To the editor:
It was interesting in light of the articles on Kaw Valley in Sunday's Journal-World that I came across another article in the Kansas City Star, about Kaw Valley's purchase of an old nursing home(?). The article in the KC Star's Sunday paper greatly concerned me. As a former foster/adoptive parent of a child with multiple disabilities, I am absolutely appalled and dismayed by Kaw Valley's intention to place 150 children in one setting (warehousing?). I hope I misunderstood this article.
It's a sad commentary on Kansas' decision to privatize foster care if this is the outcome. It doesn't make much sense that Kansas has spent several years deinstitutionalizing the chronically mentally ill and the mentally challenged (excuse my semantics, not up on the newest terms) only to now allow what amounts to institutionalization of foster children.
This is not good. This needs to be stopped before it gets started. Almost seven years ago, I took a child into my home that they said would never walk or talk. I integrated her fully into my life, my home and the community and I watched her blossom into a child who positively impacted every life she touched. And she walked and she talked.
I could go on and on about the miracles in her life and the miracles she brought to mine, but the point is I parented her, I nurtured her, I loved her, hand in hand with friends, teachers and professionals. It wouldn't have happened in an institution. Call it what you will, a ``group home'' that houses 150 children is an institution.
As for Tori, my precious loved child, I had six years of love and light before she went home to her Abba Father. Every child deserves to be loved and parented in a home setting if at all possible. And even though, foster homes are not the perfect solution, they beat out institutions any day. I pray that I misunderstood this article, but if I haven't and you love children, SPEAK OUT. Don't just wait for someone else to do it.
1401 E. 24th.
Matter of integrity
To the editor:
I took the opportunity after the recent revelations by the president to ask one of my friends who has been supportive of him what they thought about all this disclosure. It seemed like a kind thing to do, since I assumed he would be feeling let down and sorely disappointed by the events. I was surprised to learn, though, that the real criminal in this investigation was Ken Starr, the independent counsel appointed by the White House, and that Mr. Clinton was being unfairly persecuted for doing what every other politician has done.
Wait a minute, hold the bus. There are several recent political figures that I have admired for their personal courage and selfless sacrifice. Hubert Humphrey, Paul Tsongas, Paul Simon and Claude Pepper come readily to mind. Am I to believe that, given the opportunity, Hubert Humphrey would have run amok in the Oval Office and despoiled White House interns? I am sorry, but I do not think this great man would have ever entertained such a notion, and furthermore, would be shocked, outraged and ashamed at such an occurrence.
I do not believe any would have pulled IRS files and ordered the FBI to search out politically damaging dirt on their political rivals. Nor do I believe they would auction off evenings in the Lincoln bedroom to the highest bidders from a desk in the White House.
No, I believe these men would not have done any such things, not because they are clearly illegal, but because they are plainly wrong. To men of conscious and honesty, there is a clear difference between right and wrong. To those with no integrity, no character, no morality, and no honor, there is a lapse in judgment.
To the editor:
While the Journal-World editorial staff has never tried to hide its ultra-conservative viewpoints, the editorial on Aug. 14 was a blow to the integrity of the entire paper. Referring to a standing president as ``Slick Willy'' shows a vulgar lack of respect for the highest elected official in the free world. Regardless of the president's guilt or innocence in the Ken Starr Inquisition, he is still the man voted into office by a large majority of American voters and deserves the respect due to him. How can readers be assured of a free and unbiased press when the editorial staff of this paper exposes itself through such juvenile name calling? Please stick to reporting the news.
To the editor:
Your informative Aug. 9 article, ``Hospitals see cures for Y2K woes,'' is erroneous in one respect. The shaded box on Page 3A notes that the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) provides a website where manufacturers of medical devices list the Year 2000 compliance status of their equipment. The statement that this is a complete list is incorrect. In fact, only a small percentage of biomedical device manufacturers have complied with the FDA's invitation to communicate the status of their products to the public. Even though providing this information for the database is voluntary, the FCA has recently sent a strongly worded letter to medical device manufacturers urging them to provide this vital information,
1628 Dudley Ct.