Letters to the Editor
healthyskeptic
Published Letters: 671 Editor's Choice: 14
-
- Canuckistan Bob
[Read the article: Battered and fired]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]do you think you could lay off the highly personal potty mouth a little? And play nicer with the other posters? They have feelings too, how do you think you made JoeDurian feel? How would you like it if someone made fun of your name? See, I told you I work in the biz.
lol. Well that's cute and all, but we're not children here. Or at least not supposed to be. So, I'm not wearing my kid gloves.
the kind of organization that would fire a domestic violence victim by fedex does not seem to have the caring, supportive, humane attitude I would want to pervade any organization taking care of my child.
Perhaps, but that's too speculative. For all we know this woman is also a real psychopath. Maybe they had to fire her that way because she's unreasonable. Hard to say, and speculating is less than useless.
I must say though, I can assure you that child care workers pretty regularly have stresses and distractions in their lives, as we all do.
Obviously. But this is no ordinary stress.
And by her own admission she's too visibly injured in the face, to work without exposing the kids to issues they're too young for. Is she supposed to say she fell down stairs?
So there is no dispute, not even from her, that she can't work.
The only remaining questions then are:
1) can they afford to retain her on unpaid leave?
2) do they have obligation to considering she never actually worked for them?
3) does it make any sense to "sub" her class for weeks and then swap her back in after she recovers, considering the kids need a consistent relationship with their teacher?
4) is it a kindergarten's responsibility to be social workers, or should the state be looking after her needs?
5) is there a possibility she was also a participant in the violence, and would therefore be totally disqualified from working in childcare until that question is resolved?
If one bothers to think it through, it's really not difficult to understand why it would be the best possible decision in an unfortunate situation to let her go. I don't see anything unnecessarily cruel about this.
-
duh...
[Read the article: Battered and fired]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Actually, I just realized something obvious I overlooked.
FedEx it was certainly for legal reasons.
Any employer would under the circumstances consult legal counsel to make sure they do things properly, formally, and in accordance with the law, in such a delicate situation.
In that type of situation, it's in everybody's best interest to do things in writing. So papers would absolutely be sent FedEx or some other rapid delivery service.
Of course.
-
-- deering
[Read the article: Battered and fired]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't think anyone has said she should be left helpless.
But that's not the employer's responsibility.
It's the State's responsibility to help her and other victims of violent crime.
That's how every other developed country deals with it, and they have way more supportive systems than ours as a result.
Offloading this onto employers is just a way to keep people bickering while nobody gets help. Look at what a disaster employee provided for-profit health care has been. Now you want employee provided social care for battered people? That's your high minded goal?
You've been duped.
Next we'll be arguing whether employers should provide disaster relief in NOLA or such, or provide fire fighters to their employee's homes. Why not just put people back on feudal fiefdoms?
It's sad our culture has become so completely dysfunctional we even have to ask whether a kindergarten (a kindergarten!!!) can absorb the financial cost and social burden of a violent crime.
-
--Anonymous
[Read the article: Battered and fired]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I thought you went bye bye.
-
--Anonymous
[Read the article: Battered and fired]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]She's not the only person involved. There are the kids, the parents, the school, legal concerns and so on.
The state should be helping her, not the school. The school needs to serve the kids and parents.
-
Ayn Rand
[Read the article: Boys just being ... sex offenders?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Smoked herself to death by lung cancer, after denying the health effects of cigarettes long after they were common knowledge.
-
--Anonymous
[Read the article: Boys just being ... sex offenders?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You seem to be attempting to be snarky, but don't really have anything to say. Which makes you a troll without even a point.
-
Dworkin.
[Read the article: Boys just being ... sex offenders?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Dworkin. But I thought you hated her.
I'm skeptical you can understand this, but I don't hate Dworkin, I pity her. She was a very disturbed person who led a very unhappy life. It's tragic.
But what she represents as a movement is a diseased ideology of blaming the world while allowing oneself to rot from the inside out.
She could not help herself let alone others. She couldn't take responsibility for any part of her troubles or start healing herself. As such she continually deteriorated while blaming others increasingly angrily. She was so terribly insecure she was incapable of accepting any responsibility for herself without going to pieces. So, she aimed outwards and blamed the world for everything.
Her ideology is fundamentally sick, self reinforcing illness and dysfunction, and those who subscribe to it will only be more miserable for it, as she was.
-
obviously
[Read the article: Boys just being ... sex offenders?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]She was probably addicted. Maybe she couldn't quit.
Obviously Ayn Rand she was addicted. But the fact she was in complete denial, because she couldn't accept the flaws it would imply regarding her ideology, that guaranteed she could never quit. So in a very real sense her hypocrisy killed her.
Dworkin is much the same. Dworkin was addicted to over-eating and not exercising. She became morbidly obese. But because she had long argued beauty standards were misogynistic, and because her ideology was so entrenched in blaming others and victimhood, she could never accept the fact she was killing herself and needed to lose weight and take more responsibility for her health. So, it was her hypocrisy that condemned her to a painful death.
Tragic. And that's exactly why I don't want to see other people repeat their mistakes. Especially not us Americans who have the power to so greatly harm the world in our fits of blaming rage, cruelty, and gluttony.