As someone who offered education for health professionals for 35 years, 20 of which was in a small business (and the rest as a volunteer in non-profit organisations), I must question the validity and emotive nature of some of Liz Brooks' statements about education providers, including "commercial bias is what it is all about":
>>Commercial interests have a professional responsibility to make money; for them, commerical bias is what it is all about. This -- in and of
itself -- is not illegal or immoral or unethical or even bad manners. It is simply what commercial interests do. It is why they were created. I am typing this post on a computer that was created by a commercial interest that wanted to make money designing, marketing and selling it to me. It is legal moral and ethical for the computer company to do so.>> (Liz B)
What's the source for the following statements ?:
>> IBCLCs will find that education from commercial sources -- even if they paid for it -- will not be eligible for CERPs. (Liz B.) and
>>IBLCE will not award CERPs for any education offered by any commercial vendor, least of all WHO-Code-violators.>> (Liz B.)
cos I find it scare mongering. I have also spoken to IBLCE to try to find evidence to support these comments.
>>* ALL HCPs should be leery of education offered by a commercial vendor -- whether they pay for it or not -- primarily because of conflict and bias concerns, not WHO Code or continuing education credit issues.>> (Liz B.)
Health care professionals should be discerning about all education.
ILCA and some other organisations are far more commercial than several education providers (in business) that I'm familiar with.. I recall one high profile breastfeeding advocate saying that the 2006 ILCA Philadelphia Conference was an embarrassing pump fest - and there was significant participant criticism.
Many IBCLCs supplement their income through pump rental or providing education/speaking at conferences, are they just about 'commercial bias' as you've stated in reference to 'commercial interests'.
>>.. am I receviing marketing messages cloaked as education?>> (Liz B.)
Does ILCA ensure that *no* speaker has a commercial message or association and has every presentation really been 'critically reviewed by peers' ? Check the ILCA program for 2011 and confirm for yourself that every session is free of commercial interest ??
Will ILCA insist that Medela's logo not be on any powerpoint presentations at their next Conference and that Medela not feature prominently as part of any presentation. Having a logo on each powerpoint slide in keynote presentations is better than being in the Exhibit Hall - even if Medela was allowed - because the education information is being delivered with a subliminal message.
There are businesses around breastfeeding that I see as no different from an IBCLC in private practice - or anyone else seeking to earn an income. I was a full-time volunteer for 15 years, supported financially to do all that involved. When my children were older, I returned to the paid workforce but not to my first profession (accountancy) where I could have earned far more money, but to something that had become such a big part of my life. ("Find a job that you love and you'll never work again..")
Jan Cornfoot
Maleny, Australia
[log in to unmask]
From: Lactation Information and Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Elizabeth Brooks
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2011 7:50 PM
Subject: IBCLC's attending conferences sponsored by formula companies ... ok or not?!?!
Here is my take on this issue.
1. The IBLCE Code of Ethics at principle 24 says: IBCLCs must support and follow the WHO Code.
2. The IBLCE Code of Ethics at principles 5 & 17 says: IBCLCs should avoid conflicts of interest involving commercial interests.
3. The WHO Code at Article 7 says that the marketers of WHO-Code-covered products (bottles, teats, formula and
foods-pushed-on-children-to-replace-BF) should not offer, nor should health care providers like IBCLCs accept, any "financial or material inducements"
(freebies, samples, meals, trinkets, free education sessions, etc).
4. If a WHO-Code-marketer is involved in an education session (i.e. has a booth at a conference -- some venues permit this) the information provided must be "scientific and factual." No freebies, no trinkets, no logo-emblazoned tote bags or lanyards or pens or kincki-knacks can be offered -- see 3. above.
5. IBLCE will not award CERPs for any education offered by any commercial vendor, least of all WHO-Code-violators. See http://americas.iblce.org/what-are-cerps; scroll way to the bottom of the page. So, no CERPS will be awarded if the class if offered up by a pump company or pillow company or sling maker who is fully WHO-Code-compliant .... and they won't award CERPs for a pump company or bottle maker or formula manufacturer that is not WHO-Code-compliant. The entities that aware CMEs and CEUs use their own (and different) standards for what wil be considered "award worthy," so an RN IBCLC who goes to the pump company talk may find she can get CEUs even if she can't get CERPs.
6. In a masterful case of Finding the Loophole, some WHO-Code-violating companies have created educational sessions where attendees are asked to PAY to be there -- rather than get an outright freebie -- thereby skirting the issue at 3. above.
7. ALL HCPs have a professional responsibility to provide healthcare, free of inappropriate commercial bias and conflicts-of-interest, alluded to at 2.
above for IBCLCs.
8. Commercial interests have a professional responsibility to make money;
for them, commerical bias is what it is all about. This -- in and of
itself -- is not illegal or immoral or unethical or even bad manners. It is simply what commercial interests do. It is why they were created. I am typing this post on a computer that was created by a commercial interest that wanted to make money designing, marketing and selling it to me. It is legal moral and ethical for the computer company to do so.
9. ALL HCPs must ask themselves: if my education is being provided by a commercial interest, am I getting hearing independent information that has been critically reviewed by peers? Or am I receviing marketing messages cloaked as education? Some distinguished scholars feel that commerce and medicine cannot ethically co-mingle; the opportunity for overt and subtle commerical bias to result is simply too great. See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK22942/. The problem is profound; the amounts of mony involved are staggering. If you want an eyeful, see http://projects.propublica.org/docdollars/.
10. Result:
* IBCLCs should never accept freebie education from WHO Code violators.
* IBCLCs will find that education from commercial sources -- even if they paid for it -- will not be eligible for CERPs.
* ALL HCPs should be leery of education offered by a commercial vendor -- whether they pay for it or not -- primarily because of conflict and bias concerns, not WHO Code or continuing education credit issues.
--
Liz Brooks JD IBCLC FILCA
Wyndmoor, PA, USA
***********************************************
Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome
|
