LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Rachel Myr <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 4 May 2007 16:03:13 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (47 lines)
I'm traveling, am no mail and have been so since my last post to Lactnet,
about the new interim director at IBLCE who has previously been the CEO of
the abovenamed entity, CRN, basically a lobbying group on behalf of the food
supplement, or, as they call themselves, the 'nutraceutical' industry.  
Valerie W. McClain has brought to my attention that Martek, patent-holders
for the two industrially produced essential fatty acids now added to
breastmilk substitutes in the US and Europe, is indeed connected to the CRN,
as part of their Omega-3 working group.  I noticed there was a remarkable
number of Norwegian companies on the steering committee of the group and
among the corporate members.  Martek, a US company, is one such corporate
member.  You can see more at http://www.crnusa.org/o3companies.html

This increases my concern about the new interim director of IBLCE.  I hope
to hear back from them in response to the letter I wrote more than a week
ago, but I'm not holding my breath.  I am sure they are inundated with
correspondence about the Scope of Practice, not to mention the daily
workings of the office itself.  

More and more I feel the only viable way forward is for us to push for state
licensure in whatever jurisdiction we live in, which would also involve
establishing what the scope of practice would be in each jurisdiction.
IBLCE can go back to writing and administering the exam, which is what they
are good at.  I know what I propose is not free of danger either, but I
think it is less risky than continuing to trust IBLCE to lead the way on
ethics and practice.

I also think the only way IBLCE will understand how seriously we take this,
is if there is a noticeable drop in the number of candidates paying fees to
take the exam.  But this could mean that only practitioners holding some
other credential allowing them to practice, would be left.  I find it
exceedingly sad that the legacy of Joanne Scott, who really fought to keep
our field open to people who were 'direct entry' IBCLCs, is proving to be so
fragile and of such little worth, in the hands of the very board she helped
bring into being.

Rachel Myr
Kristiansand, Norway

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

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
Mail all commands to [log in to unmask]
To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or [log in to unmask])
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet or ([log in to unmask])
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2