I do hope the good doctor's complaint doesn't give ministers the idea of establishing a Fixed Penalty Notice for, say, £50 for breaking wind in public.

The money these charities make for their management teams is quite amazing. When you look into charities books you would be amazed at how much actually does go to charity! Or is written down as expenses etc!
I hope the British heart foundation is not one of these, although the attitude shown by the staff could be seen as very un-charitable!

Wow, talk about overreaction!!! I doubt the staff members would have complained if there wasn't an obvious stink. This woman is totally ill-mannered to let her child out in public if it smelled, no matter how immmune she may be to it's olfactory presence. As to setting up a petition, it's totally ridiculous. If anything childfree adults need more protection, not babies!!!!

What a ludicrous idea for a petition. I hope the Downing Street website people get a good laugh before putting it in their computer's 'recycle bin' where it belongs.
The shop staff were quite within their rights to ask this woman and her kid to leave the shop as a disgusting smell is a disgusting smell, regardless of who's making it and no one should have to put up with it. Just because the emitter of the offensive odour is a child does not make it any more acceptable for the unfortunate person on the receiving end of it. The mother probably didn't notice because, as another commenter has already said, her sense of smell is probably shot to bits by a smelly child. It seems to me that a number of parents don't care about other people and the annoyance and upset their child causes to others.

So a charity shop worker, who is giving up their spare time to do some good, has fewer rights than someone who works at Harrods? What planet is this stupid mother living on?

I bet peeps were gagging, eyes watering and everything. I've smelled a stinking nappy before and it isn't nice.

Perhaps the lady in question is immune to the smell of her childs rancid nappies?

I don't think the staff did anything wrong, a smelly nappy would put other customers off coming in the shop.

I hope the smell didn't linger too long...yuk!

For goodness sake, does this woman seriously imagine that we shouls all put up with stinky nappies? I've walked out of shots before now because someone's baby has fouled the air. I don't blame the charity for wanting the noxious polluter out before they love precious custom.
And as for setting up a petition: Get over yourself love.

Silly charity shop workers!!!! Don't they know this mother's child only emits rose scented poo and sandlewood scented farts. The nappies can be used as air-fresheners!! All must hail the aromatic chyuld.
Yup I'm being sarcastic. This supposedly educated mother is clearly unaware that when your nose is constantly assaulted by a smell it becomes used to it. Hence she is unable to detect when her child needs her nappy changed. Grow up madam-and stop being such a pompous silly woman.

Haaaaaaa Ha Ha Ha!!!!

Setting up a petition in order to prevent "Baby-based Discrimination". Why is this woman prepared to waste even more people's time by pursuing this facile complaint.

It is considerably more likely that the child had actually soiled it's nappy rather than just emitting gas, and therefore the mother should be more concerned about her kid's welfare than worrying about who is and isn't allowed to remain in a charity shop. As someone else has said, the people in there are volunteers. There is a limit to what PAID employees should have to put up with much less charity volunteers!!

For some of the above readers who do not know the whole story: here it is! I hope it will help you understand the bigger issue I'm pointing out.

The incident I shall report, which was extremely offensive and insulting, took place on Saturday, April 12th at about 10.15 am as follows:

I walked into the British Heart Foundation's Palmers Green Shop with my 17-months old daughter, as we usually do when we go out for a walk. There was no other customer in the shop. There was a young lad behind the counter, and two women who work there. While I was looking around, the blonde woman came up to me and said "I think your baby has done something (implying a 'poo'), and I have to ask you to leave the shop". I told her that my baby didn't 'poo', that she pooed earlier in the morning (and we cleaned her together with my husband 10 minutes before I left the house for a walk), and I confronted them by taking my baby immediately out of the pram and having the two women smell my daughter, who of course smelled like a freshly cleaned little baby. The other woman then said that when we entered the shop there was an incredibly bad smell, and that perhaps the baby passed wind.

I told them that my bay didn't do a poo or fart while we were in the shop; and that even if she did they have no right to ask me to leave. She is a baby after all; and there are in fact many other people, like those in wheelchairs, or simply old people, who may not have complete control over their bowel movements. Are all these people to be chucked out of stores? Who gives the BHF staff the authority to act as the 'fart police'? If this happened at Harrods, it would be disgraceful enough. But at a charity shop, the survival of which depends completely on the good will of the public, this behaviour is totally 'disgusting and unacceptable', in the words I used before leaving the shop.

