I have said this before and I am even starting to bore myself, but truly,
the *only* ethical way of getting rid of this formula is to send it back to
the makers (getting them to pay the postage).

Anything else - charitable donation, whatever - is a contravention of the
WHO code which protects *all* mothers and babies, breast or ABM feeding,
from commercial marketing.

Giving it to somewhere charitable gives the ABM manufacturers brownie
points in someone's eyes, and a free advertisement. I include the cat and
dog shelter in this, as well  - sorry if it sounds purist.

I was not aware that the Red Cross took ABM from the public and I am
surprised if this is the case - if they do (to ship abroad) the only
ethical way for them to do it is to send it in *unbranded cans* maybe with
the Red Cross logo, and to guard against it reaching the black market where
it is *dangerous* to babies' health and to bf.

I would be surprised if the US major relief organisations work differently
from ours, here, where they specifically exclude formula milk from their
appeals to the public, because it is so difficult for them to distribute it
ethically. I gather they negotiate gifts of unbranded formula, and then
make sure it goes to genuine sources, and they have to work hard to ensure
it stays away from the black market.

As regards hostels for homeless mothers and babies - yes, of course they
need to eat, but there are better ways of ensuring this safely than giving
formula. Why should homeless mothers be less protected by the WHO code than
mothers anywhere else?  Give money, give food, give clothing, but not
formula.


Heather Welford Neil
NCT bfc Newcastle upon Tyne