Annabel Karmel wants people to post questions to Clare Byam- Cook - dare you!

[RubyBlueberry]

Have been on AK forum for a while (twas good for baby food recipes) and today she has sent everybody messages asking to post BF questions ... to Clare Byam Cook .... DOUBLE DARE YOU!!

Look here this page

Partly because of these kind of misinformed, counter-to-what-the-DoH-advise opinions - for me her success is a triumph of marketing over substance/common sense.

She just looks so smug.

Plus she hasn't really got any proper qualifications, she's like 'doctor' gillian mckeith. She's just read stuff - no-one's ever given her a qualification to say 'yes you know your stuff'- apart from her MBE .

Please remember that personal comments, not related to the area of expertese, WRT the unholy trinity are unwise and may land you with a court case.

tbf I don't think you necessarily need qualifications to be an expert in something, you do however need to be current in your advice.

but how is the expertise verified otherwise? Surely someone else other than the 'expert' should say 'yes you are an expert'?

Well usually with good advice.

Of course.

I have professional exams in what I do but I have to say anyone could do them who is good at studying, you don't need any actual experience. I like to think my expertise is in how I do the job and if I deliver. If Clare Byam Cook gave advice you agreed with or reflected the current thinking you probably wouldn't demand her qualifications.

It's not only, or even mainly, to do with qualifcations. It's to do with accountability.

Lets take a breastfeeding counsellor. If she is part of an organisation which regulates her practice, which ensures she has sufficient in-service training for updating, which stays up to date for her (by informing her of changes in guidance, any important risks her clients should be aware of, etc etc), then her clients are, to some extent, protected. If she gives unsafe or poor support, or upsets someone, or fails to turn up when she says she's going to turn up etc etc, then there is a supervisory body to complain to.

They can then investigate, offer training if needed, check she is up to date with her supervision stuff, and if needs be, actually de-register her and prevent her from practising (at least under the auspices of the organisation).

That, to me, is the important bit - it's a question of integrity and safety.

Yes indeed tiktok, it's the lack of accountability these "experts" have - apart from the accountability to their accountants of course

i have reported my earlier comments, although they reflect my own personal opinion, not that of MN , but i feel it might be wiser to keep my opinions to myself.

as a doula, i am not an expert, obviously, but i have to keep myself current and up to date , hence my night time reading is often NICE guidelines or new policies at the trust i am involved in. reflective practice is also so importnat, as is being accountable. and always learning, there is always soemthing else to know, you can;t do your course/s and then be qualified and that is it.

i have reported my earlier comments, although they reflect my own personal opinion, not that of MN , but i feel it might be wiser to keep my opinions to myself.

as a doula, i am not an expert, obviously, but i have to keep myself current and up to date , hence my night time reading is often NICE guidelines or new policies at the trust i am involved in. reflective practice is also so importnat, as is being accountable. and always learning, there is always soemthing else to know, you can;t do your course/s and then be qualified and that is it.

I am delighted that CBC reads MN
Good on you Clare
GF read it too, and has changed her advice in successive publications of CLBB - hopefully we have contributed to that somehow, even if only to help get it across that people do not like advice that is clearly poor quality.

OK, I feel like a bit of a freak!!!

I'm a regular MNetter but not sure I would have got through the first few months of having a baby without following carefully chosen elements of (e.g. structure of the day and definitely not controlled crying for example) GF and CBC (in conjunction with MN and other books too). I still use the GF timings with my 7 month old and we're both very happy with that.

{taps fingers on the table nervously waiting for the tirade}

As tiktok said the other day, [something like] different people find useful guidance in all sorts of places. I found it helpful to read widely and use the bits that worked for me.

I do agree though that accountability is important - people can come to rely heavily on 'expert' advice these days (especially when close family support of new mothers is less common).

Also agree with the point about forums like MN leading to changes in these publications. Debate is a great thing...

Anyway, no intention of hijacking the thread (treat it as a bump).

