Maryland's shame is poor treatment for mentally ill
Your article "Psychiatric hospitals stand almost empty" (March 14) had too narrow a focus. The Sun once helped reform state mental institutions through its series "Maryland's shame."
Yes, the hospitals are now empty and in woefully poor condition, but the solution is not simply to get rid of them and use the money for community mental health centers.
Have you not noticed the great increase in the homeless in Baltimore City? Stop and listen, and you will hear many of the homeless talking to themselves. The streets, not the hospitals, are now the location of Maryland's shame.
Many patients who desperately need medication do not voluntarily take it or stay in treatment. And the medications are not as effective as your writer implies.
In Maryland, patients can be kept involuntarily only if they are acutely dangerous to themselves or others. Insurers almost universally apply criteria for involuntary commitment to their decisions on voluntary hospitalization. I and other psychiatrists have to stand by helplessly with family, friends and police until that legal test is met.
With no outpatient commitment possible and decreasing outpatient psychiatric insurance benefits, mental health professionals are often unable to intervene.
Dr. Jesse M. Hellman, Towson
South couldn't have gotten slaves to fight its war
In response to your article "Role of blacks in Confederate army ignites debate" (March 7), I find it hard to believe that so many black Americans could have been involved in fighting on the side of the South against the Union in the Civil War of their own free will.
Generally speaking, black Americans were not looked upon as human beings by the South and, therefore, could not be trusted to bear arms on behalf of preserving the Southern way of life and the honor of the Confederate military. The "valiant juggernaut" in Margaret Mitchell's "Gone With the Wind," for example, was by no means a black American slave.
The very idea of fighting in a war, for the right to remain a slave, poses such overwhelming contradictions in basic human nature that it's nearly impossible to conceive.
From our history books, nonetheless, we can easily infer that one of Abraham Lincoln's primary concerns in issuing the Emancipation Proclamation was to undermine any ideas the South may have had to use black slaves to fight the Union.
With the stroke of the pen, Lincoln nullified fugitive slave laws, which aimed to guarantee that slaves who ran away to the North would be returned to the South. The action makes one seriously doubt the possibility that the South could enlist black slaves as soldiers.
The history books tell us that as a result of the Emancipation Proclamation, some 500,000 former slaves had fled to freedom behind Northern lines by the end of the war.
Jim Clark, Baltimore
Private education is better for America, individuals
As a home-schooler and public school teacher, I take exception to Joe Murray's call for sacrificing our children to his collectivist view of America. ("We must support public schools," March 10).
According to Mr. Murray, the issue is not "what's best for you or what's best for me. Rather, it's what is best for America." I would like to remind Mr. Murray that America was not founded on the principle of "what is best for America." What is best for America is what is best for the individuals who make up this free nation.
State-operated schools are not in the best interest of America; they are antithetical to its basic principles of freedom. There are many more ways to provide for the education and safety of America's children than the limited voucher plan that Mr. Murray disparages.
Not only do private alternatives to the public schools provide excellent results, they do so at a fraction of the cost that is associated with the waste found in any government bureaucracy.
When all parents are free to keep their tax money and choose the type of education that is best for their children, we will have an education system that is worthy of a free nation.
Manfred Smith, Columbia
House of credit cards will tumble someday
On the front of the March 2 Business section, The Sun reported on the increase in bankruptcies in 1998 ("Bankruptcy filings in U.S. set record in '98, up 2.7%") and on a rise in manufacturing productivity and personal income ("The manufacturing slowdown is over").
Whoever did the paste-up on these two articles was obviously trying to make a point. How can personal income be up at a time when we still have thousands of bankruptcies?
The answer is clear to me. Most Americans live so far above their means that no matter how much money they make, they are so deep in debt that they can never creep out.
Credit card companies, extreme consumerism and greedy corporations are the culprits. We charge everything we want (not need).
Americans are living in a house of credit cards, and one day the house will crumble.
We should get after all these credit card companies who use telemarketers to induce weak-minded people into using plastic.
It is a sad commentary when we have such a false prosperity.
Harriet M. G. Baverman, Owings Mills
Protect free speech, even for odious Klan
The most frequently heard word in discussions regarding the First Amendment is "but," as in "Of course I'm in favor of free speech, but . . ."
Obviously, this freedom is not an unrestricted one, as we know from the oft-quoted prohibition against a cry of "fire" in a crowded theater.
But this constitutional right is of such importance to a free society that it must be limited only in the most extreme circumstances. A name on a road side sign is not one.
Anne Arundel County is considering doing away with its Adopt-A-Road program to prevent the Ku Klux Klan from participating.
A recent editorial in The Sun ("A road best not traveled," March 10) goes along with this position, with which I disagree.
The Klan is a despicable organization built on racism, bigotry and violence.
It hopes to change its image through programs like this across the country.
However, as long as its message falls within the bounds of normally protected speech, it has the same rights as everyone else. After all, only unpopular speech needs protection.
The Klan's agenda finds favor only with an ever-diminishing lunatic fringe. Such ideas, when exposed to the light, wither and die.
A reformed Klan would be like dehydrated water: If you eliminated its essence, nothing would be left.
Don't hide Klan members. The more we know, the more ridiculous they appear. Let them clean up the road. It will be their first positive act in more than a hundred years.
Sig Seidenman, Owings Mills
Confederate veterans group doesn't want Klan link
I have read with considerable concern the recent article by Tom Pelton of your staff regarding an effort by the Ku Klux Klan to join the Adopt-A-Road program in Anne Arundel County ("Black leaders divided over Klan," March 9).
It seems that after a lengthy discussion of the issue, Mr. Pelton just couldn't resist taking the opportunity to unfairly draw a connection between the Klan and the Sons of Confederate Veterans. As a member of the SCV's Maryland Division, I am very offended by any such comparison.
The SCV Constitution states that we are not associated with any other organization. And by a resolution unanimously adopted at the 1989 Sons of Confederate Veterans' convention in Oklahoma City, the SCV condemned the use of the Confederate flag by extremist or racist groups and individuals.
It also should be noted that several Sons of Confederate Veterans camps are doing their part as good citizens of the community by participating in Adopt-a-Road programs throughout our state.
G. Elliott Cummings, Baltimore
Pub Date: 3/18/99