Originally Posted by
Steve M
No, it's your suggestions that are ludicrous.
Which ones? The one where I said that she appeared to take advantage of the situation, or the one where I said the OP was in a no-win situation? Not sure those were suggestions, more comments, but whatever.
She had the option of doing exactly what you seem to think she should have done: feed her baby in her assigned seat. She doesn't have the right to have other passengers forcibly rearranged in the cabin to her liking. She could have accepted the situation for what it was: everyone in the coach section of the airplane is in cramped quarters and must sit next to strangers for the duration of the flight.
Indeed. She did not, and no one could force her to take her child elsewhere, so - what?
What I'm suggesting is that if she could not or would not accept that situation, she had the option to go to the lav to take care of her business.
Not because she had to or should have to, but because she chose to, if remaining in her assigned seat and doing it there made her uncomfortable. That would have been more reasonable than forcing others to be moved.
Since feeding a child in an aircraft lav is unsanitary, it's not reasonable.
She had the advantage. Force of law/policy gave her the upper hand. Was it right? Of course not. But the same sort of situation could happen again, given similar circumstances, and the end result is likely to be the same. Too bad.