On Monday, I contacted the Head Office of the British Heart Foundation and the Shops Manager Anne Turner, PA to Ken Blair, Chief Executive, has asked me to send a written report about the incident. Soon after I sent the report, she contacted me to say that the Area Manager will immediately investigate the incident and once this is done they would contact me. On Wednesday, I received an email from Anne Turner saying " I can now confirm that our Area Manager has spoken to the staff concerned at our Palmers Green shop. Unfortunately it does appear that the member of staff did not handle the situation perhaps as tactfully as we would have liked. We have obviously spoken to the staff member concerned and advised them how to deal with situations such as this in the future. Certainly no distress or embarrassment was intended and I can only apologise on behalf of the Foundation if you felt that the matter was not handled as tactfully as it could have been." In response I have written to her saying that as it was not her in person who brought about the insulting, offensive situation I would demand an apology from the two staff members involved, and asked whether BHF would be able to arrange a formal apology. I have further stated that this was not about "tactfully handling" a certain situation as there was nothing to tackfully handle, and that the incident involved a judgement by BHF staff that is categorically wrong, quite irrespective of whether a baby pooes or not in a shop.

Unfortunately, I discovered in the next reply I received that BHF felt that a formal apology from the two staff members was unnecessary, and that (I quote) "The members of staff in question were clearly aware of an odour and as you and your baby were the only members of the public in the shop at the time, made the assumption that your baby had made an involuntary movement of the bowel which caused the odour. I am told that other customers subsequently entered the shop and left quickly because of the problem. I do understand your indignance over being spoken to about such
a potentially embarrassing situation but our staff feel that they had merely brought the matter to your attention". As I read this reply, I realized that BHF most likely did not carry out a full investigation: Did the staff in question tell the Area Manager that I took my baby immediately out of her pram and had them smell her bottom - which in the case of a recent poo or fart would have still emanated odours? Did the Area Manager speak to the lad behind the counter and ask if he smelt a strong odour as well? And did they really believe that a small baby could pass wind so strongly that minutes after leaving the shop other people would rush out?? I'm her mother and I would be the first to notice, and actually worry that she might be sick!! I never received answers to these questions from the BHF.

Moreover, the staff in question have actually asked me to leave the shop, i.e. a public space - they did not simply bring the situation to my attention. Do they have a right to do this? They might as well put up a sign at the door saying "Leave your baby out when you enter the shop as s/he might poo or pass wind".

It seems that I could not get the BHF to understand that quite independent of this particular incident, the behaviour of the staff at the Palmers Green shop is against the basic right of babies and certain disabled or old people to freely move in public spaces without their carers fearing intimidation or insult. And again, BHF did not seem to understand that there is nothing "potentially embarrassing" about a baby pooing or passing wind in public – they are babies and this happens all the time in every shop and restaurant and café and supermarket, etc, etc. Most mothers immediately clean their babies and there is nothing embarrassing whatsoever in this. I'm sure all parents who read about this incident will be horrified by the behaviour displayed by the BHF staff, and I hope they will protest BHF. We have such family friendly shops in Palmers Green – including Starbucks, which is the meeting place for new mothers, the Alfred Herring Pub, etc. – that this incident sticks out as even more unacceptable in our neighborhood. I also would like to commend the other charity shops here, especially the North London Hospice, for their always friendly and polite staff members

Sincerely yours

You stated clearly that there were no other customers in the shop, so where did the smell come from? That has not been addressed, it obviously didn't just appear. Don't bring the elderly into this, your petition was about babies only, not freedom of movement for all sections of society who may not have control of their bowels, if the petition was phrased that way I might have some respect for it. As it is, it seems you are just tacking them on to attempt to add some legitimacy to your ridiculous argument. If an infirm person had soiled themseleves they or their carer would remvove them in order to preserve the dignity of the person before a smell is even noticed, so your argument is null and void. Also you assume that everywhere in the world has to be family/baby friendly. It doesn't, the baby was your choice, do not expect the rest of society and businesses to bend over backwards to accomodate it. Personally I am of the opinion that the BHF has done more than enough in terms of apologising to you, and in fact should not have needed to apologise at all. You are far too sensitive and way too baby focused, the volunteers had a right to be rid of the bad smell, as much as you think your baby had the right to produce a foul stink in public - this works both ways.

excellent points well made, Jess. If this woman is so adamant her baby didn't make a smell I wonder who it could have been if it was not one of the volunteers working in the shop and the woman plus baybee were the only people in there? Hmmmm. And getting members of the public to smell a person's bottom to check for themselves that it does or does not smell offensive is equally disgusting!!!