Wanders off to fold washing...

had never seen that AK clip re baby led weaning before . Wish I could post my own videos in reply of dd's BLW "history"!

lol, at unholy trinity. I did not know that AK was in it as well, but am hardly surprised.

MiniMarmite - why would there be a 'tirade' in response to a post where a mother describes how she worked out for herself from a variety of sources plus watching and responding to her baby, what sort of pattern she felt worked best?

It's a myth that people who question babycare gurus are somehow against mothers who find some of what they say is useful. But it's worth noting that these gurus don't say anything like 'take a pick 'n' mix approach to your babycare'. They are usually very definite that you do it all or nothing!

I have rated AK's view on baby-led weaning in the video MrsJarmin linked to .

If the unholy trinity had their way, they would have convinced parents that raising a baby has nothing to do with common sense, kindness and instinct - afterall, that would be FREE, wouldn't it?

have had my posts withdrawn, i have nothing further to say

Hi tiktok

Sometimes there is a tirade I suppose - but never from you (and I notice that you are often the one to stop a tirade).

I remember a pregnant newbie being accused of being a troll because she said that she thought that GF sounded reasonable and asked what others thought. She pretty much vowed not to come back onto MN after that!

I suppose it is easy to get the impression (and it is just this) that many MNetters assume that all GF etc is bad. I'm not known for avoiding conflict or controversy but I usually avoid advising anyone on MN to take a look at a particular part of the CLBB because I anticipate (maybe incorrectly) that it will derail the post completely.

I suppose I also assume that writers understand that their readers will make a judgement about which elements of their guidance work for them (but I do understand that GF and CBC write in a particularly didactic manner that people might find difficult).

Finally, I absolutely agree that questioning [so-called] experts is essential in order for progress to be made. I do think that sometimes individuals get caught up in the debate and forget to respect the opinions of others (myself included I'm sure).

It depends how it's worded, doesn't it?
I've seen a fair few posts which have done down other opinions and presented CLBB methods as though they are unassailable. I would want to challenge that quite robustly.

Or say you see a parent who's going spare because the baby "won't" "fit" the schedule...I think it's perfectly valid to say, look, the schedule is shite if your baby isn't happy with it, it's not your parenting skills that are at fault. Is that an attack? Depends which side of the fence you're on.

Agreed Callipygia - GF methods are certainly not unassailable and they're definitely not for everyone - my baby went through a period of needing 4 naps per day, so he had 4 naps per day - what would GF say

Sorry, don't find that BLW clip to be at all.

She just says she doesn't like it - she thinks it causes a choking hazard.

No different to BLWers saying that purees are more of a choking hazard than finger foods IMO (and I have read that a lot on here).

Re: accountability (and believe me, I am not defending CBC here) I agree that it's a good thing - but have you read the NCT bashing thread? Surely to god some of the terrible ante-natal teachers on there have been reported to the NCT - yet so many people still seem to have had bad experiences. Don't know about the other b/f organisations, but I would be cynical as to the extent to which the NCT would be accountable for their b/feeding councillors.

(and I know I'm going to get flamed for that, but ho-hum, it's my right to be cynical).

chequersmate - I am not going to speak in detail for the antenatal teachers of NCT, except I know personally of complaints that have been made, and followed up, and where the teacher has been brought to book. No organisation that teaches thousands and thousands of parents every year is going to fully eradicate poor practice - how can it?

I know more about the processes related to breastfeeding counsellors. Be as cynical as you like (though on what grounds? You say nothing about any direct or indirect experience of breastfeeding counsellors falling short). I know when complaints are made they are responded to, and followed through, and action taken.

Again, NCT handles something like 30,000 breastfeeding counselling calls and encounters a year. Research with mothers indicates a high level of satisfaction with the service, but even if we get 99 per cent of those calls and encounters right (and I am sure we don't!), that still means 300 of them go badly.

True tiktok, no one can get it right all the time.

I would never call the NCT for breastfeeding advice though - their antenatal teachers were enough to put me off. That is why I have no direct experience of their b/feeding counillors.