Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="UTF-8" |
Date: |
Sat, 10 Mar 2012 22:13:15 -0500 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
Message-ID: |
|
Sender: |
|
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Many of the babies I see have first seen another breastfeeding helper. It is the lucky mom who is referred; most just happen to find me as a last resort. One of my pet peaves is when "the other lc said" conversation takes place, and I then have to explain the difference in credentials, rather than helping, so the mom will believe me. The person who holds the credential needs to forthrightly explain her scope of practice, AND be willing to refer in a timely manner (including IBCLCs).
The bigger problem is that it sounds like the training received through CLC equate the two credentials. I'm not okay with that because I don't think they are equivalent. Yes, there is room for many breastfeeding helpers. But how do we protect our credential when the training for CLC says their's is no different? Surely, collectively as a profession, we IBCLCs see the difference in the credentialing.
I am also uncomfortable with the CLC advanced training course that IBCLCs can only take if they first take the CLC course as a prerequisite. Really? The IBCLC certification doesn't serve as a prerequisite? But the CLCs can take the course, and hence have advanced training when IBCLCs cannot without first becoming a CLC. I'm speechless.
Amy Peterson, IBCLC
Idaho
***********************************************
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
|
|
|