Susan writes:

>Judy  mentions starting a forum for dialogue.  I'm  wondering if she could
become the first NYLCA Liaison to develop such a  forum to build links  
between the private
practice, hospital practice,  and public health based  IBCLCs?<

and Norma responds:  Breastfeeding Networks/Coalitions are a good way to 
get everyone on the same  page. The most successful ones are those which 
include as many people as  possible from as many related agencies as possible. 
Invite childbirth  educators, midwives, OB/GYNs, doulas, LLL Leaders, 
pediatricians, family  doctors, WIC staff and peer counselors, nursing mothers and, 
of course,  IBCLCs.



Now me...:)
I agree Norma. In NYC there was a Breastfeeding Provider Network, as well  
as meetings of various interested professionals that used to happen at the 
Dept  of Health. I forgot which group had which name, actually. One is 
defunct, the  other may still be ongoing. We have NYLCA, our local ILCA affiliate, 
which has  meetings and conferences, BABE ( the Brooklyn Alliance for 
Breastfeeding  Empowerment) which is multi-disciplinary, and has conferences and 
public events,  and LLL-sponsored networking meetings between local helpers 
of breastfeeding  families, also multi-disciplinary. We have lots of 
opportunities for educational  advancement and networking. The LLL events are 
well-attended, but many others  are not for some reason. Tamara's issue  (well 
one of them) seems to  be dealing with people who are perceived as "rogue" 
practitioners, people who  are outside networks, giving information other 
professionals then have to  clarify or restate in as gentle and individualized 
and appropriate a way as  possible. Perhaps they may be in the network of 
practitioners but simply don't  practice the way most of us do. It seems like 
there are multiple issues: someone  who mentors IBCLC candidates not 
respecting or trusting local MDs/RNs to give  competent information, someone who is a 
practicing IBCLC who may  be giving out advice without adequate feedback or 
follow-up, and being  dogmatic about it, and the issue of how to the next 
practitioners in line deal  with that, or prevent it from happening. First, 
it seems it would be good to  identify who an individual is, so they can 
speak for themselves. Without talking  to the IBCLC directly, we have to make a 
lot of assumptions about each other,  which can lead us astray, or set up 
more secrecy/"soloing against the  grain" instead of transparency. This does 
not set up a good future with  trust. Sometimes I know I just disagree with 
another practitioner's approach,  but this is different from them being 
incompetent. In fact I  think NYLCA's Fall conference is at least partly about 
some of the issues many  IBCLCs do not see eye to eye one, like how to deal 
with posterior tongue tie,  bodywork,etc and how our approaches might need to 
be flexible as we learn from  new research, from the mothers and babies we 
work with, and from each other. I  would think that open educational or 
networking forums to discuss these kinds of  issues would be a potential 
follow-up to direct communication. So to wind down,  and get back to where we 
started, dialogue I think needs to start with the  individuals most directly 
involved, and if that solves the issue, great. If not,  or to prevent potential 
reoccurences,  moving into broader  discussions/educational sessions could be 
organized. 
 
 
Peace,
Judy

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

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