulky and heavy and would hit someone. It’s something you might try if they’re a sleeping infant and you don’t want to move them. Holding them with the seat buckled up next to you should be just fine.
I... am also reading it like you are. "A child may be held by an adult ... provided the child ... does not occupy ... any restraining device." It makes sense why that would be the case but I find it a little awkwardly written. In fact, it doesn't even really read to me that the mother couldn't hold the actual car seat with the child inside of it (just that she can't hold the child while it's in the car seat... unless the interpretation is that the seat/child become one once the child is buckled in.../shrug) I'm not a lawyer nor in the law field, but my field does use formal logic (academic). I want to know the outcome of this issue. u/Mother_Professor_290 , please update us when you get a resolution.
Maybe I've just hung out with too many lawyers over the years... but this reads perfectly clearly to me. "Notwithstanding the preceding" means the stuff below is an exception to the preceding rules. A child under two can be in arms instead of their assigned seat. They have to be in arms, not somehow in a seatbelt.
This was the explanation I got on my last flight. My daughter had her own seat, but she is under 2 so the FA said she will need to either be held in arms OR restrained in her seat for taxi, takeoff, and landing and that I would need to pick one and stick with it and more or less not just be moving her around a bunch.
I think the point of confusion is the exception to the exception: "provided the child ... does not occupy or use any restraining device."
Great find. I think along with the [CDC recommendation that you nurse during landing and take off](https://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/infantandtoddlernutrition/breastfeeding/travel-recommendations.html#:~:text=Nurse%20your%20baby%20during%20takeoff,whenever%20your%20baby%20is%20hungry) tells me that logically you have to be correct. You can hold the baby itself to nurse but not the carrier holding the baby. They could simply add that clarifying line. But life isn’t that easy I bet.
The CDC guidance is really stupid. That’s a terrible idea in an accident, which do happen.
Thank you for providing the statute AND an interpretation, greatly appreciated! (And kind of comical if I’m reading that correctly.)
I’m only going to tell you it’s a “federal regulation” and not a “statute” in case you have to bring it up with someone being a pedantic problem.
Ah, thank you. I will make sure I change my wording. I think someone else mentioned it was a statute so I used that. Appreciate the feedback!
I can't find any FAA specific rule on breastfeeding during taxi, takeoff, or landing. If any rule was to apply here, it would be the seatbelt rule. The general rule is "each person on board an airplane operated under this part shall occupy an approved seat or berth with a separate safety belt properly secured about him or her during movement on the surface, takeoff, and landing" Now there is an exception for children under two, however, the exception also requires that the child does not have a restraining device (i.e. car seat), The actual rule being: "Notwithstanding the preceding requirements, a child may: (1) Be held by an adult who is occupying an approved seat or berth, provided the child has not reached his or her second birthday and the child does not occupy or use any restraining device" https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/121.311 The FAA also has a circular that goes into more detail, AC 120-87C. The circular calls out in several places that when a restraining device isn't available a child under 2 can be held, but does go on to say that "aircraft operators still have overall responsibility to ensure that the CRS is properly secured to a forward-facing seat, the child is properly secured in the CRS and does not exceed the weight limit for the CRS, and that the CRS bears appropriate labels or markings (§ 121.311(b)(2)(iii))." https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/advisory_circular/ac_120-87c.pdf Now I will say these rules could be made clearer, they don't specifically call out your situation. You could also argue they aren't "using" the car seat when you are holding them, but you can just as easily argue it the other way. It's possible the flight attendant was being stricter than required, but in researching this there are a number of other posts from parents who encountered the same situation as you on various airlines, so its certainly not an isolated interpretation. However, I don't see a definitive ruling from the FAA on this very particular situation (where a child has a seat, has an approved CRS available, but the parent wants to hold them during taxi). If you would like a more definitive ruling, you can write an actual on-paper letter to the FAA's office of the chief counsel requesting a legal interpretation of the specific regulation(s) and mail it to their office. They do respond, but it will be slow. You'll need to be as specific as possible in the letter if you do, including references to the regulation in question.
