LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Elizabeth Brooks <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 12 May 2009 18:37:10 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (62 lines)
Kathleen -- I am a lawyer, and I sit on the ILCA Board, but I am not
*ILCA's* lawyer.

That clarification made, it doesn't surprise me that esteemed Code expert
Marsha Walker of NABA has a different view of the WHO Code, and how
corporate mergers/ownership are to be interpreted.  This is one of my big
beefs with the WHO Code:  not its intent and philosophy, which I share and
endorse.  Rather, it is very difficult piece of writing to equally and
universally interpret and enforce.  Wise and intelligent minds can differ on
what the Code requires.

The WHO Code is designed to be used as a springboard for *governments* to
write legislation, that enforces the "marketing brakes" suggested by the
Code.  The countries that have done so all have differing versions
of legislation and enforcement teeth.  The countries that have no
legislation behind it (and the USA is a big one) have no enforcement teeth
behind it at all.  The good will of companies and HCPs who support the Code
is what keeps it afloat here.

The WHO Code asks that health care workers around the world voluntarily
support it.  That includes their agreement not to take freebies from the
companies that market the four product-types under the Code.  IBCLCs have an
extra-added admonition under their IBLCE Code of Ethics, that says they
*must* support the WHO Code.

I have spent many more years reading legislative language, devining
legislative intent and sources of jurisdictional authority, and interpreting
regulatory language, than I have spent serving mothers as an IBCLC.  I have
read the WHO Code, and its WHA Resolutions.  I have read historical
and interpretative materials and monitoring reports produced by groups like
IBFAN and ICDC and Baby Milk Action and NABA and INFACT Canada.  I have gone
back  repreatedly and looked at the language of the Code itself.  I can find
nothing that requires any of us to determine compliance by looking beyond
the "first tier" of product type, and marketing.

And here's the part that drives me batty:  there is no Who Code Court to
whom I, or you, or anyone, can appeal for a final, definitive ruling on
these matters.  Yes -- *opinions* are abounding.  Including my own.  But
each country legislates the WHO Code differently.  Even if you find a
country that says "Aha!  Bad Parent will taint the Good Child -- fines all
around!"  that wonderful ruling willl NOT hold any weight or authority
across its own borders.

JHL allows Lansinoh to advertise, and ILCA allows Lansinoh to have an
exhibit booth, because they do not manufacture nor market formula, bottles,
teats or foods meant to be given to infants.

-- 
Liz Brooks JD IBCLC
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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2