In reality, this doesn’t mean enormous savings for moms. Not all working moms have flexible spending accounts, and even though they may still be able to deduct the expense, most income tax filers take the standard deduction rather than itemize. The savings is unlikely to determine whether or not a mother can afford a breast pump and feeding equipment.

But this decision is about more than dollar savings. For the mothers who are eligible and likely to take advantage of it, yes, it’s a good incentive. It’s also about awareness of a mother’s options. The incentive of the tax break may get women thinking about providing breastmilk after returning to work. Many women don’t think breastfeeding is an option if they plan to work just a few weeks after giving birth. But perhaps the greatest benefit of the IRS decision is the growing recognition in our society of the importance of breastfeeding to mother’s and baby’s health. For mothers to succeed in breastfeeding, we need to have all parts of society stand behind breastfeeding to make it a manageable option for all mothers: pediatricians, employers, hospitals, families, media, public health agencies, and government. This is a huge step in the right direction for our society.

What do you think about the IRS decision? Will you take advantage of the tax deduction for your breast pump?

In response to AB 513, which would have provided HMO and MediCal health insurance coverage for lactation consultations, Governor Schwarzenegger says that paying for a visit to a Lactation Consultant would increase the overall cost of health care (see his full response here).  Apparently, he didn’t get the message that breastfeeding reduces health care costs.  Just three months of exclusive breastfeeding has been found to save $475 in the first year of life, due to reduced illnesses, fewer doctor visits and hospitalizations. Paying for a single lactation consultation is far cheaper.

The second bill, SB 257, would have helped make lactation accommodations available to breastfeeding employees. California law already requires accommodations for lactation, but many women, as well as employers, aren’t aware of this. In my role as a lactation educator, I talk to new moms every day who think they have to use formula since they will be returning to work. This bill would require state department employers to notify employees going on maternity leave of their right to breastfeeding accommodations upon their return to the workplace. Despite the minimal cost and effort required, the Governor feels that this measure is unnecessary (see his full response here).

California WIC Association and the California Breastfeeding Coalition are urging breastfeeding advocates to send letters to the media to express disapproval of the Governor’s action. If you live in California and you support breastfeeding, please take a look at this sample letter that you can personalize and send.

My Related Posts:

Sign it, Arnold!

Health Insurance Coverage for Lactation Support: My Letter to the Governor

AB 513 will require health insurance coverage for consultation with an IBCLC and the provision of breast pumps to mothers who need them. If you live in California and you support this bill, please send a letter of your own, soon! You can find information on the bill and a sample letter at the California WIC Association website.

Here is the text of my letter (minus the letterhead, signature, etc), adapted from the sample letter.

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger,

I am writing in strong support of Assemblyman de Leon’s bill AB 513 which is awaiting your signature. This bill will improve support for breastfeeding by requiring health care service plans and health insurers to include coverage for:

• lactation consultation by an Internationally Board Certified Lactation Consultant (IBCLC)
• the provision of quality breast pumps, as part of their health care service plans or insurance policies that provide maternity coverage.

I, personally, have experienced the tremendous value of these measures. After my son was born, we had difficulty with breastfeeding due to medical complications. I struggled to breastfeed for a month, delaying seeing an IBCLC because it was not covered by health insurance. I finally saw a lactation consultant, paying out of pocket. She did a thorough assessment and taught me how to improve his sucking and increase my milk supply using a breast pump several times per day. The improvement was almost immediate.  Now, 9 months later, I am still fully breastfeeding without any problems.

There are so many more mothers with similar difficulties that could be eliminated with just one visit to an IBCLC, but the cost prevents them from seeking help. By enabling mothers to breastfeed who would otherwise be unable to, this bill will have a great impact on our nation’s health and save health care costs.

Exclusive breastfeeding for three months has been shown to reduce health care costs for infants in the first year of life alone by up to $475, compared to non-breastfed infants. The benefits extend to mothers, too, with breastfeeding reducing the risk of breast cancer. Lactation consultation is an essential investment in these health benefits for women and our children.

I respectfully request that you sign this important measure, AB 513, into law.

Leave me a comment and let me know if you are writing (or have written) a letter! Has anyone written letters on behalf of breastfeeding legislation in your state? Did you get a response, and did the measure pass? I’d love to hear about it?

My Related Posts:

Sign it, Arnold!

Jury duty wrapped up today. Other than the initial phone experiences, the Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center, in downtown Los Angeles, has done a great job of accommodating breastfeeding.  Since my last post, the accommodations have only improved.