The baby being held also isn’t just a danger to the baby, but other people in the cabin. They become a flying projectile which can hurt other people. It’s less rare in planes but no different than what we are taught in drivers ed about seatbelts
That's why I always thought it was kind of weird that children under two didn't need their own seat and could fly on their parent's lap. It's such a massive liability to the child, parent, and anyone else that shares the cabin with them. Hell, I've been on flights with such bad turbulence that if I hadn't been wearing my seatbelt I would've been thrown from my seat and I'm a grown ass adult. Turbulence like that could definitely turn a child into a dangerous projectile. I'm also of the belief that infants (children under one year old) should be in car seats when flying and therefore will need their own seat on an airplane. At the very least, they should be secured to the parent in a wearable baby carrier during taxiing, take off, and landing.
I agree. Now if it’s a situation where I have to take my young baby on a trip and can’t afford the seat I’d think different (think family emergency) but otherwise I’d probably opt for a car seat. If they had a seat I wouldn’t nurse them during those times because I’ve watched too many episodes of air craft disaster and know their safety is more important than crying and would explain that to anyone who says something.
Thank you for taking the time to provide a very astute answer, I appreciate that! It is definitely looking like there isn’t a clear cut, easy answer. Great advice to write to the FAA, didn’t even think of that being an option, and because it doesn’t seem to be an isolated issue, it would make sense for them to clearly define everything across the board to make a very sensitive topic objective instead of subjective.
It is clear-cut, though. In order to be held by an adult during takeoff, the child must be (a) under 2, so you're good there, but also (b) nit child occupying a seat/using a restraining device (i.e. not a lap-child). Your situation unfortunately doesn't fit part (b). The FA still should have been polite about it, but they were enforcing the law.
Your kid is 17 months old....tine to put the boob away
It’s extremely common for children to breastfeed into toddlerhood and even the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends breastfeeding until 2. Literally none of your business unless it’s your boobs.
Mind your own boobs.
Your child is a literal projectile during taxi, take off, landing, and turbulence.
Something about babies in arms during taxi and take off came up a while back but I couldn’t find it. I think I saw the rule that said something about how babies have to be if they have their own seat during landing and take off. I searched and searched and found nothing. However I expanded the search here: https://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/infantandtoddlernutrition/breastfeeding/travel-recommendations.html#:~:text=Nurse%20your%20baby%20during%20takeoff,whenever%20your%20baby%20is%20hungry. The CDC is literally saying nurse during take off and landing here. >The thought of traveling with your breastfeeding baby can feel overwhelming, but breastfeeding provides several benefits to parents and children traveling together. Breastfeeding can provide a source of comfort for babies whose normal routine is disrupted due to travel. In addition to providing the ideal nutrition for your baby, breast milk keeps babies hydrated. Breastfed babies under 6 months do not need to drink water or any other liquids, even in hot weather. >By planning ahead, you can successfully continue to nurse and/or express milk for your baby. >Nurse your baby during takeoff and landing when traveling by airplane. This will help to protect your child from ear pain due to cabin pressure changes. This makes me think it is allowed. Further I recommend you reach out to [Senator Tammy Duckworth](https://www.duckworth.senate.gov) as well as the DOT and ask for a clear ruling on this. (Duckworth is named here for advocacy in airline travel access for all and because as the first senator to give birth to a child while a senator she might care) Asking and getting are not the same thing (I asked the state department specific website corrections and additions and never got it) but I think this issue might get more attention from DOT than I got.
The CDC's recommendations are irrelevant to the FAA. The CDC doesn't have the responsibility to consider the possibility of hitting clear air turbulence during landing and your baby being violently thrown around the cabin because of not being properly secured.
I did not say the CDC controls the FFA. In fact I said that they should reach out to various government officials and agencies for clarity. However the OP already made clear that agencies saying exactly opposite things is not an impossibility. However as others have noted several times lap infants ARE ALLOWED. And [still others pointed out that](https://www.reddit.com/r/delta/s/A564lAN1Xv) what it seems to be saying is that you can have the infant on your lap but not the car seat itself which might be confusing.
This is actually really irresponsible advice from the cdc. Babies are safest buckled in their car seat on the plane. I can’t comment on faa regulation or delta policy, but I work in transportation safety and the idea that our public health department is advocating against safety restraints for babies on flights is shameful. I just flew delta with my kids, and my 1.5yo has ear problems. I nursed her throughout much of the flight, but I made sure she was buckled for taxi, takeoff, landing, and turbulence. We used Tylenol and ibuprofen to manage ear pain, and sipping liquids and applesauce from a syringe to try to keep the Eustachian tubes open.
They say that about babies several times on that page including the beginning.
