LEGAL ISSUES
I discovered that having a mentor means lots of red tape. At
least where I work--in an HMO in the USA. I've been advised
that, in order to have someone work with me, I have to get a
daunting list of clearances. These are for legal/liability
concerns. Since most LCs aren't sponsored by a medical
school or other "recognized" body, getting such clearances
would be very difficult here. We can only accept medical
interns from one medical school, not the other -- which
frustrates some of the physicians who have to turn down
requests to supervise otherwise qualified applicants based
solely on the school they have attended. This is an area of
politics I don't really understand, except to know that
becoming a mentor is not as easy as it sounds.
On the other hand, I feel I owe a big debt in the LC field.
There are many, many LCs who have shared their knowledge
and skills with me over the years.
NEED FOR LC TRACK IN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION
I *wish* there was a formal pathway for all LCs (not just a few
isolated ones). If you decide to become an R.N. or CNM you
can find a way to do so. The school provides hands-on
clinical training. When Harvard or Boston University has a
program for lactation consultants then workplaces like mine
will open the door for mentoring. Until then we all are
frustrated by the catch-22 situation of expecting LCs to have
clinical experience without providing opportunities for them to
do so.
There is no substitute for hours and hours of work
experience. Knowing all the information is dramatically
different than putting it into practice. The level at which I have
to function in order to do my job well, and to interface with
the medical community where I work, is dramatically higher
than I anticipated ten years ago.
LCs "IN TITLE ONLY"
I have heard rumblings from LCs around the country who
work in hospitals or clinics where the employer is compelling
nurses to pass certification as IBCLC. These persons easily
meet the qualifying hours due to their in-hospital experience.
What I am hearing more frequently now is that those persons
often "couldn't care less" about the field. They are the ones
who know the facts without understanding the underlying
principles. This "new breed" of LC does not promote bf, nor
effectively support it. The employer can advertise they have
LCs on staff. This is a small, but growing, minority. If left
unchallenged this influx will weaken the field.
My first reaction when told of this was "Surely these persons
won't be able to keep their certification? If they don't have an
interest, how can they put the effort into obtaining CERPS or
to pass the re-test?" Opinion is that many of these people
won't have to worry about it: they passed the exam, the
employer will not require up-to-date certification. One can
hope that market forces would push employers to tout they
have certified LCs -- but what would compel them to do so?
As far as I know there are no legal reasons for LCs to have to
be re-certified.
We all need to put our collective heads (and hearts) together
to sort out these issues. If the field is going to move forward
we need to create a pathway for all who are interested, and
establish a means of assuring uniform standards.
Margery Wilson, IBCLC
[log in to unmask]
Who is everlastingly grateful to my sister LCs who gave, and
gave, and gave, and gave of their time and knowledge. (And
who continue to give, and give, and give...)
|
