Published: March 16, 2008 01:21 am            

LETTERS: Sunday March 16, 2008

Age discrimination bill hurt by Chamber



Indiana House Bill 1034, which would have provided a remedy for Hoosier older workers who may be discriminated against because of their age, was in front of the Indiana Senate Labor Committee recently.

Eighty-five percent of all Hoosier older workers are not now protected and could be discriminated against without any legal recourse, thus the need for House Bill 1034.

During the committee testimony, six people who represented various organizations testified in favor of this bill, and the majority of the committee would have voted to send it to the Senate floor. However, the Indiana Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers both testified against the bill.

What does this tell us? That those two organizations are OK with killing a bill that would have protected older workers from discrimination.

The committee was not allowed to vote on this bill, suggesting some back room agreements to keep these remedies for workplace discrimination off the books.

Shame on the Senate leadership, shame on the Indiana Chamber of Commerce.

— Bob White, Jeffersonville



Family thanks area ‘angels’



On March 2, 2008, at approximately 6 p.m., my younger brother, Rob, his wife, Alea, and their son, Jackson, were on their way back home to Henderson, Ky., after spending a day with our family in Louisville.

On Interstate 64, not too far past exit 123 New Albany, they had to make an emergency stop because Jackson had stopped breathing. Alea called 911 as Rob immediately administered CPR.

It turned out that God was truly watching over this family, because of the angels that happened to be traveling down that same interstate and at that same time, whom he sent to help. They were in the form of three beautiful women: Angel 1 was trying to calm Alea and talk to the 911 dispatcher. Angel 2 happened to be a nurse and Angel 3 was on the phone getting medical instructions on what to do and relaying them to Angel 2 while she worked on Jackson.

Jackson was taken to Floyd Memorial Hospital and Health Services where it turned out he had caught the flu and had a slight case of pneumonia. It also turned out Jackson had a febrile seizure, due to the spike in his temperature.

Well Angel 1, Angel 2 and Angel 3, our family would like to thank you from the bottom of our hearts for being such Good Samaritans and such wonderful blessings. We cannot comprehend what may have happened to a 14-month-old boy that day. That baby has his whole life ahead of him. Words cannot express our appreciation. May God bless each and every one of you.

— Martha Smith-Wathen, New Castle, Ky.



Reader: Providence coach needs to take responsibility



Mr. Lefevre (Providence High School’s basketball coach) in Mathew Cress’ article, “If the Shoe Fits, Burn,” implied that the reason they had a mediocre season this year could be laid at the feet of Joe Hinton. Coach Hinton never coached Mr. Lefevre’s two seniors. They were in the eighth grade the last year Hinton was the Providence coach, (Maybe Mr. Cress needs to get his facts straight also.)

Coach Hinton was the fall guy for Providence’s lack of institutional control in a system that had been in place for many years before he ever arrived. Now Lefevre wants to make him the fall guy for his lack of ability to improve Providence’s players.

What is even more interesting is Mr. Lefevre did not bother to give Coach Hinton any credit for developing the players who had such success over the past three years. By Lefevre’s own admission, it took him three years to develop this year’s senior class, which was not that successful.

Joe Hinton has proven that he can successfully turn a program around and develop complete players. In two years at Paoli, he has revived the program just as he did at Providence.

How can a coach who wants to take credit for the players that Coach Joe Hinton developed, turn around, and lay blame for his poor season on a coach who never coached any of his players? I wonder if the word “hypocrisy” is in his vocabulary.

Coach Lefevre and his seniors should accept responsibility for their lack of success instead of placing blame on the people of the past.

— Nick McIntosh, New Albany



Reader: Don’t charge or medical records



On August 22, 2007, I wrote regarding my experience in attempting to obtain copies of the medical records of my son from Clark Memorial Hospital. My attempt to obtain 13 pages was met with a charge of $22.89 for copies of my son’s own medical records; an outrageous practice to say the least. I am sad to inform you that this practice has not changed.

I have heard similar stories of greed regarding many of the providers in our area.

A friend of mine, a 92-year-old widow with Social Security as her only form of income, attempted to transfer care from her doctor’s group in New Albany to another doctor. Her new doctor requested copies of her medical records to aid in her continuing care. Her doctor’s office agreed to supply those records, but only if my friend paid $26.28 for the 34 pages of records.

In Kentucky, the law recognizes that medical records belong to the patient. Kentucky allows the patient to receive one free copy of their medical records and limits hospitals, and doctors, to $1 per page for additional copies. To date, I have not seen any Kentucky hospital or doctor’s office fold as a result of the cost of making copies of medical records for patients. In fact, Kentucky’s medical providers seem to be flourishing in spite of this cost.

This is a law that needs to change. We need to stand up for the rights of patients to have unfettered access to their own medical records, especially when it is in regard to continuing medical care.

— Jeffrey Knoebel, Charlestown



Why make judges partisan?



Although I'm still awaiting confirmation from the Indiana Election Commission on whether Superior Court judge races have to be run as Democrat or Republican (or any party designation), for those vying for Superior Court 2, this voter says: Who cares?!

In what way does being one or the other affect carrying out the responsibilities of being a judge?

To me an acknowledgement of political party in campaign ads connotes that in some way the party's philosophies will have a bearing on how the candidate will make decisions. If not, why mention it?

In the campaign literature I've received, all (the candidates) espouse they will be fair and impartial. How can that be when political parties are inherently partisan?

I know each candidate will adamantly contend that party affiliation will have absolutely no bearing on their application of justice. If so, run on your resume, and leave politics out of it.

There are four candidates I know of running for Superior Court 2 judge, and I know they are all Democrats even though all have not advertised their affiliation. Although I haven't decided for whom I'll vote, I already know for whom I won't and it has to do with the "person," not the party.

— Patsy Melton, Charlestown

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.