If I could love this comment, I would. Thank you. I too found the CDC recommendation which would make me think that surely (insert skepticism lol) two government entities would have the same stance on a subject. Thank you so much for the recommendation on reaching out to Senator Duckworth. I really appreciate you!
Are you an Illinois resident? Don't reach out to Tammy Duckworth otherwise. Even then, it's unclear what you expect her to do. You should understand by now that the issue wasn't breastfeeding. The issue was the required safety of putting your baby into its car seat, buckled in, during takeoff and landing. Babies scream all the time on planes for a whole bunch of reasons. Your baby could have cried even if he was still being held by you and being fed. I assume you fed him before you got on the plane, so he wan't crying because you waited until getting on the plane to feed him.
I’m not and I have for policy issues of importance to her office.
Upvoting and agreeing with you that this type of contact is appropriate, regardless of whether you are a resident of the State from which the Senator is elected, if you have a question or concern related to an area of policy particularly of interest to that Senator.
How many children have you breast fed? They do not cry, it's like the most comforting thing for them that exists. Breastfed babies also digest milk very quickly, so even if she fed him before she got on the plane it's likely he'd be hungry or ready for more by the time the plane was taking off. Hope this helps.
Reign in the outrage. I never said breastfeeding wasn’t healthy or beneficial. But holding a baby on your lap when there’s the option of him sitting in his own seat is dangerous. And no baby ever died from crying a bit because they are uncomfortable or hungry. This mom also should have had other things to help the baby clear his ears, like a pacifier. It sounds like she was very prepared for the flight and an attentive parent, so I’m sure her baby was fine, even if a bit hungry and disoriented by the flying experience. Many adults feel the same way when flying.
Two entities with different stances is one of the reasons for the recent Chevron ruling…
Greed and indifference for human life are the reasons for the Chevron ruling. Agencies have many checks and balances and steps in their review processes before creating rules. Do inconsistencies still occur? Address those individual issues instead of throwing the baby out with the bath water.
It is allowed, but the rule requiring a baby req in its assigned seat and buckled in also applies. It's hard to breastfeed a child who is buckled into a car seat and it's far more dangerous to take a child out of its car seat to breast feed than it is for the child to not be breast fed for the 15 minutes or so during take off.
This is why people should bring apples or other fruit that keeps the Eustachian tubes open.
The baby is much much safer secured in a seat.
So let me get this straight...you purchased a seat for your child (which is the safest thing to do), but didn't want him restrained in said seat during the riskiest parts of the flight? Taxi, takeoff and landing are the last times when you would want to be breastfeeding. Wait until you are actually climbing out, for everyone's safety
Breastfeeding during takeoff and landing reduces ear pain in babies because the suction clears their ears, which is something babies can’t do on their own.
It’s not just “breastfeeding” that reduces ear pain. It’s sucking. So a bottle or pacifier could have done the job
Then wait until you are actually in the air. In the rare event of a high-speed rejected takeoff that baby will become a projectile
I also find this very odd, literally during the most dangerous part of any flight you don’t want your infant to be secured into a seat? If you fly a lot as OP states, it’s pretty obvious that they take the seatbelt requirement seriously during these phases of the flight and if you have a seat you need to be in it and buckled in. Seems like such an unnecessary risk.
Flight crew here. It doesn't matter if your kid has a seat or not if they are the appropriate age(under 2) they can be a lap child. Some people even buy their babies seats just to have the extra room . Regardless, taxi, take off and landing are the most critical phases of flight and the safest place for a child is always in their own seat and seat belt fastened(even if that's in a car seat). So the flight attendant was probably just looking out for safety and not comfort for your child. But you are well within your rights to breastfeed during any phase of your flight. Edit to add: flight crew love saying FAA regulations when telling a passenger something. I'm convinced that the FAA words things so that they're a little murky and hard to understand so that they can be interpreted for either side to think they're right.
So “breastfeed your kid any time you want, but if you do it when they told you lot to, you might get them killed.”
My oldest child is 19 now. We always purchased seats when they were babies and I was consistently told that if the child was a passenger with a seat, as opposed to a lap baby, then the child must occupy the seat during taxi, takeoff, and landing. We flew a lot with our kids so I just came prepared with pumped milk for takeoff.
It’s really a bad idea to be breastfeeding at any of those times, if you ask me, for safety reasons. That is the most likely time for there to be an emergency. Why on earth would the CDC say that’s the best time?
