In einer eMail vom 24-2-02 21:35:23 West-Europa (standaardtijd) schreibt [log in to unmask]: > ". Please, those of you who know me, email me (privately or > via Lactnet) with your feedback on all of this. I don't feel "flamed", but > I'd like to know how others feel about this. > Yes, Carol, I very much want to send you and others who're interested, my thoughts on this. It is a complicated item that has been keeping me thinking about for about as long as I'm aware of the Code. There have been times that I've been bouncing around from one final end of the spectrum to the other. I think I now reached kind of a resting point somewhat towards the middle. I am moderatly in favour of some autonomy in thinking on these matters. For me, it is absolutely clear that compliance with manufacturers of replacements for human milk is out of the question in any way one could possibly think of. Period. Manufacturers of ''only'' bottles and pacifiers/dummies is a no-no as well. At the other end there are the IBCLC based projects and the lay bf advocating group activities: very much encouraged ofcourse. Towards the middle come the health care institutions, parents magazines and manufacturers of babystuff or bf stuff *and* bottles. Both health care institutions and parents magazines give horrible bf information (well, some give reasonable info). But they are the main sources outside friends and relatives where parents do get their information from and, even more iomportant, they are seen by parents as knowledgeable and hrustworthy sources (''the dr will know, won't he?''). It' is quite easy to make parents understand why bf info from a ABM producer might be not as accurate as could be (to put it mildly), but it is a whole lot more difficult to break down the trust they have for hcp's and parents magazines. They do not see the connections with industry as we do. I think each person who holds her or himself responsible for living the Code should consider each case as one. HCP's do not deliberatly want to have parents making the wrong dicicions, they just don't knoo, or in some worse cases, do not care. The same for companies like J&J and Medela or Ameda. One should consider wether this organisation does diliberately want to undermine breastfeeding in order to replace it by AIM or other stuff. HCP's want to have healthy patiens who make healthy choices. They do not always have the information or literacy tools to communicate the right information to parents do to so. We can do that. babystuff and bf stuff producers do ofcourse want to sell their stuff, but they do not want to make moms choose AIM to put in it. WHO states that ''mom's own milk given in an other way tha directly frome the breast'' is the second best feeding option. These manufacturers aknowledge the fact that mothers do choose to be away from their child and do thus need other means to provide the milk. We can give them the right basic bf information and try and change their options from primairily bottle to other means (although al other means than breast do carry a risk of confusion). I do not see this as being opposite to the spirit of the Code, allthought it might be with the wordings. I'm very much interested in others' points of view. Warmly greeting, Gonneke ================== Gonneke van Veldhuizen =+= IBCLC, LLLL, MOM =+= primairy school teacher EUROLAC breastfeeding information centre and lactation consultant practice http://www.users.skynet.be/eurolac *********************************************** The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM) mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to: http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html