Yep. It's very frustrating to read these. And keep repeating the same
thing. The WHO Code is meant to protect infant health by regulating
marketing. Marketing works (i.e., undermines breastfeeding in this
case). Medela is not compliant with the WHO Code, despite the fact
that they make a decent product. IBCLCs have agreed to uphold the WHO
Code in the code of ethics we sign. Therefore, we should--at
least--not market non-compliant products, and--at best--not support
companies who are undermining the Code. Of course "support" is
subjective, and I would not presume to prescribe what that should mean
to others, but to me it does include boycotting companies who are
breaking the Code.
Honestly, I feel very discouraged by this thread. If IBCLCs can't
manage to support the Code--a minimalist document that protects babies
around the world--who can? Why don't so many of us *get* that
companies that violate the Code HARM babies? I've hypothesized
off-list that in America we seem to think that capitalism should be
unregulated by and large. We seem to think that if you can make a
buck, you should. We also seem to think that we're somehow above this
marketing that so much money is put into. Well, we're not. Clearly the
marketing that has been done to IBCLCs has clouded judgment, and I
imagine the impact on mothers is even more profound. At least (in
theory) we understand the protective effects of breastfeeding and have
tools to facilitate the relationship. Mothers often do not.
I would encourage anyone who is making excuses for Medela to dig a
little deeper and find out what it is that you're fighting for. Is it
that mothers sometimes need good pumps? That's irrelevant to the
discussion. Is it that babies sometimes need EBM? Irrelevant. Is it
that you don't think they're breaking the Code? It's clear they are.
Is it that Medela's marketing has convinced you that you should
support them despite their status regarding the Code? Well, then, that
should illuminate something to you.
Medela can change their marketing practices. That is the
quintessential point here. And they should. And we, as breastfeeding
supporters, should insist on it.
Gina Gerboth, IBCLC, CD(DONA), CBE, Intern Midwife
Pueblo, Colorado
www.safepassagebirth.com
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 5:21 AM, Jamelle Lyons <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> These types of comments remind me of mothers who say " Well, thank god for
> formula. I couln't make enough milk. Do you want my baby to starve?"
>
> NO ONE is saying pumps don't have a useful place. Just like formula has its
> place.
>
> IT IS ABOUT THE MARKETING!!! I am sorry to shout, but it seems that half the
> list is not listening to this. How many times does Marsha Walker have to go
> over this stuff? She has enough work to do without convincing a bunch of
> Lactation Consultants to support the Code.
>
> Jamelle Lyons, IBCLC , Nestle Boycotters since age 12, and WHO Code
> supporter
>
> ***********************************************
>
> 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
|
