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:
"Regina M. Roig-Romero, Bs Ibclc" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 1 Nov 2011 08:37:25 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (84 lines)
Liz,

Thank you for your analysis of the new CPC. It resonates with my own
initial impression. The "hot mess" in the FAQ seems, to me, to hinge on
the following statement:

"However, from a legal perspective IBLCE cannot prohibit, or pursue
ethical sanctions, against a certificant who chooses to work for an
infant formula company."

Perhaps I am reading too much into it, but that to me seems like their
diplomatically-worded explanation to us as to why they intend not to
enforce adherence to one (and, presumably, ONLY one, only THIS one) of
our *duties*. They say they CAN'T legally enforce our adherence to the
code.

So....color me confused. Is that true, and how so?


Regina Roig-Romero BS, IBCLC
Sr Lactation Consultant - WIC Breastfeeding Program
Phone: (786) 336-1333 x 16219
Fax: (786) 336-1302
Email: [log in to unmask]
Visit us online at http://www.dadehealth.org 
________________________________

Please note: Florida has very broad public records law. Most 
written communication to or from state officials regarding 
state business are public records available to the public and 
media upon request. Your e-mail communications may therefore 
be subject to public disclosure.

-----Original Message-----
(4)  The elephant in the room.  The WHO Code.  The August 2011 version
merely "encouraged" the IBCLC to uphold the standards articulated in the
WHO Code.

The Nov 2011 version states "A crucial part of the IBCLC's **duty** to
protect mothers and children is adherence to to the principles and aim
of [the WHO Code.]"

Sounds pretty darned mandatory to me.

EXCEPT when you go read the FAQs, which are supposed to explain and
support this CPC, we have all sorts of confusing and contradictory
language and examples. A total of 8 FAQs are posited ... 4 have to do
with the WHO Code ... and those four are just a hot mess.  We can go to
marketer-sponsored lunches and give out discharge bags ...?  Yet it is a
**duty** to
**adhere** to the WHO Code?

Sigh.

I gotta tell you though. This final version -- if you can ignore the
remaining confusion about WHO Code applicability -- is a huge
improvement over what we saw in August.

--
Liz Brooks JD IBCLC FILCA
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

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

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