Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Now that I have your attention please take the time to read this........


Earlier today I was in the MIND Charity shop looking at the children's books. Close by was a woman with two young children aged about one and two. When suddenly a member of staff came over and sprayed air freshener around us and over our heads. The children started coughing and I said it was probably because of the spray. The mother said to me the smell is quite strong isn't it? At this point the sprayer said


"SO DOES YOUR MILK" and repeated it when the mother said I beg your pardon........


It was obvious something had happened before the spraying, I thought perhaps one of the kids had dropped a bottle of milk, but no. The store manager (the sprayer) was referring to the mother, breast feeding her younger child in the changing room!!!!!!!


Their conversation went as follows.......


Mother "I was in the changing room with the curtain closed"

Store Manager "NO you weren't it was half open, how did I know what you were doing??"

Mother "Perhaps you peeked through. Give me your name as I would like to complain"

Store Manager "My area manager is out the back now....I'll go and get him"


At this point I gave the mother my phone number and told her that I too would complain to the MIND head office, but I had to leave.


When I got home I called the head office and explained what I had seen/heard and Frank asked me and I quote.........

"Do you think the lady should have been breast-feeding in the changing room?"


I kept reasonably calm and said the shop didn"t appear busy, there wasn't a queue for the changing room and it probably meant that by feeding her baby in the changing room meant she could continue to shop and spend money.

Frank, then went on to compare MIND Grove Vale with Marks and Spencer and did I think M&S would mind their changing rooms used as a breast-feeding facility. I told him that was an inappropriate comparison, because at this point I felt I was speaking to someone who might spray an aerosol at any moment.


To the Mother you were very composed and handled the situation well but imagine if you were a new mum.......??


Rest assured I will write to the head office as his behaviour was rude and intimidating and he should NOT be dealing with member of the public.


I for one WILL NEVER re-visit this shop, and yes I walked up Grove Vale effin and jeffin !!!!!


Edited several times... obviously too angry at time of original post to punctuate, spell correctly etc etc too tired to double check now...

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/10188-breast-milk-stinksapparently/
Share on other sites

That is outrageous behaviour. Sometimes we have to bf or otherwise the pain is ecruciating. That aside - spraying

aerosol on someone is assault - what if they'd had asthma or an allergic reaction?


Something i'm not clear on though - did they actually think that it smelled? Or was this attack simply a reaction to the fact that she was doing it in their changing room?

Ryedalema......The "breast-feeding incident" was already over by the time I had entered the shop and I was unaware of any smell, but I will say this my nose has been subjected to more than a decade on/off of breast-feeding directly/indirectly and I have yet to detect a smell.


I have suggested signage to their head office, if they really find it that offensive/inappropriate.


Edited as original post quoted Bristol Bus Breastfeeding Incident.............

That's awful! My son is 10 weeks old and on the (rare) occasions I do BF him in public, I've always seem to have a negative reaction from others :( I have to say as a new and unsure Mum, it doesn't help things one bit! I can imagine how that poor lady in the shop felt...

Do you have any link to contacts at MIND Father Jack? I rather feel this needs to go a little further, & perhaps those who want to could contact whoever it is at MIND HO & let them know a) How outdated, unhelpful, indefensible & offensive those views are; and b) That they won't be visiting any of their shops or supporting them in any way until they receive evidence that MIND volunteers/ employees are given clear guidance as to the unacceptability of this kind of attitude.


Don't they know what happened to facebook when it tried to ban pictures of women breastfeeding? I know who I think stinks - and it certainly isn't that poor Mum!

That is awful! I never breastfeed in public for fear of being subjected to such horrid behaviour! It means I am limited to only being out an hour at a time but I rather do that then have to put up with such idiotic views!

I cannot believe the amount of people who are so insulted and repulsed by women feeding their babies when they are hungry.

We are mammals, we have mammary glands in order to feed our offsprings, what is so disturbing about that?! I supposed breasts are looked upon as a sexual thing, so people find it offensive when we get them out to feed.


It might be 2010 but sadly attitudes are still very outdated!