The issue is you bought a seat for the baby making the baby a full blown individual passenger which Delta has a duty of care to, and who must individually comply with all FAA safety regulations. If there is an incident or turbulence, you could hold Delta liable for not informing you of or enforcing the FAA's safety regulations by claiming contributory negligence etc... When you carry a lap-child, you are assuming the risks for your lap baby. You can't really turn around and sue Delta because you chose to carry a lap-child and it went flying through the air due to turbulence or another incident. That's your fault and you accepted the risk. It's not that there is a specific FAA link for this circumstance, it's that your one year old was a ticketed passenger subject to all FAA rules and restrictions. Imagine if you sat on your husbands lap during takeoff. It is the exact same thing legally. Imagine if you tried to seat belt a bag in to a seat next to you. You would not be allowed to do that unless you had declared it as an oversized object (like an instrument). You had a carseat on the seat without a baby in it. I am not sure why you are referring to the CDC here, that has nothing to do with anything. Nothing about this should be confusing to you, and I do not understand why he would be screaming/crying regardless. You could give him a bottle or pacifier, or have any multitude of options to calm him. The specific FAA guidelines are, your 1 year old is a ticketed passenger. The rules that apply to you apply to him. Period. Fully supporting a woman's right to breast-feed her child is not the opposite of what you were told on the plane. They gave you a technically correct PR related answer. They can fully support a woman's right to breast-feed a child, but also fully support compliance with FAA regulations, fully support their flight attendant, fully apologize that you felt it was inappropriate, etc... without actually contradicting what happened to you. You were in violation of federal law. It's also not relevant that other people were coming up to you at baggage claim apologizing for the flight attendants behavior. People are crazy, emotional, and illogical. The flight attendant was correct, you were wrong.
It is not the same thing as if OP was sitting in someone's lap. The statute is crystal clear, contrary to some interpretations here: Basically what it says is that everyone needs to be in their own seat except a child under 2 may be held. It doesn't say that a child under 2 is treated like everybody else when they have their own seat. It says they may be held. FA was wrong.
This is the correct interpretation. As a seated passenger, the baby needs to be buckled in and follow the same rules as other passengers during landing/takeoff, etc. The FA was a jerk about though. They could have handled it more kindly
Kindness is honestly irrelevant in these types of interactions. It’s a command / order. There is no negotiation and kindness can leave it open to interpretation. The OP was clearly pushing back and not getting it. Has come on here to focus on getting the specific FAA rule and still believes she was correct. This is absolutely when you use command voice. Kindness is for your friends.
the risk does not rise to the level of needing to take the most strict interpretation of conflicting regulations. what should have happened is FA says “it’s safer in the seat, delta wants ur kid in the seat because it’s available, but because we allow lap children which society and government say is safe enough, i’m going to recommend the seat, but if u disobey my recommendation, i will note that warning was given, and get some woodford to the FC cabin, which i usually avoid because it’s easier to throw water bottles on the seat, and i feel i’m underpaid, and enforcing draconian rules makes me feel more important”
Not breastfeeding specifically but I have been told similar with a hysterical toddler during turbulence - I was told I couldn’t hold her while the seat belt sign was on because she had her own ticket/seat, but if she’d been a lap child I could have. FA was a total asshole about it, said it was federal law. I assumed he just meant how federal law mandates complying with signs and crew orders.
It's because the child has its own seat and is a separate passenger and it creates a liability issue if there were turbulence and the baby went flying. You would be able to sue and say, well the flight attendants didn't say anything— so basically claiming contributory negligence. If you treat the child as a lap baby, then you are assuming the risk. If you treat the child as a passenger, then Delta has obligations to the baby as a passenger.
Wrong. The statute recited above doesn't say that a child under 2 is treated like everybody else when they have their own seat. It says they may be held.
Wrong. The statue clearly states "A child may be held by an adult ... provided the child ... does not occupy ... any restraining device."
that means mom can’t hold a car seat containing a baby in it.
And also the baby can't be strapped into a baby carrier attached to mom. I have always had to remove my child from her ergo baby carrier for takeoff.
Sorry, that’s is so frustrating.
