The largest expert travel community:
  • 697,096 Total members
  • 14,080 Users online now
  • 1,617,282 Threads
  • 28,558,146 Posts

In Brief: Alyssa Milano’s Breast Milk Was Seized by Heathrow Security, Actress Is Anything But CHARMED

In Brief: Alyssa Milano’s Breast Milk Was Seized by Heathrow Security, Actress Is Anything But CHARMED
Jesse Tabit

“Charmed” actress Alyssa Milano took to social media Thursday to vent her frustrations after security officials at London Heathrow Airport (LHR) confiscated her breast milk, tweeting:

Shortly thereafter, the airport tweeted back at her, clarifying its policies on liquid allowances for mothers flying without their babies.

Milano fired back with several tweets before making her closing argument via TwitLonger:

.@HeathrowAirport I would have happily spread milk in different containers (which I travel with) to comply to those liquid rules. Instead, milk was taken away with no discussion. Shampoo, lotions, etcetera were simply tested and handed back with no issue. Makes no sense at all.

For more information on this story, visit The Huffington Post.

View Comments (16)


  1. rjburns

    April 10, 2015 at 7:08 pm

    Another government failure. Alyssa Milano cannot take down an aircraft with 10 oz of breast milk.

  2. ricski64

    April 10, 2015 at 7:33 pm

    Oh damn, another story about a celeb that seems to think they are above the rules when it comes to flying. If she would have just asked politely about the rules I’m sure they would have provided her with plastic bags to separate her “liquid” to conform.
    I mean really, where has she been since 9/11. Living under a rock.

  3. weero


    April 11, 2015 at 1:24 am

    It is stories like this that help me to understand why China feels the need to block FaceBook, Twitter and the likes. It seems excessive at first but if it is the only way to stop celebs from posting things like this, understand the need for harsh action …………

  4. medichill

    April 11, 2015 at 7:06 am

    It’s not the government’s fault, it’s not the airport’s fault, it’s not Alyssa Milano’s fault – it’s the terrorists who have tried myriad ways to take down airplanes. So we have to put rules that seems quite ridiculous at times. Why do we take off our shoes? Because a terrorist tried to set off a bomb hidden in his shoe. It’s the world we live in.

  5. kcupp95

    April 11, 2015 at 8:43 am

    The rules are quite clearly stated. The exception for EBM, formula and baby foods is only if there’s a baby travelling. Otherwise it’s split into 100ml containers and put it in the 1L bag like every other liquid.

    Why did she need to carry EBM if her baby wasn’t with her??

  6. HampsteadHeath

    April 11, 2015 at 10:45 am

    It’s not thinking she’s above the rules, it’s that applying “rules” so as to prevent a woman from bringing breast milk on board is ridiculous and does nothing to enhance passenger safety. It can be very difficult for a woman to pump breast milk, and spilling some, let alone having an airport security agent throw it out, can be very distressing for many women. I don’t feel safer knowing that this sort of thing takes place.

    I’m sure she would have organized herself differently if she knew the rules, but traveling these days is stressful enough, nevermind having to think about feeding a baby. I refuse to believe a less draconian solution could not have been found.

    If rules are applied so rigidly and with these results, time for us to take a collective look in the mirror and rethink how best to ensure passenger safety.

  7. Centurion

    April 11, 2015 at 3:06 pm

    The liquid rules are there for a reason. Unfortunately several extremely very dangerous materials can be made whe Until then our only safety will come from everyday passengers who no longer will standby but attack and stop a known threat.

  8. vishalgupta22

    April 11, 2015 at 8:42 pm

    Making noise for no reason, typical DYKWIA behavior by stars.

    The same rules are applied to 10 of 1000s passengers everyday without any problem. Now the rules are applied to a celebrity and she is throwing a tantrum.

    More than the celebrity, I feel bad when people support this behavior.

  9. Himeno

    April 12, 2015 at 12:34 am

    The only “reason” to the liquid rules is to promote fear. There is no valid or viable threat from liquid explosives. Period.

  10. TravelingBear

    April 12, 2015 at 6:14 am

    EBAY: For sale 1oz of Alyssa Milano’s breast milk. Starting bid $1,000 USD.