Poor woman, I think we should all complain.

awful!!


The Chief Executive

Mind NAMH

15-19 Broadway

Stratford

London

E15 4BQ


Stage one of the complaints procedure (CP) is an informal complaint to the person involved - TICK

Stage two of the CP is write to CEO Address above


The complaint can be made by an individual or a group

Sillywoman....I requested an email contact but was only provided a postal address edited with email address see below.......


Mr Monteith

Managing Director of MIND Shops

15-19 Broadway

Stratford

London

E15 4BQ


I spoke with Frank Hawkins at the MIND HO, but given his responses and forced apology, I really don't feel his opinions to be any different to Steve, the manager at the East Dulwich shop.


The Head Office number is 020 8534 4040


The Chief Execs email courtesy of a Mums Net poster.......


[email protected]


PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE if you have time or feel the urge.....complain about it, Facebook about it, tell you friends about it.


When I prepare my letter I will be quoting this forum and thread.

i was just wondering about that bizzylizzy as I know some of the people who worked on the breastfeeding manifesto (which changed the law so that you cannot be stopped from breastfeeding in public) - wonder if it constitutes a public place? obviously they were wrong either way but would be helpful if it does count as one as they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

I suppose one of the sad things about his thread is it took place in a charity shop in which the behaviour was anything but charitable.


MIND is a charity for Mental Health. It should recognise human behaviour in all aspects. People have problems but a mother meeting the nutritional needs of her young is normal behaviour by any standards.


Spraying fresh air spray around a mother and young children is one of the most ignorant acts I have ever heard of. You wouldn't do that to a customer who could have smelled for complex reasons in their life. ( Who hasn't shared public transport with someone with less than ideal hygiene?)


I understand others anger but wouldn't withhold support of charity. I'm sure this is not representative of the organisation as a whole, but thanks for posting FatherJack.

Hello! Someone posted a link to this thread on the Albany Mums Facebook page so hopefully Mind HQ will get snowed under with letters of complaint. I find this really shocking. May I suggest to contact La Leche League? Sometimes they have wonderful ideas...and a bit naughty...such as sending a bunch of really committed breast feeding mothers to the crime scene :) they will need to buy loads of air freshners to stop that smell I reckon!


I really feel for the poor lady that was breastfeeding. Hope she reads this thread.

I am absolutely disgusted by this, I will be writing to head office too, and also, I have a good mind to pop into the shop next time I am in ED and tell the relevant staff what I think of them.


People like this should not be allowed to get away with it. Feeding your baby is a basic human right. They should be ashamed of themselves.


To the Mum involved, I hope you see this thread, and get a full apology from MIND in due course. They are lucky it wasn't me in there as I wouldn't have gone into a changing room, I'd have fed baby while I continued to shop, which I am sure would REALLY have disgusted them.


Molly

May I ask, could you describe the bloke who sprayed the aerosol please?

The reason I ask is that I have often encountered rude, and abrupt behaviour in the MIND shop and am wondering if it's the same person. I stopped going in there a while ago because of it.


Thanks.

disgusted, shocked, saddened - poor Mum - there are many times when I have been out and about and I have just had to breastfeed right there and then for a variety of terribly good reasons [sometimes just to keep the peace for fellow shoppers and me!!] - and I have breastfed in changing rooms lots of times - the fact is its meant to be a place of privacy in the first place - no one should have been looking never mind looking then assaulting...poor lady.:'(

Whilst yep this mans reaction was totally out of order (how ODD he thought breast milk smells) - I don't think it would ever occur to me to b/f in a changing room in a charity shop...cafes/parks/pubs/even a loo etc yes - and there are loads of b/feeding friendly places on lordship lane. I do think I might have quickly asked if it was ok to use the changing room first - so avoiding the aerosol behavior. Just a comment - not trying to support him in any way! I suppose I was pretty lucky it was summer when I was doing most of my b/f on the move so any park bench would do - and these days the little one can certainly wait. Sounds like the mum was pretty cool though.


Am happy to go down there tomorrow and breastfeed right out in the open of the shop.... standing up maybe? Molly you too?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...