Why in the world would you want to hold a child in your arms and not have them in a seat belt during turbulence?… you’re not strong enough to hold them in your arms if it gets very severe. adults die, and have very recently, due to turbulence when not buckled in. Turbulence is also getting more prevalent and severe. Being an asshole by the FA is sometimes necessary to protect people’s safety. I’m a parent and my kid could be screaming bloody murder but they’re not moving, safety is always the priority.
I’m gonna give some benefit of doubt, and I think the FA was having a bad day. My wife nursed our 15 month old son on take off and landing, round trip this past March. No issues. Sorry to hear this happened to you but I don’t think this is an FAA thing, but a FA causing a bad experience.
I think the FA should as trying to uphold the rules and keep everyone safe. Perhaps FA was applying those rules incorrectly, but people often assign evil intentions to those who disagree with them.
Thanks, I’m leaning towards that as well. I’ve nursed our kids on probably 40+ flights domestic and international and this is the only time I have ever had an issue.
We keep talking rules here, but we are taught that we are informers not enforcers. The FA can tell you your baby needs to be in their seat for TTL, however that’s where the conversation should have ended. It’s your choice what you decided is safe for your child. I’ve had a child (probably about 4-5) occupy a D1 seat and wanted her dad. She would not stay seated and we were getting ready to land. She is not allowed to occupy a seat with someone else due to age restrictions, but it was safer for her to sit with her dad than it was to risk her standing as we land. If your baby is under 2, she should have never even said anything to you. Buying a seat doesn’t change anything. I’m sorry she was so rude to you.
Planes are most likely to hit something or crash during taxi, takeoff and landing. Ergo, everyone with a seat needs to stay in it, and even a lapchild should be secured until a more calm status of flight is reached. Waiting a few minutes won’t kill or harm a hungry baby, if it cries it cries but imagine what would happen if the pilot slams on the breaks and hits full reverser in an aborted takeoff… that kid is going ballistic, what happens to a baby inside going 100 knots when the plane itself is slowing below 50? You want a dead baby? Bc that’s how you get a dead baby.
No, there is no FAA regulation which prohibits breastfeeding at any time on a flight. However, FAA regulations do require all passengers to be in their seats and buckled during takeoff and landing. So it’s one of those weird if/then situations, and to be honest, the interpretation of this rule as it applies to infants could probably vary. Assuming the rationale was because you purchased a seat for your infant, the infant needed to be buckled into the seat during takeoff and landing. Had your infant been a lap infant and not had a purchased seat, then it should not have been an issue to breastfeed during taxi/takeoff/landing. Is this consistently enforced across the board? No idea. Honestly doubt it. https://www.faa.gov/travelers/fly_children I understand that it’s frustrating because the FAA strongly encourages using a child safety restraint which can only be guaranteed if you purchase a seat for your child. However, the CDC recommends breastfeeding during takeoff/landing. The advice is a little contradictory/misleading if it is true that the infant must be buckled during takeoff/landing. I don’t think you did anything wrong, and I’m sorry this happened to you. It sounds like you just got unlucky with someone who wanted to feel a little more powerful that day.
[удалено]
I totally respect regulations, I’m just having a hard time finding this specific regulation. I should add, a separate flight attendant told me as I was leaving that they all tried to find the regulation she “quoted” and couldn’t. Through the delta app, a representative clarified that I SHOULD have been allowed to nurse during those times, which is why I find it strange delta is telling me one thing but a flight attendant is telling me another. If it’s a rule, let it be standard across the board, I’ll happily follow it. But, the other flight attendants couldn’t find the FAA regulation, and I can’t find it. I’m hoping someone here has seen it or can point me in the direction of where to find it.
This has been interesting and informative, thank you to OP and those who cited and analyzed relevant regulations. I’ve read the comments and understand that the issue turns not on whether you were breastfeeding or whether it would have been permissible for the child to travel as an infant in lap, but whether the child was a ticketed passenger on the flight in question. I’m curious as to whether the answer you received from the Delta App was correct for the question you posed. When you communicated with Delta via the App, did you include that you bought the infant a seat, or did you omit that information because you didn’t understand that it might affect the answer? The exact wording of your question and Delta’s response both are of interest to me, as an admitted law nerd (and generally a fellow rule-follower). Totally understand if you are over this already and don’t feel like going to the bother to indulge a stranger’s curiosity. Happy and safe travels to all!
