A public service announcement for our nation's children

Editor, The Times:

This message is offered by the Republican National Committee to provide balance to the president's message to America's children.

"Kids, studying is hard work. Don't do it. Don't study, and do not stay in school! If you picked your parents well, your daddy will get you into college and set you up in business with your buddies. If you were born poor or middle class, well it sucks to be you!

In America, it may be true that even a man who was born into a family that broke up and was given a funny name can stay in school, study hard, work hard and run for president! And even get more votes than the other guy!

But it can't happen to you. We're working hard to ensure that, so don't bother trying, OK?
Remember, kids, whether you're in the classroom or just walking around wearing a suit if something really bad happens, you should freeze for six or seven minutes. Sooner or later, another man in a suit will come along to tell you what to do.

You already know school is hard work. And I'm here to tell you it does not matter. Don't study! Don't stay in school!

Hope sucks. Give up!"

-- Randy Winn, Mercer Island

Fox keeping speech only on its news channel

I was amused at The Seattle Times' attempt ["Fox to dance, not sit for Obama speech," News, Sept. 7] to denigrate the Fox network decision to ignore (not air) President Obama's health-care speech Sept. 8 in favor of regular programming.

Is it really necessary for the Fox broadcast network to cover the speech when its cable affiliate, Fox News Channel, will be doing so?

-- Ed Wittmann, Seattle

Why can't Obama reinforce parents' positive messages?

It is tragic how easily fear can be generated and people manipulated into believing President Obama should be censured and shouldn't have spoken to students.
Excuse me, but he is the president of the United States of America. He told the children to, "Study hard, be good, be responsible."

It's a parent's job to talk to their children, of course, but aren't we pleased when other adults reinforce important messages? Could we be reasonable? The president cares about children, including his own whom he obviously treasures.

I'm not happy with all Obama is doing either, but he does know how to speak to children. As angry as I was when Bush was trashing this country in a variety of ways, I would never have objected to his offering a word of encouragement to our nation's young citizens.

No one objected when Reagan and George H.W. Bush spoke to the country's children.
This suspicion is completely unwarranted. Our country is built on diversity, but acceptance of it is tough.

-- Charmian Jondall, Gig Harbor

After Bush, who wouldn't question president's motives?

It's not surprising some parents worried about their children being indoctrinated by President Obama when he spoke about the importance of education to school children ["Obama tells students each has something to offer," seattletimes.com, Politics & Government, Sept. 8].

We are barely out of the eight years of the Bush administration, in which no decision was made, no action taken, no speech given that was untainted by politics and ideology.

Unnecessary wars, the firing of federal prosecutors, inept cronies in charge of federal agencies -- all carried out with an eye on the goal of a permanent Republican majority.
Rest assured, parents. As a child of the '60s who grew up in a politically conservative family, my life was constantly scrutinized for evidence that I was being indoctrinated into the liberal agenda of the public school system.

Forty years later, I am a law-abiding, family-raising, hardworking, taxpaying American, just like you. Can we please give President Obama the respect he deserves as the legally elected leader of our country?

-- Karen Knutson, Seattle

Objections to Obama's speech boil down to racism

No argument as to why President Obama should not speak to students at a school can hide the real reason for the dissent: racism.

Racism that is so abandoned to its own urges that it cannot help but make itself obvious in the most vile, contemptible ways. For example, in this phony indignation over Obama's speech to students.

A visit and speech by any other president was an honor in the past, and no valid reason can be given for this to be any different. It is obvious some people will just not accept a black president and that racism is the reason for the whole litany of ignorant objections to Obama's presidency.

It is time for the rest of us to marginalize this hateful group, and call them out for what they are. And it is time for the press to stop legitimizing the thuggery that is so commonly practiced by these racists by presenting it as some sort of normal thing.

At a time like this, the country needs to pull together, not tear itself down, as these lunatics would have it. Enough is enough.

-- Jeremy Smithson, Seattle

Don't let emotion determine hospital's expansion

There are grave problems with the Seattle Children's hospital expansion ["Examiner calls Children's expansion too 'aggressive,' " NWThursday, Aug. 13]. that go beyond destroying a community's livability.

