Sigh...what I find most sad about the article is the general RN,IBCLC versus non-RN,IBCLC tone of the entire piece. I can certainly appreciate that what is at the base of the piece is the loss of nursing jobs. However, the approach taken in the article is that non-RN IBCLC's are sub-par IBCLC's, and not qualified to help the at risk breastfeeding mothers at the hospital. There isn't a single thing cited in the article as examples of why the IBCLC must be an RN, that a non-RN IBCLC would not pick up. The qualifications and standards for an IBCLC are the same regardless of all the other little letter put before or after the "IBCLC".

I have seen talk for quite some time about how non-RN IBCLC's have difficulty getting work at hospitals and clinics because they are not nurses, when what is needed for the position is not a nurse, but an IBCLC. Much has also been made of this lately with the changes to the requirements to sit for the exam. Discussions in the past have always meandered around how hospitals will eventually realize IBCLC's are IBCLC's, and how the RN requirement is due to how they budget the position, hospital insurance requirements, etc., and now it seems that we have an article full of vitriol, including quotes from some prominent IBCLC's, about how using non-nurse IBCLC's in the hospital setting is equivalent to providing substandard care for breastfeeding mothers and infants.

I take issue with that! 
Angela Hartfelder IBCLC, RLC

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

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