Because you purchased the ticket, he is a passenger on the airplane who is not in his seat. They cannot legally move the plane to taxi, take off, or land, with passengers not in their seats. I do not know how much clearer that can be to you. It may not make sense to you, but is legally the same as if you were sitting on your husband/partner's lap.
[удалено]
Thank you so much! Yes, I purchased a seat, but he is under two (17 months) so still technically considered an infant in arms. I elected to purchase him a seat.
Safest way for a baby to travel. We have always done this too. Smart choice!
And the minute you purchased him a seat, he became a passenger and no longer an 'infant in arms'. No matter what the age of your child, you may hold them DURING the flight. The age restriction of 2 and under is so that parents understand that their child older than 2, can be a lap child and therefore fly free.
If you want your baby going flying during one of the most dangerous parts of a flight do you. The flight attendants job is to try preventing that though
I flew several times with my child before she was 2 and bought her a seat. I always held her most of the time just wanted the extra space. This was with multiple airlines and no one cared. What if you bought a seat for a 2 month old. They couldn’t stop you from holding such a young child
You weren’t deprived of breast feeding, first of all. You were asked to buckle the child during a very specific time, a rule applied to anyone with a seat. After those times, which are very limited (such as take off), you are able to breastfeed. If you really wanted to calm your child, you have means available to you (a bottle, a pacifier, a toy, whatever) for take off, landing, etc. I think you’re taking this whole breastfeeding thing a little far. You’re acting like the FA targeted you in some malicious way and you are deprived of some constitutional right. I also wonder if the FA asked you the first time and only became “rude” when you constantly argued and wouldn’t just comply.
I mean, those are the most dangerous times. Is breast feeding more important than your child's safety? You can't do it in the airport? Or after take off. It has to be during taxi, take off, and landing? Like, those are your only time slots? I mean, honestly the whole lap child thing is dangerous. If someone is unwilling to safely strap their child into a carseat and risk turbulence, aircrafts colliding while taxiing, and many othe possible accidents, just to save a buck, that's not great child care
It’s not about feeding him because he’s hungry, it’s that kids that young can’t pop their ears. Adults and kids old enough to be able to follow instructions can be told how to pop their ears during the portions of the flight where the altitude changes causing the pressure change, rather that be manually by opening and shutting your jaw, chewing gum, etc. To help younger kids pop their ears it is recommended for them to chew or suck on something, hence a child that is use to breast feeding being able to breastfeed, to pop their ears and relieve the pressure. A lot of people have been really awesome providing an educated and cited response to my request regarding the guidelines, which I really appreciate. So I thought I would return the favor and answer your question of why some people breastfeed during those times of the flight. The safety issue of in lap vs restrained is a whole other debate that I’m going to stay out of. Just wanted to pop in regarding the reasoning around those times.
All the baby needs is something to suck on. A bottle or pacifier should work. At 17 months, you aren’t still exclusively breastfeeding are you?
At 17 months, a baby should be off bottles, and not all babies use pacifiers.
Considering your child is already one and not a tiny 3 month old or whatever, you could have given them a sippy cup of water to drink for the same effect for the ears. There were options here.
It’s not FAA policy that you can’t breastfeed, but it’s policy everyone is in their seat for taxi takeoff and landing. They are absolutely correct.
“Nurse your baby during takeoff and landing when traveling by airplane. This will help to protect your child from ear pain due to cabin pressure changes.” https://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/infantandtoddlernutrition/breastfeeding/travel-recommendations.html#:~:text=Nurse%20your%20baby%20during%20takeoff,whenever%20your%20baby%20is%20hungry.
I’m sorry I know the CDC says it’s ok but the CDC doesn’t specialize in aircrafts or flying. I imagine the FAA guidance would trump the CDC guidance in this regard. As a previous breastfeeding mother my child would’ve been in their seat until take off or landing was complete.
Sorry, my response probably doesn’t make sense since the poster edited their post. They had said that the CDC would never make a recommendation regarding breastfeeding while flying, so I was just trying to provide the source of where I got that information.
Gotcha!
Ask any airline crew and this is a terrible idea. I’d personally ask the CDC if I were you why they are giving you dangerous advice.
Unfortunately because you purchased a seat that child is no longer a lap child. If it was a lap child us flight attendants don’t mind. Breastfeed all you want. But because that child is now in a seat, that child has to follow FFA rules of being seated with a seatbelt during, taxi, takeoff and landing.
