"Don't do anything to bring on any negative press about LLL."

I have no intention to join in any protest or to go widely public about my
feelings that LLL have made a naive decision here -- but the undertone of
suggestion that one is not allowed to make critical remarks about an
organisation in the field in which one is working -- a decision which may impact
on the field in general (see my post about how it would be possible for Nestle
to get reflected positive benefit from this conference) is astonishing.

If we cannot comment on how breastfeeding advocacy is perceived by the wider
public, and on the actions of fellow advocates/supporters/promoters which may
influence the perceptions of the wider public -- I start to see warning signals.

When you have a 'family' quarrel you don't tell the neighbours first thing.  But
is it right to supress all difference of opinion within the family just so the
neighbours will see only the happy smiling front?

In 1997 a UK organsiation which has breastfeeding volunteers accepted money from
a supermarket chain which markets an own brand formula -- a manufacturer in the
definition of the WHO Code.  The subsequent internal dissent spilled over into
the media, and while there was no sense in which the battle was fought in
public, it was interesting to hear the views of women who learned of the issue
only from the media.

Is it only members who have a stake in an organisation such as LLLI?  And if the
members have a stake is their only option to agree with every decision coming
from the centre?

Charities ( I presume that LLLI is one, or a similar entity under US law)
'belong' or have a duty to the public, not just their members.  It is the remit
of the governing body to take this wider responsibility into account and -- in
the UK at least -- charity legislation reflects this.

As for differing views and opinions expressed by members -- these should be
*welcomed* by
organsations as opportunities for reflection and development.  If the board
decides something "And that is it, no member views welcome", the organisation is
*not* in good health.  (I know, no one has suggested in the Lactnet debate that
these requests not to protest come from LLLI board.)

It is acceptable to request that people remember the risks of taking a debate
into a wide public arena, but let us also remember the *huge* consequences of
suppressing dissent.

During the UK situation I kept remembering my 8th grade civics lessons.  This is
an issue wider than the choice of hotel.

Magda Sachs
Who has been trustee of two organisations which have lay breastfeeding workers.