This is a topic that is so important to all of us and I welcome the opportunity to hear all the viewpoints. I am only sorry, Diane, that this comes from your personal (and not theoretical) situation. I'm the sort of person that can easily sit on a fence and see both sides of the situation (someone said that's why we have a cleft in our backsides--so we can straddle the fence!) I, myself, would likely be swayed by the counsel to decline payment of abm funds but go ahead with the presentation--with appropriate opening remarks addressing the conflicting interests. In this case, being that it is the 11th hour, it may be worse to cancel. However, *in general*, is it good to "sup with the devil" as Maureen put it? If I become the devil's dinner companion it might be assumed I approve of what he puts on the table. One very successful marketing strategy abm companies have employed is "promoting" breastfeeding. They publish and distribute ("free") breastfeeding materials. Their television commercials show women breastfeeding (BTW--in the USA formula commercials are one of the very few instances you see bf on tv). Their product packaging even has printed on it that bf is the best. If I agree to be a speaker for bf but do so with abm sponsorship -- am I any different than the brochures bearing the abm logo that purport to promote bf? Most people on this planet never think about the political stuff surrounding abm. The abm companies have done a marvelous job of engaging the public trust. "Babies are our business" seems like a warm, fuzzy statement to folks who aren't in our line of work. This perception by the public of abm companies as supportive of bf, as putting babies' best interests first, means that those of us who question the benign nature of abm are easily labeled "weird" and "radical." I can still recall the first time I heard Gabrielle Palmer speak. I thought I had arrived at the fanatic fringe! I remember that now every time I share Marsha Walker's publications on "Hazards..." . Or Linda Smith's bf & abm/illness statistical calendar pages. I find I must prepare people first -- lest they back away and consign me to the kook category! We have been put in a position of defending our stance that abm is not benign. To many this seems ungracious--after all, the abm companies say good things about "our" stuff. Where do we draw the line? Do we make certain there is no abm sponsorship before we agree to the commitment? Or do we agree to speak, as long as we don't accept the money ourselves, so as to do right by mothers and babies? By extension, then, it should be ok to allow abm companies to publish brochures we (as LCs) author -- as long as the information is correct? I am a newbie when it comes to this issue, so I am hoping all of you with "real" experience will jump in. Theory is one thing, but I want to know what works in practice. What are our goals, or what should they be, and how do we advance towards them? Looking forward to your thoughts, Margery Wilson, IBCLC