  11. iexaltu

    April 12, 2015 at 7:23 am

    I don’t think this is a case of DYKWIA. You never know what is going on in someone’s life. Breastmilk is already extremely precious to most mothers. I have a baby who was born very early and as a result, his oral muscles are not where they need to be meaning he is unable to chew and swallow any food. Formula also wasn’t an option as it is not for many premature babies. If my milk was confiscated while traveling it means my baby would starve which would make me upset. Depending on how much you have, separating into 3 ounce bottles isn’t always feasible because the milk will need to stay cold for the duration of the trip. They don’t allow ice so you can only have one or two icepacks which can only handle a few bottles. Until you’ve been in someone’s shoes, stop judging.
    That being said, I’ve been allowed to take travel domestically with breastmilk without my baby with no issues from TSA. I can’t speak to international procedures because I always had my baby with me for international trips

  12. Carl Johnson

    April 12, 2015 at 9:02 am

    “The liquid rules are there for a reason.”

    Yes, to pretend that screening is doing anything to promote security. Even the US rules aren’t as stupid as this (although the TSA clerks in the USA are often too stupid to follow the rules and so sometimes improperly block breast milk). The fact is that liquids pose no threat – the liquid “threat” consists of some guys in 2006 saying they wanted to make a liquid bomb. But there’s no way to make a liquid bomb – all the screening is just a way for the authorities to pretend that (a) there’s a threat and (b) they are doing something about it. The fact is, though, that there is no threat because the screening won’t stop any reasonably determined attacker. So if there were a reasonably determined attacker, there would have been a successful attack. But there hasn’t been a successful attack, and the reason is that no one is trying. Why should they? It’s a lot better for enemies of the western powers to just let us fall all over ourselves worrying about liquids and (in the USA) shoes.

    The airport screening process might just as well have been designed by al Qaeda.

  13. vishalgupta22

    April 12, 2015 at 10:05 pm

    To those who don’t think this is a case of DYKWIA,The way it was tweeted, it was meant to sound as if the security did something illegal or unethical while the fact is what LHR security did is THE LAW PERIOD. Anyone on this forum can be upset with security but the topic here is not about how useful the laws are.

    If someone doesn’t like the law their options are 1. Don’t fly from that airport. 2. Go to the court. 3) Talk to the govt to change the law. Any attempt to just gain sympathy this way is pure DYKWIA.

    We have a 2 years old and we have taken atleast 8-9 trips with the baby through LHR. Although most US security would let us take a 15oz milk bottle for the baby LHR security made us throw it. We had a real tight connection and had to run to a store to buy milk and run with milk to the gate. We did feel a little frustrated but knew it clearly that we have to accept it or vote with our feet.

  14. JTCz

    April 13, 2015 at 12:26 am

    Re: the above – the rules are there to prompt you to buy drinks and liquids at the airport stores or on board. I wonder if all the products on sale in the stores and brought aboard by catering companies are tested against containing the wrong stuff – you don’t have to actually make a bomb (although you could hide one in a box of chocolate), you can simply poison a large group of passengers with some “enhanced” Coke.

    The rules are clearly wrong and it is thanks to media bringing attention to it – be it because of celebrities twitting or some non-celebrity making a fuss – that brings attention to them and has the potential to change them under public pressure.

  15. wolf72

    April 13, 2015 at 10:57 pm

    Give her a break. Some of you are commenting as though you understand how she feels as a mother. Yes, she is obviously in the wrong and she has admitted it but were YOU aware prior to this about the rules on bringing breast milk/baby milk on board international flights?

    Let her be. Go pick on someone else.

  16. Carl Johnson

    April 14, 2015 at 8:10 am

    “To those who don’t think this is a case of DYKWIA,The way it was tweeted, it was meant to sound as if the security did something illegal or unethical while the fact is what LHR security did is THE LAW PERIOD.”

    It is unethical, actually. The rules are supposed to be directed to security, and it is thus unethical to have the liquid rules because they do nothing to promote security. And beyond that – it was breast milk. The screening clerks knew it was breast milk. The screening clerks know breast milk isn’t dangerous.

    So, you are saying Ms. Milano was a DYKWIA for wanting to bring on a known harmless substance and complaining because she wasn’t allowed to, because rules!

    Now, if it had been a stupidity detector, that would have been something else. Around all the screening clerks it would have overloaded and set off an explosion bigger than Tsar Bomba.

You must be logged in on the FORUM to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

More in Airports

Two People Got Married Inside an American Airlines Admirals Club

Meg ButlerNovember 17, 2017

Poland to Move Forward with $9.6 Billion Airport Plans

Ryan BoydNovember 9, 2017

Watch: Man Hops on Baggage Carousel to Dodge Airport Security

Meg ButlerNovember 6, 2017

Copyright © 2014 Top News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by Wordpress.