D-H Action Was Disruptive

I am writing in reference to statements made by John P. Kacavas in a column in the July 19 Valley News (“Critics Not Telling the Truth About D-H and State Hospital.” I cannot speak for the practitioners that he speaks of, but I can speak for the paragraph that starts, “They falsely claim that D-H has closed its inpatient psychiatric unit.” He goes on to state that “D-H continues to maintain its high-quality inpatient psychiatric care without disruption.”

This may be true from where he sits as the D-H chief legal officer, however, I am a registered nurse employed in the Inpatient Psychiatric Unit at DHMC. The fact is that we have provided two units for patient care, one a nine-bed unit, the other a 12-bed unit. Staff was informed on June 28 that the nine-bed unit would be closing on July 1, temporarily, while we helped staff NHH. The nine-bed unit closed on June 28. I was called off from work for my June 28 shift, as the unit had closed. Our 12-bed unit is still open and, yes, we provide excellent care to our patients.

I don’t understand how Mr. Kacavas can think that the closure of our nine-bed unit has not been disruptive. We were short-staffed; now we are overstaffed until the other unit reopens. This means that staff is floated to other units, on an as-needed basis. If we have more staff than what is needed to cover the shift, and we are not needed on our unit, we are called off. How is this not disruptive?

Also, many of our patients are familiar to us and with the facility. It is upsetting to those patients that the other unit is closed. Not to mention the patients who have longstanding relationships with some of the practitioners who have been sent to NHH, and are finding themselves, in moments of crisis, having to seek a different practitioner. To those patients, it is discouraging to lose the ability to seek care from a practitioner with whom they have built a trusting relationship. It’s very difficult to have to start fresh with a stranger.

Susan Carver

Newbury, N.H.

Don’t Just Pick on Norwich

Last Wednesday’s editorial, “Frugal Norwich,” seems to be another “poke” from the Valley News at the way things are done in Norwich. Sort of irresistible, I guess, to go that way, but I’d rather see our newspaper actually report some news instead of publishing cherry-picked numbers when it takes Norwich to task. For example, instead of comparing the Norwich town manager salary to a single other town, Hartland for some reason, why doesn’t our paper actually do some research and publish what other area towns are paying their staff? And I mean all their staff!

Does Norwich spend about the same, more than or less than other towns with comparable populations? Is Norwich overstaffed, understaffed, or comparable to other towns? I’d like to see that kind of reporting. I don’t want to see your editors suggesting we pay more for a town manager . . . only to be followed up by a Jim Kenyon column suggesting Norwich pays too much and only the rich can afford to live here. We can’t win!

Harry Roberts

Norwich

Trump Is Not a Fascist

In trashing Donald Trump, Forum writer Len Ziefert (“The Danger of Trump,” July 22), offers no better alternative. If he is implying that we should support Hillary Clinton, it should be noted that she represents the essence of fascism, which is corporate-government collusion without all the incidental attributes. If Donald Trump is guilty of some of these rhetorical attributes, that is still preferable to Clinton’s full-blown imperialist corporatism.

Mr. Ziefert’s reference to Nazism in conjunction with Trump is not credible. Has Trump stated that he will invade other countries? No. Has he indicated there will be repression of dissent at home? No. Do not be distracted by careless rhetoric; Donald Trump is not a fascist.

Dan Leggett

Hanover

Bullying Is Undemocratic

Thank you for your coverage of the New Hampshire representative who publicly urged that Hillary Clinton be executed. (“Harsh Words On Clinton Make Waves,” July 22). Also for your remarks about him in the next day’s editorial.

As the article pointed out, when confronted with his words, he only dug in his position. I think this is an opportunity for all of us to examine bullying from outside the protective charisma bubble of that representative’s favorite presidential candidate.

Those of us who provide therapy for both childhood bullies and domestic assault survivors likely noticed in the article that this man’s violent words came after a history of success with lesser-violent words. As with most bullies, we see his tendencies incubating in the environment of a hands-off response to most male violence.

Some years ago, Nan Stein, now a nationally recognized researcher on school bullying, spoke at the elementary school in Norwich. She told parents and teachers that when peer-identified school bullies were interviewed, they shared a common response: “Nobody told me it was wrong.” Stein’s take-home message was that all adults need to consistently tell all children that bullying is wrong, unfair and undemocratic.

Think about what we tend to ignore. A boy pesters a girl who keeps telling him to stop. A swimmer splashes water into another’s eyes, and when told that it hurts, continues, pretending not to care. I think that any distance between such local examples and this lawmaker’s militant extremism is simply a matter of time, rehearsal and degree.

Because we in the U.S. share a democratic Constitution, we can speak up much, much earlier and with good effect for everyone. Because in a democracy, bullying is not just unkind, it is undemocratic.

Robert Spottswood

Norwich

I’m a Believer in ‘Shrek’

What a wonderful way to end a weekend, and so many of us did, leaving the Barn Playhouse having seen Shrek, the Musical — a thoroughly delightful time. Seeing smiles on so many faces on the porch following the performance was proof enough. Enjoy — I surely did.

Janet Miller Haines

New London