I have been nomail since vacation last month.  I usually like to catch up with the archives before signing on again, so I had not heard of the SOP discussion until several people mentioned it at a workshop last Friday.  In a way, I am glad to have been able to read all the comments so far before jumping in as it gave me a chance to really mull it over instead of giving an immediate reaction which could have been more "knee jerk" than thought out.
I, too, received a copy with my notification of passing (yippee!) for the third time. (I was one of the original test takers back in "85).  I did see in the letter that the Code of Ethics and SOP were included.  However, since I felt quite familiar with the COE, having presented on the topic to our affiliate last spring, I set both aside, not realizing what was really in there!  Many thanks for Jan for bringing it out in the open.
I am glad this did not come out while I was still working in my last position before retiring.  My supervisor would have been jumping for joy at the wording as she felt we should be following the old "the doctor's word is equivalent to the word of God and noone dare say anything different" attitude!  There is a big difference between "contradicting" and offering alternate views and approaches to a situation.  I am thinking that the IBLCE board was responding to the fact that some IBCLCs may have been not just offering conflicting information, but actually "trashing" the MDs (or whoever) that gave what we know to be inaccurate, out of date or just outright wrong information.  While there have been times that I was thinking "What an idiot!" when a mom reported what she perceived her doc had told her, I have always tried to respond with something like, "Yes, some do hold that view, but what I have learned from experts in the field who are currently studying lactation is....."  I soon learned which docs were hypersensitive to what I would say and while I would not hold back from giving a mom a different choice in what she should do (in the final analysis, it is her choice what to do), I did find myself "soft-pedaling" the way I countered the bad advice she had been given.  In other cases, I felt comfortable saying something like, "I'll have to give him such and such information I have learned" because I knew he (or she) was open to it and respected my field of expertise.  This part of the SOP definitely needs to be reworded or eliminated for sure.
My initial reactioin, having just paid to recertify, was "I want my money back!"  I had given a lot of thought to not recertifying as I know at least one of the originals did,  simply because I am retired and not sure how much I would be using the title (in addition to the fact that I would have to get a new liscense plate since mine says "IBCLC"!).    I am also one who will ask to have my name removed from the roles if this part of the SOP is not recinded or changed!
I also agree that "alternative medicine" needs to be more clearly defined and the ramifications clarified.  for example, I know many LCs who refer moms and babies to persons such as CSTs with good results.  Now some HCPs whould consider this an adjunct to "mainstream" medicine while other HCPs would consider it quackery.  Whose definition of "alternative" applies????
We all need to let IBLCE know our feeling on this calmly, but firmly and insist on a substantive response in a timely manner.  I am glad to hear that they will be reviewing it, but let us know how soon and whether we are bound to it very literally in the meantime.  We shouldn't have to be in limbo over this.
Thanks to the ILCA board for its quick, substantive response.  I trust they will keep the pressure on for this to be resolved ASAP.  Again, a reminder to those Lactnetters who still seem to be confused-ILCA and the IBLCE are NOT the same, so please don't confuse the 2.

Regarding the "second credential" my feeling has been and still is that I can see value in this but NOT YET!  We are still trying to find our place in the whole scope of care as this current situation so clearly points out, so how can we expand on credentialing until we know for sure what we ourselves are supposed to be doing?  

I believe that most of us want IBCLC to be accepted and recognized as an independent "patient care specialty" (for lack of a better term).  I feel that that means in time we will need our own educational track to the profession.  It is great that at the present time we come from so many different backgrounds.  The RN/IBCLCs, the RD/IBCLCs, the teacher/IBCLCs, the social work/IBCLCs, the physical education/IBCLCs etc. etc. etc. all bring a varied perspective to the occupation.  I believe and hope that when we do develop an educational track to eligibility for certification, it will include aspects of all of these varied disciplines as well, of course, as areas unique to our profession.  The requirement for certain educational criteria for future exam takers is a step in this direction, not, IMO, an attempt to make us all have a medical title first as some have hinted.

Both these issues bring up the question of whether there should be more input from those of us "in the trenches" with any positions, criteria, standards or whatever that are established or are we just to sit back and follow blindly whatever those in power dictate to us?  One of the early thoughts that crossed my mind was, who are these people? Is it possible some are being influenced by interests that don'y have the best interests of moms and babies in the forefront?  I hope not.  While it is probably good to have persons on the Board from not just LC, but othet backgrounds, but I would hope they all fully support breastfeeding in all its ramifications or they have no business being on the Board.  I don't mean this to be taken as an attack on the present board or any participants on it, just questions that have been on my mind.  I get the feeling with both the second credential and the new SOP that we are being told to "take our medicine like good little children and don't question it-we know what's best for you"!

Winnie, IBCLC (for now anyway)

             ***********************************************

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

The LACTNET email list is powered by LISTSERV (R).
There is only one LISTSERV. To learn more, visit:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html