Breastfeeding Aside. You bough a seat for the child. So the child has to be in that seat. That’s it. That’s the end of the argument. The child even tho it’s considered an infant by age is not an INFT for delta since it has its own seat. And no other than an INFT maybe on the lap while taxi take off and landing. The breastfeeding doesn’t really mean much tbh.
Seriously you fly often and didn’t think of a plan B - like pumping ahead of time & bottle feeding while both of you remained in your seats? Shame on you!
Why would you risk your child’s welfare if the most dangerous times on a plane are taxi, takeoff and landing, it the only cost was some crying. Would you do it in a moving automobile too if someone else was driving?
The CDC is apparently the villain here. Again.
She's did her job. Pushing back is also her job. He had a seat. By law they must go by the manifest. If. You want to breastfeed during takeoff and landing, you can't buy them a seat.
The issue is probably since the child isn't a lap baby they have to be seatbelted and secured during those times. It would be amazing for someone to comply with this rule by shooting their tiddie milk sideways into the seated child's mouth.
If plane makes a sudden stop as it’s moving on the tarmac And you drop your child while breastfeeding And gets injured Ur not gonna sue the airline Right?
My kids are 14 & 17 now but I was told the same thing 16 years ago. Because I brought a car seat for him, he had to be buckled in for taxi, takeoff, landing, and taxi. If I hadn't paid for the seat, I could have breastfed him. 🤷♀️
The CDC is now dictating breastfeeding guidelines? Not sure how or why that makes sense unless it’s only about Control. I’m interested why Delta doesn’t have a policy in this situation since it’s very common.
If you have a seat you must be secured in the seat during those times its not a feeding rule per say
Next time pump and give him a bottle. That’s what I did.
If you have a car seat and bought a seat for the baby it is required and to be honest the safest place for an infant during takeoff and landing. In the event of an emergency or any incident, an infant will fly out of your arms like a ball.
Those are considered “critical phases of flight” she probably wasn’t wrong, just a crappy rule.
Why is it a crappy rule to require a baby to be seated in the safest place during take off and landing?
I would much rather the baby be silent, if breast feeding facilities this, that’s a good thing. If we all have to be miserable because of a rule that is kind of meh…is it really a good rule.
That’s the time (taxi, take off and landing) you are most likely to have a problem and need to evacuate. The time it takes to get out is very limited. FAA requires plane to be evacuated in 90 seconds.
Lap children are fully legal and allowed. Which means that they would already be holding a child, per Delta policy.
Dying in a plane accident isn’t against the law either. I would prefer not to do it.
just feed him prior to boarding….very simple. and feed prior to you landing. that’s what i do. i fly with my LO all the time…
Wow i’ve always breastfed during those times and I have never had that issue. I would have buckled my child in and as soon as we took off i would have gotten him back out. 2 and under can sit in laps so that’s really odd she made such a big fuss.
You want them in a seatbelt for the most statistically dangerous parts of a flight.
Keep in mind the flight attendants are just following their rules and regulations. If it were me, I’d honestly just wait until we lined up on the runway then take the baby out. There’s risk involved if the FA really wanted to be an ass, but in all likelihood they wouldn’t even notice. Just my two cents.
Also dangerous. Wait for above 10,000 feet at least.
Not any more dangerous than a regular infant in arms situation.
That’s also very dangerous in an accident, but no, I believe it is more dangerous, because you are less prepared to evacuate even then you normally would be just holding an infant.
Ugh, I’m sorry this happened to you and your baby.
I found it under FAA rules for seating/restraint, and yes, if the child is under 2, you are allowed to hold them during takeoff and landing: [FAA Rules](https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/about/initiatives/cabin_safety/regs/acob949.pdf)
Thank you!
If he is old enough for a seat, he must be buckled for taxi, takeoff, and landing. The FA is correct.
If he is old enough AND has a ticketed seat of his own, he must be buckled in that seat for taxi, takeoff, and landing. If he is old enough to be permitted to travel as a ticketed passenger but is traveling as an infant in lap, OP is permitted to hold him during, taxi, takeoff, flight, and landing.
We never get ours a seat. Always lap. My wife fed him several times and no issues.
Your one year old IS a lap child and can be held during taxi, take off, and landing. The fact that you purchased an additional seat to put a car seat on it doesn't mean he has to sit on it. Now when that child turns two, the kid does have to be buckled on its own seat. In the mean time I would call Delta and let them know what happened and ask them how are they going to fix it. I belive it's not legal to tell a woman not to nurse a child anywhere so there is that too.