The first misunderstanding is that Children's hospital is adding more patient beds. Children's is petitioning the city for more square footage. It is the state that will determine how many beds can be added and, according to Children's own statistics, it is not eligible for the 350 beds it desires.

Like most hospitals in the area, when Children's refers to operating at capacity it is often referring to staffing issues not actual beds. If a hospital does not have the necessary staff-to-bed ratio, the hospital can be operating at capacity even with empty beds. As a tax-exempt entity, overbuilding would turn Children's into a financial succubus.

There seems to be blind allegiance to Children's hospital simply because it is a children's hospital. City planning should not be determined based on emotion, and no single entity, even one grounded in good works, should be allowed carte blanche to bypass building codes and laws.

Children's is a large institution and medicine is big business. Other area hospitals are quickly adding specialized pediatric services, and there is global competition for funding and prestige. In medicine, bigger is better.

-- Tonya Clegg, Seattle

Hospital opposition taking isolation to extremes

It appears on the surface that some well-meaning and well-placed citizens of the Laurelhurst community have raised their small but loud voice once again.

My family lived in Laurelhurst for six years, and we experienced firsthand the zeal these community leaders can direct toward elected officials. They have always fought Children's hospital, and if you look at the adjustments the hospital has made over the years, I'd think you'd agree that Children's has always been a good neighbor. Their push to isolate the neighborhood has always gone to extremes.

During our time in Laurelhurst, there was an organized effort to call the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport tower whenever a jet flight path made its way over our neighborhood.

This group wants to isolate the Laurelhurst neighborhood from everything. It fights growth. Why? Because it may create congestion, influence property values, impact driving times or other factors that the rest of Seattle is dealing with on a daily basis.

Laurelhurst is part of Seattle and Children's has always been a part of Laurelhurst.
Do not let a few well-placed citizens worried about their conveniences influence the next generation of health care for our children and our children's children.

-- Bill Blanchard, Kirkland

Seattle Children's not the only pediatric hospital in state

On behalf of MultiCare Mary Bridge Children's Hospital & Health Center, I would like to respond to an erroneous statement made in The Seattle Times Aug. 13 in the article, "Hearing examiner calls Seattle Children's hospital expansion 'too aggressive.' "
The statement, "Children's is the only pediatric hospital in the four-state region of Washington, Alaska, Idaho and Montana," is not accurate.

MultiCare Mary Bridge Children's Hospital & Health Center in Tacoma has been serving as a trusted pediatric referral center for children across the region since 1955. In fact, we often see patients from Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon and even Canada.

As the designated Level II Pediatric Trauma Center for Southwest Washington, Mary Bridge operates one of the busiest pediatric emergency departments in the state. This high level of care for children continues throughout the hospital with a 13-bed Pediatric Intensive Care Unit and a Medical/Surgical Unit.

We also offer pediatric specialist physicians in a wide range of disciplines. Supplementing our inpatient services is a network of Mary Bridge outpatient clinics in Pierce, King, Kitsap and Thurston Counties.

-- Madlyn Murrey, Mary Bridge Children's Hospital & Health Center vice president, Tacoma

Strict law deprives kids of summer play

Ridiculous! The Virginia Graham Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act was enacted to prevent drowning by body/hair entrapment from the suction of recirculating water through main drains. It will possibly save a few lives. But it was politically backed (who could vote against it?, tightly worded (no allowance for common-sense solutions) and the cost of compliance is not addressed, except for the hint of federal-assistance funds from a presently unfunded source.

Now city kids will be deprived from the pleasure of wading pools because city parks personnel find it easier and prudent not to challenge the King County Health Department storm troopers and their rigid interpretations and enforcement of the law ["Around the Northwest: 11 wading pools closed over safety," NWThursday, May 21].

Permitting fees amount to at least $346 and $173.39 per hour for extended plan reviews and inspections. Costs for a plumber, electrician and an engineer add up to several thousand dollars per pool. And the hassle cost to other owners and operators of pools, including our condominium association, aren't included.

