Argument plan


To prevent further discrimination against mothers who choose to breastfeed in public, Government agencies need to fund a campaign to bring awareness to the legal rights of breastfeeding mothers.

Premise 1.

It is important for the physical and emotional wellbeing of an infant to be able to feed on demand.



It is crucial for the infants development both physically and mentally to feed often, especially in the first weeks after being born. The need to feed may arise and anytime and in any place and the mother needs to be able to meet the needs of the infant.

Premise 2.

It is sexual discrimination under the Human Rights Act to discriminate against a mother who is breastfeeding.



There are laws in place under the Human Rights- sexual discrimination act that protect woman, allowing them the right to express milk and/or breastfeed in public spaces.

Premise 3.

Breastfeeding is natural and should not be associated with negative connotations.



Some countries do not have indecent exposure laws but in America, United Kingdom, Scandinavia/Europe, Australia and Canada breastfeeding does not fall under the indecent exposure law.

Counter Claim

Some people may find breastfeeding in public personally or culturally offensive.


Even if breastfeeding in public is offensive to some people, the need for an infant to eat is far greater than a persons sensitivities to breastfeeding.












12 thoughts on “Argument plan

  1. Trezanah says:

    Hi Nina,

    I can’t express how excited (and relieved) for your argument. In today’s society, public breastfeeding has become such an unnecessary issue, mainly because people argue that it is culturally/socially offensive to breastfeed your child in public, ultimately denying an infant’s right to eat — which is one of your main premises. I like the main points you have selected to focus on, and the rebuttal to the counter-claim made my those who oppose public breastfeeding. I’m looking forward to your argument because despite the unnecessary drama it is causing in society, it’s an important topic to discuss and the relevance it has to other social issues (such as child poverty, the sexualization of women in society, etc.)

    Liked by 1 person

    • ninafranklin222 says:

      Hi Trezanah, thank you so much for your kind words. It is an issue that I am passionate about as I am a mother myself and I breastfed my son. I understand the importance of breastfeeding and I think the discrimination of public breastfeeding is so common. People need to be informed of the facts and legality surrounding breastfeeding. I understand the cultural sensitivities however the welfare of a child is far greater than that issue.


  2. caitlind.r says:

    Hi Nina, your argument topic is very strong and i see the importance in it. I like how you have included in your premises, the needs of the baby, the Human Rights act and the opinion that breastfeeding in public is not indecent. They show that people should just accept and move on as the mother and her child are people too. Your rebuttal makes a lot of sense and I agree with it. The way your argument is going toward the needs of the baby is persuasive and very important, as how else are infants meant to grow and function without breast milk? I look forward to reading the rest 🙂


  3. Solomon Te Ture says:

    Hi, Nina. Excellent premises. It will be beneficial to include you evidence and warrants in your outline. You may want to change your main claim slightly barbecue it is very difficult to argue whether or not something is a ‘human right’. Instead, you may be able to create a stronger argument if you changed your main claim to something like: Breast feeding in public should be legal everywhere (i realize its legal in most places). Or, Breast feeding in public should remain legal.


    • ninafranklin222 says:

      Hi Solomon, thanks for the comment. I have taken that into account and also after talking to our tutor, I have re worded my main claim as I already have two of my other claims focusing on the legality and human rights on the infant and mother.


  4. 정예영 says:


    I think your argument plan is very interesting to discuss about! I completely agree with your premise 1 because it is true infants/new-born babies definitely have the right to eat from their mothers’ breasts when they are hungry. I believe parents should not give their newborn baby stress because babies, especially newborn babies are very weak; you never know what will happen to them. However, not only I agree with your premise 1 but I also agree with your counter-claim and rebuttal due to the fact that I believe breastfeeding in public is not very common and so people might take it offensive.


  5. kama16 says:

    Considering that the law gives women the right to breastfeed in public, you are essentially arguing that people should agree with this and think positively about it. This is quite a difficult thing to provide evidence for, as people obviously have the right to think whatever they like about anything. Might it be relevant to your purpose to argue that interested agencies be government-funded to run campaigns to influence people’s thinking on the matter? Public attitude change can’t generally be achieved just because it “should” be. If it’s an important enough matter that change need to happen, then active funded campaigning (such as the TV campaign against drink-driving) is probably the the most effective, if not the only possible way.


    • ninafranklin222 says:

      Thank you Karen for your input and advice.

      I had not thought of that angle but I really like this idea and agree that this would be a great way to bring awareness to the issue of discrimination against breastfeeding mothers.

      I will keep this in mind while I continue to work on my blog.


  6. nicolelarmerbennett says:

    I think it is interesting that the idea that the government funding campaigns to steer public opinion in one way or another seems so acceptable if we already agree with the opinion. I can’t help but imagine how people would react to the government funding campaigns to raise awareness that breastfeeding in public can be offensive to those of other cultures so breastfeeding mothers need to “Cover up” so as not to expose themselves.
    As for my own personal experience, I’ve never seen a mother breastfeeding in public receive any discriminatory treatment, in fact I find that it seems to be acceptable and expected of mothers to feed their babies whenever and wherever. I see more exposure on billboards and adverts than from breastfeeding mothers. I’m unsure as to what the main point of this argument is attempting to argue.


    • ninafranklin222 says:

      I think you have misunderstood my argument claim. My argument is not to inform people of the cultural sensitivities people have towards breastfeeding in public. My argument is to inform people of the legal rights that breastfeeding mothers have because in fact it is not as widely accepted as you think. Being a mother who breastfed myself I encountered discrimination personally and so have many other mothers I know. A lot of people find it “disgusting” and that we should not be “exposing ourselves” in public. Many mothers around the world have been asked to stop breastfeeding in many different establishments, including a children’s hospital and told to go to a restroom or a car to finish feeding their babies. The campaign would be no different to say a drink driving ad. It would be to raise awareness and to make people realise that any kind of discrimination towards breastfeeding mothers is sexual discrimination is it is not ok. I have actually discussed my topic with both lecturers and have settled on this argument topic with guidance from Karen. I think you might want to read up further on this issue to inform yourself better. Thanks for your comment.

      Liked by 1 person

      • nicolelarmerbennett says:

        I think a comparison between drink driving and breastfeeding in public is a little misleading, I’m not saying there isn’t a problem, but I’m thinking it isn’t the same as funding a campaign to save innocent lives. I’m not criticising you or your argument at all, I’m merely expressing my own opinion from my own experiences. I also understand the campaign idea is not your main claim, I think you misunderstood my comment earlier, I was writing in the hypothetical in relation to the comments, not your argument, I digressed where perhaps I shouldn’t have.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s