I agree with Marsha 100%. Where does one draw the line? If the parent
company refuses to comply with the Code, but the subsidiary does...the
parent company still gets the $$ and continues to violate the Code sending
mixed messages to all.
My personal ethics tell me that if the Parent Company is violating then the
subsidiary pays that price too. Regardless of what the subsidiary does,
they are in effect violating the Code 'second-hand' so to speak. If we
apply more stringent ethics to situations like this then perhaps the
subsidiary will stand up to the Parent company and begin to force the issue.
I see it like this: (and yes this is a true story) A little boy (18 mo
old) choked a 12 mo old little girl to make her get off a toy. The mother
of the little boy gently spoke to him saying it wasn't OK to choke the
little girl. The little girl is now off the toy and crying hysterically in
her mother's arms. The little boy is then allowed to get on the toy! He is
happy - he got what he wanted with virtually no repercussions to speak of.
If allowed to continue on like this the little girl will only know to be
afraid of the little boy and the little boy will know he can do what he
wants without repercussion.
Another story - similar and true. 9 yr old bully at my kids school.
Beating on anyone and everyone - hitting, kicking, punching, spitting and
biting. The adults refuse to correct the situation as it will affect the
school's record to have any disciplinary issues on file (don't even ask
about my reaction to that!). The problem went on for about 4 months. My
boys are in the group being beaten on - they are 8 and 6. I sat them down
and told them that they and their friends would need to take matters into
their own hands since the adults who should be taking care of the issue
refuse to do so and I have done everything I can to stop this situation. So
they do. The very next day, the bully starts beating on a much younger
child (5). My kids holler for their friends (about 6 of them) and they drag
the bully to where the adults won't see and 'take care of business'. The
bully left that day with a black eye and a bloody nose...but he never hit
another child at that school - and he eventually made some friends too.
In essence - the first story shows the Parent company bullying and the
subsidiary submitting. The second shows the Parent Company bullying and the
subsidiary fighting back for what is right. And the gain for the Parent
Company was - well, more friends. Evenflo had that gain initially...now
they will lose it.
So - is it time for the kids (subsidiaries) to take things into their own
hands? Maybe...maybe not. But I do believe that our ethics need to be
firm, clear and consistent. What we allow...we promote...
Warmly,
Jaye
Jaye Simpson, IBCLC, CIIM
Breastfeeding Network
Sacramento, CA
www.breastfeedingnetwork.net
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 7:24 AM
Subject: Evenflo and the Code
Continuing to reinforce poor corporate behavior by allowing subsidiaries of
Code-violating companies to support breastfeeding activities is problematic.
Even though a subsidiary of a Code-violating company may meet its
obligations under the Code, the parent continues to reap the financial
benefits. Allowing subsidiaries of Code violators to provide financial
support for conferences, sponsorship, advertising, and educational materials
rewards a parent company and encourages more flaunting of the Code. The
lineage of a company is important. Code-violating companies use a
non-violating subsidiary as part of their marketing strategy and as a means
to generate good will from the opposition. ILCA and other professional
associations and organizations fall prey to this tactic and reinforce and
encourage more poor behavior by corporations whose interest lies in the
bottom line, not in supporting breastfeeding. Permitting subsidiaries of
Code violators to support breastfeeding activities allows Code violators to
use us to support their own goals. This tactic dupes the breastfeeding
community by pulling a veil over the marketing strategy used by Code
violators while allowing them to reap the profits from their subsidiary. We
should not be fooled by such machinations.
Marsha Walker, RN, IBCLC
Weston, MA
***********************************************
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
|