Contact delta file complaint.
If u bought a seat, they have to be in it for taxi, TO and landing. Period.
If your kid is old enough to have their own seat, why are you still breastfeeding
Infants as young as 0 months can be in a car seat. An approved car seat is safer onboard a flight than being a lap infant. So by your logic just no baby can breast feed if they can sit in a car seat 🥴🥴. This is a bad take.
The exact same thing happened to us. I wonder if it was the same flight attendant. She wasn't rude just to us, but everyone on the flight. It was especially shocking since we were sittingl first class. I was sitting two rows behind my wife when it happened. When I stood up and called the flight attendant out she got more timid. She ended up sitting at the front of the plane, just talking to the passengers in the first row. She was trying as hard as she could to be nice to them but not talking to anyone else She was a shorter Hispanic looking lady. Maybe in her thirties. I heard her talking about your time in the military. I just can't imagine her still being employed.
Could have been the same person honestly. I did get her name and I will be reaching out to Delta, I just wanted to make sure I had all the facts and wasn’t reacting with emotion.
since even the flight attendants will be seated, just do it
I think the issue is that you are viewing your child as a baby, while the FA views them as a toddler. 17 months old should not need you to be nursing during takeoff and landing. You are putting your child at risk by insisting on holding them instead of buckling them in. It’s actually wild that the FAA even allows lap infants these days with all of the safety issues that it brings. Protect your child and buckle them in. If that means their ears hurt and they cry, better that then putting them at risk to become a projectile if there was an aborted takeoff or something else that goes wrong.
it’s your kid and the government allows under 2 years old. I think you’re stupid not to strap the kid in for the most dangerous parts and then take the kid out in the air. But it’s not so dangerous that i think your parental rights and autonomy should be threatened and corporate or government actors should tell you what to do. So had u refused and fed the kid in your lap and gotten kicked off plane, i would find FA in the wrong.
Ur a rule follower? U would have been a great nazi in germany...who cares about anything else, just follow the leader lol
Why would you buy your one year old a seat? Since you bought a seat for your toddler, the FAs were simply enforcing the policy that every passenger with a seat assignment needs to be seated. Sorry they were rude to you, but it sounds like they were just trying to cover their behinds.
Because every parent should. “Don’t have to” isn’t the same as “shouldn’t”
Have you ever tried to spent hours containing a toddler on your lap? I have always bought my kids a seat, starting at like 3 months old. If you can afford to do it anything else is bananas.
I bet you are fun at parties.
Was the infant strapped to you in any way?
Not at all strapped to me.
bro just pop the tiddy and feed the child, nobody is gonna stop you although some people may look at you odd, it’s the circle of life
I was able to do this when my son was little. Never had an issue, but that was a few years ago.
She made up the part about breastfeeding. I have had FAs and TSA employees just make up stuff because they don't know the actual regulations and it doesn't matter if you are right because just by disagreeing with them gives them enough cause to stop you from continuing your trip.
To Quote Al Bundy: "Eek! I'm blind! I'm blind!!!" https://youtu.be/6oKJV00xWAk
Could you have not leaned over the carseat and feed the child during taxi, take off and landing?
The true answer is that legally the flight attendant was correct but from a practicality and hospitality perspective, was wrong. Rules are meant to be bent and broken all that, especially when they don’t affect anyone else but the mom/baby. You perceive this as cruel to the baby but people on this sub will say you’re entitled because you brought a child on the plane and expected to be treated differently. Those same people will also complain endlessly that you brought a kid on board at all. People on this sub believe children should be banned from flying, should be muzzled, stored in the cargo hold, etc. Even in the age of being able to watch TV 100% of the flight with headphones, the same people that call you entitled will instantly pull their own entitlement card because they heard someone else on the plane make a noise. You won’t win on this sub.
Rules that are intended to keep everyone alive during a flight are not meant to be broken. Full stop.
Oh the great seat recline debate. Couple that with babies and loud screens and you have a trifecta of flight related posts for sure. Truly just needed the FAA guidance she quoted (thanks again to those who provided it!), and was told this was the place to come for it. Lol I know the audience and maybe shouldn’t have just copy pasted the post I had originally posted and instead just asked for the statutes surrounding the situation.
Who cares what the CDC thinks?