Simpler methods to avoid entrapment could be implemented at almost no cost.
Pumps and fountains could be turned off during operating hours and the filtration done separately. Any sort of construction that reduced the velocity of the water and separated drain openings would do. Boulders around the drain, a circle of side-placed concrete blocks, an oversized additional drain cover or other American-ingenuity-inspired methods could allow the kids to safely play.

There needs to be some way for common sense to be exercised to meet the intent of the law without the outlandish costs. The federal law and King County Health Department's enforcement tenacity are not improving my quality of life, nor that of the neighborhood kids.

-- Terry Slaton, Federal Way

Tired of agency's neglect

Thank you for this excellent reporting ["DSHS settles for $2 million," NW Friday, May 8].

I am sick and tired of reading and hearing reports about the extreme neglect of this department, which generally goes unpunished. Where are the legal consequences for these workers who have shown so much irresponsibility in so many situations? Why are excuses always made for them?

Children (now adults) do not lie about such things, and it would be entirely unlikely that anyone could make up so many horrific details of abuse anyway.

I am appalled and call for action on the part of this community against this state-funded agency and these negligent individuals!

-- Carol Meyer, Seattle

Unjustified actions

In the matter of a school searching a young girl down to her underwear, the school officials involved should be fired ["High court to weigh school strip searches," News, April 19]. There is no justification for what those incompetents did. The girl's parents should sue the daylight out of those losers.

-- Walter Montgomery, Seattle

Embarrassing situations part of life

On Sunday, I read "High court to weigh school strip searches." Now Monday, I found your editorial, "School went too far in searching student" [Opinion, editorial, April 20]. My first response was: What were you thinking? My second response was that there was no thinking involved at all.

I have to concede that an appeals-court ruling automatically makes something newsworthy, so I can't fault your news judgment in running the strip-search piece on Sunday. But I am at a complete loss with respect to the editorial.

I have no doubt that "thirteen-year-olds do not want to change in front of each other for gym class." I also do not doubt that thirteen-year-olds do not want to strip for an exam in a doctor's office. But they need to learn to get over both. Occasional embarrassing or humiliating experiences are part of life. None of us likes them, but we all need to learn to deal with them.

Ulcers, dropping out of school and filing lawsuits are inappropriate responses. They are especially inappropriate when combined with the activities discussed in the interrogations piece ["Psychologists shaped interrogations," News, April 19]. The logical conclusion of your line of thinking is that we should be waterboarding teenagers (not torture) and making terrorists turn out their underwear (torture).

-- Patrick J. Russell, Seattle

Abuse and neglect of girl ignored

While reading about the 14-year-old girl who is being charged with killing her newborn baby ["Teen mother charged in smothering of newborn," NW Thursday, April 16], I am struck by many things. First, this is a heinous act. Society exists in part to protect the most vulnerable among us. This includes the elderly, the sick and disabled and, of course, children.

This 14-year-old mother is not old enough to drink, smoke, work, buy cigarettes, sign a contract or drop out of school. These laws are in place because, as a society, we want to protect our youth so that they will not become targets of abuse.

This girl has been having regular sex with a man six years her senior since she was 13. The article stated that he was not implicated in the baby's death. I beg to differ. He was the father. He was having predatory sex with this child. When she got pregnant, what did he do?

Adding to this young girl's misery is her family. First of all, they did not protect her from the sexual predator. Secondly, they did not know she was pregnant even though she had a bump. So where was this child supposed to turn for protection and education and advice?

Society certainly did not protect her. And now they want to extract their pound of flesh and keep her incarcerated until she is 21.

I am appalled. I suspect that the abuse and neglect of this girl is being ignored. This is beyond wrong. I suspect it is misogyny.

Shame on King County for being a partner to this travesty of justice.

-- Carol Barber, Kent

Inspired to teach multiple languages

Patricia Kuhl's research reassures and inspires me ["Infants learn earlier than thought," Local News, Feb. 3].

