Pat says,
<< And, the problem that is being created in hospitals who see having RNs take
a
 one week course as a more valuable cost effective solution than hiring more
 IBCLCs.  >>

But Pat, the RNs that take a one-week course CAN then sit for the IBLCE exam
based on their "years of experience" working with mothers and babies.  Grant
you, the 20 years experience can be all incorrect and WRONG experience, but it
counts.  So, you have someone take a one week course in, say, February, and
she qualifies to sit for the exam in July based on the fact that she has been
a mother-baby nurse since Hector was a Pup (whoever Hector was/is).   Grant
you, because she IS sitting for the exam, she may peruse R&A or Lawrence, but
she will most likely PASS the exam.  And she may never do much else until she
decides whether or not she is going to stay an IBCLC or go on to cardiac
nursing.  So, what does that give you?  An IBCLC with lots of bad experience
giving bad advice.

Sigh.

THIS is precisely why ILCA and IBLCE are working on changing the requirements
for sitting the exam eventually.  Personally, I'd like to see one of the
requirements be that at least 1/2 the experiential hours come AFTER the
didactic.

Jan Barger -- who wonders why on earth she is sitting at the computer reading
Lactnet on Christmas DAY!