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:
Mon, 22 Feb 2010 22:49:47 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (50 lines)
I hear you Karleen.  I know that I will just have to agree to disagree.

"The *International Code Documentation Centre* *(ICDC)* was established by
IBFAN in 1985 to provide a focus on the implementation of the International
Code<https://mail.google.com/mail/html/compose/static_files/issue-international_code.html>.
*ICDC* keeps track of Code implementation measures worldwide."  (from the
IBFAN website).   ILCA has a "*vision* [as] a worldwide network of lactation
professionals [and a] * mission* ... to advance the profession of lactation
consulting worldwide through leadership, advocacy, professional development,
and research."  (from the ILCA website).  My position is not all that
remarkable when you step back from the politics and the passion of lactation
advocacy.  That ICDC would choose to liberally and broadly interpet the
language of the WHO Code does not at all surprise me: look at the very core
of their mission.  Similarly, go back and look at the core of
ILCA's mission.  ILCA operates an international member organization, and
must do so in consideration of local, state and federal law, fiduciary
responsiblity by the Board to the organization and the membership, and in
compliance with its own by-laws (which embody support for the WHO Code that
goes *beyond* the basic framework offered by the Code, I might add).   It
must construct policies and procedures which can be fairly interpreted and
equally applied.  It must do so in an environment free of conflict of
interest.  There are very real consequences that bring to bear --
politically and legally -- if an organization does not operate in a
forthright manner.

And so I go back to My Own Square One:  ICDC certainly is "entitled" to
interpret the WHO Code to that Lansinoh is tainted by ownership by Pigeon,
because they operate to promote teh code.  But I am "entitled" to look at
the face of the Code language and draw my own conclusions as to whether it
requires one to conduct corporate ownership forensics.  *Ownership of
companies is not something that the WHO Code examines*.  To inject such a
requirement would do disservice to the simple manageable goal set by the
Code:  to encourage governments to regulate marketing of the four
product-types, and to encourage companies to market such products in an
acceptable manner.

Liz Brooks JD IBCLC FILCA (ILCA Secy 2005-11)
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