The courtroom attendant, a kind but awkward gentleman, checked in with me several times to make sure the timing of our breaks was ok with my pumping schedule.  “Juror number 9? [lowers his voice nearly to a whisper] I talked to the judge about your [voice drops even softer] . . . situation. . . ”

The judge offered to open the juror deliberation room, right behind the courtroom, for my pumping. It saved me a lot of walking and made the process much faster. I got to sit back in a comfy chair with a huge window-wall overlooking the city of Los Angeles as I pumped. Not bad.

I’m sure the other jurors wondered what was up with me, why I was being called aside, escorted out of the courtroom through a different door, and why did I carry that gym bag around everywhere?? I would have been more than happy to tell them about breastfeeding, but nobody asked. I remain a mystery . . .

After my discovery that California law allows breastfeeding mothers to postpone jury duty for more than a year, I called the court again to see if I could reschedule for this winter. Since I had been given wrong information before, I was prepared to cite the law and demand my rights. Instead, when I explained the reason for my call, the woman on the phone said pleasantly, “that’s right, we can postpone your service until mid-March.”

March? That’s great! But wait,  that’s my husband’s spring break. Our only chance to travel for months. Can’t I come in January or February? No, they have no openings until March. It’s either serve now and pump, or skip vacation.

So I reported to jury duty today. And I am happy to say that the accommodations for my need to pump have exceeded my expectations!

The security guard paused as my breast pump rolled through the X-ray machine, but after calling another guard over to look at it, they let it through without a comment and without opening it. I was assigned to a juror assembly room on the 11th floor, while the pumping room was on the 5th floor. They immediately transferred me down to the 5th floor for easier access to the room. The room itself was really not very impressive: small, cold, and no lock on the door. But it had a comfortable chair and an electrical outlet. They made me a “Do Not Enter” sign.

The judge whose courtroom I was assigned to is amazing. The courtroom clerk privately informed the judge of my need to express milk. My fellow potential jurors didn’t know that the reason we were dismissed early for the day today was because I needed to pump. She will be making the breaks for the entire courtroom longer so that I have enough time to pump. I wonder if this judge was once a breastfeeding mother?

No more worries about losing my milk supply or having to pump in a bathroom. I’m now rather excited about fulfilling my jury duty!

To read about what happened when I served on the jury panel, breast pump and all, read Pumping on jury duty: Final update.

California has a law that allows breastfeeding mothers to postpone jury duty for one year. Problem is, the clerk who initially postponed my service, months ago over the phone, wasn’t aware of this (neither was I, at the time). She told me, in an impatient tone, that September 14 was the absolute latest I could postpone, and that I was already beyond my extension limit.

When I made a call last week to inquire about pumping accommodations, the courthouse staff person had to ask her supervisor. I was informed that I could request to postpone it until December at the latest, when my baby turns 1. But I was thinking of taking vacation that month. If I have jury duty then, I’m stuck.

She told me there are facilities for pumping my milk, but she wasn’t able to describe these facilities, when I asked for details, other than it is a space with an electrical outlet. Sink? Chair? Privacy? She wasn’t sure.

Because of my hope for a winter vacation, I decided to leave my jury duty as scheduled for this week. And that would mean lugging my (rather heavy) pump and all my supplies with me downtown via public transit, uncertain of where and when I would be able to pump.

Then, in the process of writing this post, the night before I am scheduled for jury duty, I actually looked up the law and read it myself. Wait a minute. . . not only can I postpone it for a full year while breastfeeding, but then at one year, I can submit a written request to postpone it further as long as I am still breastfeeding.

Awesome law, California! Now, why doesn’t your courthouse staff know about it!? I talked to 3 different people, one of whom consulted a supervisor, and never was I fully informed of the extent of the law as it affects me.

Time to make some more phone calls. Quick, before they call me (and my breast pump) into the courthouse!

This is the first of 3 posts about my jury duty experience as a breastfeeding mother of a 9-month-old. To read the next two posts, please see Pumping on Jury Duty: Part 2 and Pumping on Jury Duty: A Final Update.

This bill has such tremendous potential to help mothers breastfeed. I know the value of a lactation consultant.

In my first few weeks of breastfeeding, we encountered so much difficulty. Even though we and had several knowledgeable people helping us, we required the help of an IBCLC. Twice. The first charged about $200 for a 2-hour assessment and in-depth counseling session. The second was supposed to be $120 for the 2-hour session, but she took pity on us and only charged half.

My job gives me good health insurance, but this was still 100% out of pocket. Cheaper than paying for formula and extra health care costs, but still. Ouch. This kind of help is completely inaccessible to so many mothers. Yet for me, it was essential to breastfeeding. Those two sessions saved us and got us on track to good nursing.

For more information about the bill, see this fact sheet and a brief news report from the LA Times. Read the final text of the bill here. It even includes background on why it is important to protect and support breastfeeding.

Sign it, Arnold. Sign it!