As a parent, it's nice to know how much of a difference we make in our children's lives by talking to them and playing with them. It's also inspiring to know that we can help our children embrace the world by providing them opportunities to interact with people who speak other languages.

Parents who have a native language other than English can feel empowered to play with their children in their own language. English-speaking families can seek out opportunities to expose their children to other languages and cultures. Starting early is clearly the key.

I founded Sponge, a children's language center, based on these principles. Watching our native-speaking teachers sing, dance and play with babies and children, it's clear how powerful a personal relationship is in child learning. A special bond grows between the children and the teacher and the children and their parents, as they embrace a second (or third) language and culture together.

Ideally, our children will continue to grow up ready to embrace diversity in the world in a new way.

I look forward to the next groundbreaking round of early-learning research and the impact it will have.

-- Jackie Friedman Mighdoll, Seattle

Outgrowing the planet

I am writing in response to your Feb. 4 article about the mother of octuplets ["Mother of octuplets not feeling the love," News].

The Earth's population reached 6 billion in 1999 and is expected to be 7 billion in 2011, only 12 years later. It will then increase by another billion in even less time. At this rate, a baby born today will see the planet's population double within its lifetime.

This is happening despite all the rhetoric of its deniers; the population bomb is real.

It doesn't take an Einstein to recognize that the proliferation of the human species will outstrip the planet's capacity to sustain it and will present our next generation with one of its greatest, if not the greatest, environmental disasters.

Why should anyone be applauded or rewarded who contributes to or expedites this process?

-- Herb Aldinger, Seattle

The brain-building bond between child and parent

Gov. Christine Gregoire and members of the Legislature who claim that early learning is their top priority should be held accountable for having apparently ignored these basic facts ["Infants learn earlier than thought," Local News, Feb. 3]:

-- Science long ago proved that parents are their child's first and most important teachers;

-- Early brain development is primarily a function of parent-child interaction, not the interaction between the child and other caregivers;

-- Many parents struggle to provide the nurturing that children need, especially those with low incomes, who have to manage the stress of making ends meet;

-- The return, especially to the state, from investing in prevention programs that support parents and strengthen families is far greater than any other early-learning strategy.

Given these facts, the state's failure to invest in genuine, early-learning strategies that foster healthy parenting and the all-important brain-building bond between child and parent is an abrogation of its responsibilities to children, families, communities and our economic future.

-- Jarrett Lee, Seattle

Vaccines on the chopping block

Washington lawmakers lauded our State Children's Health Program (SCHIP) this weekend, hailing it as the best in the nation ["A partner in kids' health," Local News, Feb. 1]

While we may have the best state-subsidized children's health-insurance program, Washington has one of the worst child-immunization rates in the country. In on-time childhood immunizations, Washington ranks 39th according to the 2008 Healthiest State Report Card, the Institute of Medicine and the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The state's goal of universal coverage for kids by 2010 is inspiring; it is the right thing to do. We are hopeful that Washington will continue to lead in this area, thanks to the determination of our leaders.

But, what is the plan to ensure these kids actually receive care, especially when the state's universal-purchase program for vaccines is on the chopping block? And, how will the state educate parents to ensure that children receive the right care, at the right place, at the right time?

We encourage our state leaders to be certain that the SCHIP expansion includes coverage for vaccines. We encourage them to do more to educate the public about vaccine safety. And we encourage them to implement a training schedule for the school employees and health personnel who implement immunization policies.

Washington is, and should be, a leader in health. Addressing our state's low immunization rate will go a long way toward healthy kids and a healthy state.

-- Greg Vigdor, Seattle

Eliminate state criminal statutes

The Washington state Legislature should eliminate the criminal statutes of limitation for sex crimes committed against children.

Our children are being denied equal protection because federal law has eliminated those statutes "during the life of the child, or for ten years after the offense, whichever is longer."

So, children who are molested under federal criminal statutes have no statute of limitations. If, however, they are molested under our state criminal statutes, they are limited in attempting to seek justice. This is not fair because not only do they not have the additional deterrent effect by the elimination of the statutes of limitation, they cannot seek justice when they are able to come forward. After all, they were children when they were molested.

