This is a topic that is so important to all of us and I welcome
the opportunity to hear all the viewpoints. I am only sorry,
Diane, that this comes from your personal (and not
theoretical) situation.

I'm the sort of person that can easily sit on a fence and see
both sides of the situation (someone said that's why we have
a cleft in our backsides--so we can straddle the fence!) I,
myself, would likely be swayed by the counsel to decline
payment of abm funds but go ahead with the
presentation--with appropriate opening remarks addressing
the conflicting interests. In this case, being that it is the 11th
hour, it may be worse to cancel.

However, *in general*, is it good to "sup with the devil" as
Maureen put it? If I become the devil's dinner companion it
might be assumed I approve of what he puts on the table.

One very successful marketing strategy abm companies
have employed is "promoting" breastfeeding. They publish
and distribute ("free") breastfeeding materials. Their television
commercials show women breastfeeding (BTW--in the USA
formula commercials are one of the very few instances you
see bf on tv). Their product packaging even has printed on it
that bf is the best. If I agree to be a speaker for bf but do so
with abm sponsorship -- am I any different than the brochures
bearing the abm logo that purport to promote bf?

Most people on this planet never think about the political stuff
surrounding abm. The abm companies have done a
marvelous job of engaging the public trust. "Babies are our
business" seems like a warm, fuzzy statement to folks who
aren't in our line of work. This perception by the public of abm
companies as supportive of bf, as putting babies' best
interests first, means that those of us who question the
benign nature of abm are easily labeled "weird" and "radical."


I can still recall the first time I heard Gabrielle Palmer speak.
I thought I had arrived at the fanatic fringe! I remember that
now every time I share Marsha Walker's publications on
"Hazards..." .  Or Linda Smith's bf & abm/illness statistical
calendar pages. I find I must prepare people first -- lest they
back away and consign me to the kook category! We have
been put in a position of defending our stance that abm is not
benign. To many this seems ungracious--after all, the abm
companies say good things about "our" stuff.

Where do we draw the line? Do we make certain there is no
abm sponsorship before we agree to the commitment? Or do
we agree to speak, as long as we don't accept the money
ourselves, so as to do right by mothers and babies? By
extension, then, it should be ok to allow abm companies to
publish brochures we (as LCs) author -- as long as the
information is correct?

I am a newbie when it comes to this issue, so I am hoping all
of you with "real" experience will jump in. Theory is one
thing, but I want to know what works in practice. What are
our goals, or what should they be, and how do we advance
towards them?

Looking forward to your thoughts,
Margery Wilson, IBCLC