
8-Day
Week
A weekly e-newsletter from the publisher of Chronogram containing:
Up-to-date Mid-Hudson events, listings, selections of insight
for conscious living, and social & political commentary.
|
|
|
|
View From the Top >
Letters
A Good Man Done Wrong?
To the Editor:
In his [8/03] response to the frustratingly accurate depiction by Felicia
Hodges [“The Child Support System: Tangled Beyond Repair?”
7/03] of the inadequacies of our child support collection system, Tom
Allen positioned himself as “the good man” who makes his payments,
but gave himself away when he complained that his “hard-earned money”
was going “mostly for the entertainment of the mother.”
Yes, I get your drift, Tom. I have heard this and worse from other noncustodial
parents who resent that their payments improve the quality of life of
the ex by helping support their children. This control issue is exactly
what causes many of the problems highlighted in Ms. Hodges’ article.
Your hard-earned money, Tom, pays a share of the overhead
expenses incurred by your family. Whether any is left over for discretionary
purposes (for either of you) is beside the point. While you have been
rising to the role of a real dad by actively caring for your kids, the
“good man” would also understand that child support properly
liberates the mother not only to live without fear of homelessness, but
to use a portion of her own hard-earned money for a retirement account,
services to ease her workload, therapy, classes, hobbies, clothing, dining
out, etc. These “entertainments” add up to a more secure,
well-adjusted mom, the kind who would raise more secure, well-adjusted
kids.
—Barbara Jean Briskey, Clermont
(CUSTODIAL PARENT SINCE 1992, SUPPORT COLLECTION SURVIVOR 1992–1996)
Thunder in the Mountains
To the Editor:
I found Steve Thader’s warped assessment [“You Don’t
Need a Weatherman to Know Which Way the Bomb Blows,” 8/03] of the
Weathermen highly disturbing. To glorify this band of thugs and terrorists
and attempt to make these cowards into heroic icons is even more shameful
on his part.
By Mr. Thader’s own admission, they did plan
to kill people at a non-commissioned officers dance at Fort Dix; so much
for pacifism. To call bombing an art form is even more ludicrous.
Mr. Thader should take a long look into his mirror;
what he’ll see is a hypocrite who believes he can violently convince
others that peace is the only way. By the way, Steve, that’s thunder
in the mountains, not bombs!
—Tom Dinchuk, New Paltz
Crossing the Abyss
To the Editor:
In his nearly comprehensive and rather self-righteous rant against modern
life, Dr. Trevor Turner [“Malignant Self-Actualization Syndrome,”
8/03] makes some valid points. However, the list of things of which he
disapproves—television, the Internet, people living alone, unmarried
couples living together, people who don't have children—ultimately
seems like a plea to return to the 19th century. Turner, though he sounds
more like a communitarian (who, as far as I can tell, don't have a very
coherent philosophy but are very vocal about condemning lots of things)
than an evangelist, actually has much in common with the Pat Robertson–type
fundamentalists who censure everyone from their pulpits. It is very easy
nowadays to look at our confused (and possibly doomed) civilization, compare
it to simpler eras where everyone knew their place, and conclude that
the solution is to turn back the clock. In my opinion, this is neither
possible nor desirable. As misguided and often tragic as our admittedly
selfish and superficial society often is, I suspect that it's all part
of our psychological and spiritual education. There is quite a bit of
wisdom in the existentialist view of human beings as essentially lonely,
unformed creatures who must find freedom by creating themselves in a chaotic
universe. Familiar social, cultural, and political structures provide
the illusion of security but they are as ephemeral as our lives. It may
be tempting to take away our freedom (which is often squandered), rail
against the usual culprits (selfishness, television, drugs, the breakdown
of the family) and try to recapture a romanticized vision of the past,
but it won't help. Both individually and as a culture, the abyss must
be crossed.
—Lleu Christopher, Rosendale
|
 |


|