I read the recent editorial “The Name Game: Selling the Cancer Center’s Soul” (June 6) and couldn’t help but respond.
Being somewhat sentimental myself, I understand some of the concerns in the editorial. That being said, I believe the “soul” of the Norris Cotton Cancer Center is the facility itself and, more important, the people who work there. No matter the name on the building, it’s the doctors, nurses and researchers who work tirelessly every day doing their best to save lives and provide hope to patients who make up the heart and soul of the cancer center. My late husband was treated at Dartmouth-Hitchcock and Norris Cotton for four primary cancers over the course of six years. It’s the doctors and nurses I’m indebted to for giving our family the extra years with my husband.
Most donors I know give because of the care they or their loved ones have received. Some donate to support research efforts with the hope that someday others won’t have to endure the toll cancer takes. It’s a grand gesture, and certainly an honor, to have your name on a world-renowned cancer center. But I find it hard to believe that’s the reason the majority of major donors give to a cause. Making a sizable donation to any cause is usually based on a deeply personal reason and a passion to help others.
I, for one, will be “eternally grateful” to Sen. Norris Cotton for securing the grant for the cancer center. I’ll also be “eternally grateful” to the many donors who help ensure the work continues, no matter how many zeros they write on their checks.
Maureen Hirtle
Hooksett, N.H.
The writer is a Dartmouth-Hitchcock volunteer in both Lebanon and Manchester.
Peter Hoe Burling’s got it wrong (“Silence of the Colleges on Voting,” June 10). New Hampshire’s colleges, Dartmouth included, are peopled by bright young men and women who know how to obtain an absentee ballot from their home communities and cast informed votes — national, state and local. No way are they disenfranchised by HB 1264, the New Hampshire voting registration bill that is sitting on Gov. Chris Sununu’s desk. They can and should vote at home.
Just 2 percent of Dartmouth College students are New Hampshire residents as defined by UNH’s in-state tuition guidelines; fewer are from Hanover. Ninety percent of all Dartmouth students live in college dormitories, many others live in other Dartmouth College housing. If Dartmouth has any role whatsoever here, it is simply to remind its citizen-students that an informed electorate that votes is vital to our democracy.
Walter Noll
Etna
There are several serious issues related to Mary Branch’s Washington Post column (“I Was Listening to Biggie. My Neighbors Called the Cops,” June 9), but insufficient room in the Forum to discuss them all. I will limit my comments to two topics: disturbing noise and foul language.
I sincerely doubt that Branch had any intention of upsetting her neighbors and was probably unaware that she was doing so. I take her at her word that she was innocently celebrating the good fortune in her life, and good for her! The column says, though, that she was in an apartment setting, with assumed close quarters to her neighbors, and playing her music loudly, even with lowering of the volume “when a song had a lot of bass,” which admittedly shows some sense of concern on her part for her neighbors.
However, I suspect that many of her neighbors value “peace and quiet,” especially on the weekend (the incident occurred on a Saturday) when many people seek a peaceful respite from the busy and noisy workweek. When out and about, I know I resent having an outdoor (and sometimes indoor) private conversation interrupted by an unnecessary loud sound, including for example, music blaring from an open car. But at least such an interruption is temporary.
In contrast, it is much more upsetting when the disturbance persists for long periods and is suffered in one’s own home. In addition, this disturbance was “’90s pop and hip-hop,” which, in the case of the latter, included obscene lyrics that the Valley News would never subject its readers to see in print, but which Branch likely subjected her neighbors to hear in the privacy of their own homes.
Branch reported in her column that she was pregnant. I believe, after becoming a mother, she will better understand how some of the songs played that day should have been listened to with earbuds and kept outside the alert hearing of a child.
Jim Lacombe
Grantham
I recently saw an automobile race, held in California, that was broadcast on the Velocity channel. The winner was presented, as a prize, with a beautiful pink slip. Not the paper kind, but a silk undergarment worn by many women. How offensive. I almost fell off my recliner.
How could they do such an odious thing? But the damage has been done and can’t be reversed. Now, naturally, an apology by the race organizers is in order. But what can the women of this fair country do? They must not countenance such untoward behavior. They must organize and march against such offensive goings-on. And they must carry signs and placards bearing the appropriate statements. Just what is this old world coming to? All power to the people, I say.
Bob Cattabriga
West Lebanon