There will be no immediate cost to the state because the law cannot act retroactively, so it only affects cases that occur after the date the governor signs the law. Moreover, experience has shown many of the victims will not come forward until they are in their 30s or 40s, so not until then will those cases begin to enter the criminal-justice system.

See www.stopmolesters.org

-- Don Brockett, Spokane

The governor's promise

Gov. Christine Gregoire won my vote in 2004 with her promise of universal health care for all children in Washington state by 2010. She locked in my 2008 vote in 2007 when she signed the Cover All Kids Bill. It was one of those rare moments when the hope that accompanies a daring pledge starts to feel like reality.

I understand our state faces daunting budget challenges. But stepping back on this promise is not the way to solve them ["Goal to insure all kids could fall to budget ax," page one, Jan. 11].

We have a $5 billion deficit and the governor's answer is to cut needy children from the state's Basic Health Plan and limit access to those not yet covered? That's no answer; it's a shortsighted travesty that will make these hard times harder for everyone.

Gregoire's proposal to ax a quarter of a billion dollars from the state's insurance plan for low-income kids is not only a grievous breech of voter trust, it's an unacceptable breech of leadership.

Leaving nearly 80,000 children uninsured in Washington will only serve to drive up insurance costs -- for the state, for employers and for those of us who can still afford to pay for it privately -- as more and more families turn to emergency rooms in lieu of low-cost primary care. It is the very definition of the phrase "penny smart, pound foolish."

I understand the challenges of the current recession. But reneging on a promise to take care of our most valuable asset for a prosperous future, our kids, is disgraceful. Balancing any budget on the backs of the poor is unjust, especially in times of economic crisis. And especially when there are other, more just and equitable solutions.

The governor and our state lawmakers must consider all options. At the very least, before taking asthma medicine away from a child such as Sarah McIntyre, ask me, the voter, if I'd rather see the governor break her promise to kids or her no-tax stance.

-- Cheryl Murfin, Seattle

Arbitrary tax breaks

On Jan. 10, The Times presented two sides of the same coin about the budget shortfall ["Goal to insure all kids could fall to budget ax," Times, page one].

The story tells that low-income children's health-care programs are facing severe cuts. The report paraphrases Sen. Chris Marr, D-Spokane, saying about children, "They're cheaper to insure, and keeping them healthy now pays financial dividends later."

On the editorial page, The Times takes another view. "In session: legislation by a thousand cuts" and "A state out of money and also out of time" [editorials, Jan. 11] both claim that because the state has an immediate and serious budget shortfall, the editorial board advocates no expansion of health-care coverage for children, but no increase in taxes and no elimination of tax breaks.

The Economic Opportunity Institute, a nonpartisan, nonprofit, public-policy institute has studied the state tax structure. Their briefs on tax breaks show that Washington state had 567 tax exemptions on the books as of 2007. A 2008 analysis by the Washington Department of Revenue shows 302 of these exemptions saved business and individuals roughly $15 billion (yes, billion) in state and local taxes in the 2007-09 biennium.

So, there must be sacrifices in children's health care and teachers' pay, but no sacrifices by business?

-- Mary Ann Leskie, Tacoma

Insure children, ensure us all

Reneging on the promise to provide health insurance to all kids will have serious unintended consequences we will all pay for. Let's follow what's likely to happen to Sarah McIntyre as a good example ["Goal to insure all kids falls to budget ax," page one, Jan. 11].

As a child with asthma and a prior history of heart disease, if she does not receive her medications on schedule and skips doctor visits, it is only a matter of time before she will be rushed to the emergency room in severe respiratory distress. The medical bills from that ER visit and the resulting days of hospitalization will be costly. Her parents will be faced with possible bankruptcy if they try to pay the bills, or the hospital will have to write off its costs as charitable care (which raises the cost of care for all insured patients).

One way or another, we taxpayers will end up paying more for kids like Sarah. She'll pay the cost in unnecessary suffering, her parents will pay by losing whatever they have managed to save, and taxpayers will pay for more expensive emergency care than would have been necessary if Sarah received better medical insurance.

