Teen suicide's toll on those left behind
We lost two more lives to suicide in less than a month -- both boys who attended Calvert Hall High School (news article, Feb. 17).
Unfortunately, Calvert Hall is only one of many schools that have experienced this frightening epidemic.
Death is a serious price to pay, especially when a teen-ager feels there's no more to life. What is it going to take before people open their eyes to the problems our kids are experiencing?
Suicide is a word many choose to ignore, yet we must confront the problem. When a child is lost to suicide, it is important for the school to provide guidance for classmates left behind.
Suicide is a learned behavior, and it is essential the subject be discussed openly with students. Trust is extremely important for survivors.
The Maryland Youth Crises Hotline, 1-800-422-0009, has saved many lives. The number should be posted throughout every school . . .
Lisa Hurka-Covington
Baltimore
Remedial classes
Having heard during the debates in Congress on the balanced budget amendment that the consensus among members of both bodies is that they have collectively no guts and that they do not believe that any Congress which may follow this one will have any guts, I have a suggestion to make.
I am willing to allow the members of Congress to budget themselves a million or two for one or more self improvement courses. There are many out there, I am sure.
(They could try at one of the many community colleges in Maryland or Virginia. Some of them offer free tuition to senior citizens.)
The course title would be something like "How To Make Executive Decisions," "Improve Your Self Image," or "Make Them Notice You."
Many of these courses would take only a week or two of concentrated effort, which would be worth it to the country.
In the private sector, and indeed in the civil service, it is the policy to offer education in management skills to those at appropriate levels of decision-making authority, so why not to the Congress?
ohn V. Lanahan
Aberdeen
Profligate ways
I would like to comment on the article by Michael Levin (Other Voices, Jan. 30).
Professor Levin's view is shared, I am sure, by millions of Americans who are burdened in myriad ways by people who make irresponsible decisions and leave the resulting mess for responsible citizens to deal with.
As Professor Levin correctly states, "The issue is forcible fulfillment of charity, or someone's idea of what that entails.
"Let those who feel obligated to support the abandoned children of strangers do so. But leave others to wrestle with their conscience."
I say "Amen" to that.
It is high time that the bleeding-hearts, hand-wringers and other enablers realize that until the parties responsible for their profligate ways are made to bear the full responsibility for their actions the situation will only get worse.
obert Neubauer
Berlin
Much in a name
I have often read Dan Rodricks' column in The Evening Sun, and he usually provides us with bits of whimsy which give a sense of lightness and relief in contrast to most of the depressing news occurring in our city, our nation and worldwide.
However, in one of Mr. Rodricks' recent columns, he commented on a bill introduced by City Councilman John Cain to change the name of Pulaski Highway to Pulaski Boulevard.
The columnist's cavalier treatment of this issue is understandable, I suppose, since he obviously did no research into the reason for Councilman Cain's introduction of the bill to City Council.
To "poke fun" at Mr. Cain and his constituents in the light of the past two years' work to cure the "blight" in this area of the city is not amusing. As a member of Armistead Homes Urban Renewal Committee, I take exception to the author's frivolity with regard to this issue.
Our City Council President, Mary Pat Clarke, who is the co-sponsor of our urban renewal measure, along with Mr. Cain, Councilman Nick D'Adamo and Perry Sfikas (who now represents us as senator in Annapolis), have worked hard with the members of this community to "clean up" the area.
Some of our efforts include protesting the construction of a new Pulaski Highway (Boulevard) incinerator after a five-year moratorium on building any more incinerators was enacted; the closing and razing of one undesirable motel and the "crackdown" on illegal activities at another motel. This has been effective in stemming the prostitute trade along the corridor.
These accomplishments are the result of a concerted effort by the above mentioned city officials and the residents of the community adjacent to Pulaski Highway and Erdman Avenue. So, the request to change Pulaski Highway to Pulaski Boulevard is just one small part of an ongoing, larger effort to enhance the area.
Instead of running away from our problems or finding them amusing, we are trying to solve them -- not by spouting a few words of high school French -- but by working hard within our community with the help and support of our elected officials.
We are just trying to restore some of the majesty that "once was" and bring business establishments to the neighborhood that will provide employment and benefits to all those in our community.
Peggy Kirk
Baltimore
Contract conspiracy
The GOP "Contract with America" will be dead on arrival, at least a good part of it, by the time Congress is finished with it. The U.S. Senate will serve as executioner.
If I know politics and politicians, the fix is in. There will be what I call a "scripted vote" on the much ballyhooed contract. It will go like this:
Newt Gingrich:
"Look Bob, we've just got to deliver on our promises. But you, in the other wing of the Capitol, must kill the package when it gets to you.
"We can't let things like term limits and the line-item veto see the light of day. Got it, Bob?"
Bob Dole: "Got it, Newt! No problem."
William F. Lickle Jr.
Towson
Art for our sake
In her Feb. 6 letter, Jane Spencer scolded the Walters Art Gallery for holding a special exhibit, "Gauguin and The School of Pont Aven," which required a surcharge.
Her wayward arguments pitted the Walters Art Gallery against the Baltimore Museum of Art in a mean-spirited contest. To wit: Which institution is best serving the community? There is no such contest.
Both institutions splendidly fulfill their responsibilities to art and the community in ways that reflect the differences and strengths of their collections and resources.
While doing so, they are forever obligated to be dutiful practitioners and never permitted to escape the fiscal realities // that face all partially public-funded arts organizations.
The arts may be going through a transitional period, one that seems to fall upon that segment of our society about every
half-century. The conundrum needing bicentennial redress: Whom does art serve and who is going to pay for it?
If that is indeed a valid question, then to commiserate with present-day museum directors in their quest for alternative funding requires tolerance of all parties.
It is not inappropriate to link new financial needs to new solutions such as special exhibitions. Such exhibitions now referred to as "blockbusters" help transformstaid environs into populist show-places.
This evolution in museum philosophy may be anathema to traditionalists, but whenever tried, it appears to be generating funds.
To all those traditionalists (and Ms. Spencer), the fair question, then, is: How much did you contribute to your favorite museum's last sustaining-fund drive? If your answer is little or nothing, then you are part of the problem.
It must be clarified that the practice of imposing a surcharge for exceptional, costly exhibits was not initiated by the Walters.
The Louvre has charged a premium for special exhibits for the past 20 years, as have the Victoria and Albert in London and the Alte Pinakotek in Munich. All American museums (including the BMA) have had to do the same in recent years.
The current political atmosphere underscores the financial crisis even more dramatically than Ms. Spencer and others who may not be looking over their shoulder may be aware.
If you think art, music or libraries are important, make no mistake, the Newties are after us. All who think these institutions are vital in defining us as a civilization are going to be called upon to do more to support them.
This is not the time for whining. This is the time for check-writing.
Kenneth A. Willaman
Baltimore