Wouldn't it be better, not just for Sarah and her parents, but for all of us, to pay the lower per-child cost of covering regular medical care and prescription medications for all children?

-- Sarah Weinberg, M.D., Mercer Island

A call for equal rights

Washington state law needs to be changed to help our foster children. Once a child has resided with a foster family for at least 12 months, the foster family needs to become the legal guardian, with the same legal standing as the birthparents, during the resolution of the permanency plan.

Within a year of living as a family, strong psychological attachments are developed and the foster parents become experts on the needs of that child. Currently, foster children can live with foster families indefinitely in transition.

However, foster parents are not equals in child-welfare cases. Their opinions are marginalized as nonprofessionals, and their willingness to provide permanency is interpreted as anti-birth-family sentiment.

There are many decent, loving families willing to help a foster child find a permanent home, but few willing to live through years of powerlessness under the adoption process.

Open adoption with liberal contact may be the most compassionate option for birthparents struggling with long-term addiction and/or mental health issues. But, is not openly offered as a solution toward permanency. Why not?

We all know DNA no longer defines family in modern society. Our laws and child welfare policies need to reflect that.

-- Jennifer Gross, Everett

The bigger picture

Will someone please explain why a 16-year-old girl is charged with first degree murder in the suspicious death of her newborn baby ["Body of newborn found in trash," Local News, Jan. 6] when adult males who beat and torture to death newborns, infants and toddlers are only charged with manslaughter?

-- Karen Clay, Port Orchard

Be aware

I want to say I was glad to see the item on the opinion page by syndicated columnist Nicholas D. Kristof ["Sex Trafficking: the evil behind the forced smiles," Jan. 5]. I have been following his columns on this subject and was glad you elected to publish his column in The Times.

I think this is something we all need to be aware is happening in our world. Sometimes the newspaper is the only way we have of becoming aware.

I am a supporter of the Somaly Mam Foundation and have ordered many of the bracelets made by the young girls they manage to rescue. I do my best to pass them on to my friends and family.

Kristof is a national treasure as far as I am concerned. His dedication to reporting is outstanding. I hope our Seattle paper will continue to publish his columns. Keep up the good work and God bless the American Press.

-- Linda Flickinger, Lynnwood

It's a science

Ellen Goodman hit the nail on the head with her analysis of a new study on teens and sexual activity ["Sex mis-education doesn't work," syndicated columnist, Jan. 2]. For the past eight years, our government has funded and promoted abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, despite mounting evidence that these classes make adolescents more likely to have unprotected sex.

Advice to patients should always be guided by scientific evidence. As a physician, I have encouraged my patients to exercise more or stop smoking based on studies that show the health benefits of these behaviors.

I urge President-elect Obama to use the same principle when deciding which sex-education programs merit federal funding. Comprehensive programs -- including lessons on relationship-building, responsibility and birth control -- are the best choice for raising healthy adults.

-- Suzanne Poppema, MD, Edmonds

Come together

Once again we read about the destruction of a young life. I rarely cry when I read the newspaper, but this story made me sob ["Beaten toddler in coma; mother's boyfriend to be charged," News, Dec. 4]. The perpetrator beat the toddler when she cried and beat her when she didn't. Imagine her little mind trying to figure out what she could do to not be beaten. No child should have to.

We need to solve this problem because what we're doing with at-risk children is not working. The problem is huge and systemic and requires infrastructure and innovation to solve it. We can figure this out, but we need the will to do it.

There are charities that work, but they're bailing out the ocean with a teaspoon.

The problem won't go away -- it's getting worse and the results will plague us in the future. Eighty percent of prisoners were abused or neglected as children. How expensive is that?

We need legislation, enforcement, courts and the resources of the anti-abortion, abortion-rights, church-based and children-focused charities to work cohesively toward the common goal of "what's best for the child."

We need to build the support infrastructure to provide love and care for our little ones. It's time for the village to come together.

-- Leslie Malek, Kent