Letters to the Editor | July 10, 2024

Speaking as a retired teacher, the recent Inquirer article concerning the disparity of student discipline between white and Black N.J. schoolchildren seems lacking in one important aspect: Precisely what offense led to the discipline? Even knowing that can be misleading. For example, disruption of classroom instruction can include threats, swearing, violence, a refusal to put away a cell phone or any combination of these. More, was the disruption brief or prolonged? Was the student a repeat offender? Were the parents in any way involved? Only instances of students being reported to the police, when such reports were not mandatory, seem to have facial merit. Perhaps schools could issue a code of conduct to students and parents from day one, because like it or not, institutions like schools require an adherence to rules for the benefit of everyone.

Elwood Corbin, Marlton

Regarding the Inquirer article on disparities in student discipline, was gender, race and other demographic data of the school teachers, staff members or administrators disciplining or expelling students collected, or just student data? Is there a disparity in how different race and gender school administrators discipline children of different races and genders? Are there geographic, socioeconomic, single parent/two parent households, and other demographic data available? Before Joe Johnson, policy counsel for ACLU-NJ, concludes publicly that the disciplinary disparity is racially biased, or Collingswood Superintendent Fred McDowell restructures the Camden County leadership team or we invest in new DEI programs, we should follow N.J. State Sen. Andrew Zwicker’s advice: “It is important that we get the data so that we are not guessing.” Do we have the data we need to make the right decisions?

Fred Walker, Wyndmoor

I had to pinch myself and question what country I’m living in after the Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity was announced. Surely, I reasoned, this could not be the United States of America, where no one is above the law. The news must certainly have been broadcast by Vladimir Putin’s RT media, or maybe even from North Korea. Imagine my surprise and incredulity when I realized it came from our very own conservative justices.

One does not have to be a legal scholar to tease out the reason why the six conservatives on the court again sought to twist themselves into pretzels to give criminal Donald Trump what he wanted. From refusing to hear the case last December, to unadvisedly deciding to hear it several months later, to tossing it back to the lower court (where months will be lost parsing the charges and the inevitable appeal), the justices have been complicit in Trump’s strategy of delay, delay, delay. The court had a real opportunity to make a decision, grounded in decency and principle, while vigorously protecting our democracy. Instead, it chose to bend the knee, kiss the ring, and do what all the other MAGA supplicants do: the bidding of dear leader.

Antoinette Auger, Burlington City, N.J.

In terms of replacing Joe Biden as presidential candidate, are we thinking beyond step one? What happens to Kamala Harris? She may not want to run again as vice president and she is too unpopular to run as president and win. That means selecting a new winnable ticket that has the support of many factions of the Democratic base, including voters of color and politicians such as James Clyburn. An awfully steep hill to climb at this late date. Seems daunting, but I hope someone has a winning idea.

Charlotta Thunander, Wynnewood

There’s no denying that President Joe Biden’s debate performance was shockingly bad. He stumbled frequently and failed to articulate all he’s accomplished in his first term. In retrospect, I wish he and his campaign team had never agreed to debate Donald Trump. Why even grant a convicted felon that lofty platform? Conversely, Trump was smugly confident in speaking his usual litany of lies. It was disgraceful that the two CNN moderators allowed Trump’s many false statements to go unchallenged. Postdebate polls seem to indicate that most voters’ minds weren’t changed by the outcome of one 90-minute debate. Count me among them. Joe Biden has led our nation admirably for the past four years. He is a moral man of high character who is deserving of another term. He is also America’s last bulwark against a corrupt dictator-in-waiting. Nothing less than American democracy is on the line.

Frank Keel, North Wales

Instead of bemoaning and meekly accepting the provisions of the Supreme Court’s recent presidential immunity decision, Democrats, and more specifically President Joe Biden, should seize upon the opportunities it presents to enact bold policy initiatives. For instance, the president should immediately transfer the title and responsibilities of the chief justice from John Roberts to Sonia Sotomayor. He should reenact the original provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and additionally use them to end the practice of gerrymandering. He should issue an executive order reestablishing Roe v. Wade as the law of the land. These and similar actions will both help restore the rights and liberties Americans have recently lost, but also further enhance Biden’s image as a strong and resourceful leader.

Michael L. Berger, Maple Glen

Pennsylvania is facing a health crisis. One-third of adult residents reported symptoms of anxiety or depression in 2023. Deaths from drug overdoses have skyrocketed in recent years to 43.2 per 100,000, more than 10 points higher than the national average. These statistics represent real people who are suffering and require comprehensive care. Pennsylvania needs a robust supply of health-care practitioners to treat patients, but the state lacks this critical resource.

Widespread burnout and challenging environments have driven workers out of the field. Of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties, 53 of them have mental health professional shortage areas within their borders. Amid these challenges, our legislators must support behavioral health treatment. That should include decriminalizing innocent mistakes. The burden of potential legal action undermines the pipeline of future health-care practitioners. Why enter a field where a human error could land you in prison? It also undermines transparency and, therefore, patient safety. Why report an error when it could lead to charges?

Earlier this year, Kentucky became the first state in the country to decriminalize medical errors. The bill, which passed unanimously with the support of the state’s nursing and hospital associations, still maintains penalties for gross negligence and malicious acts. The ability to make informed decisions without fear of criminal retribution is necessary for retaining and recruiting a robust pool of talent who can adequately care for patients. It is heartbreaking, but in treating the sickest patients, adverse outcomes will occur. If health-care practitioners believe that decisions made within their places of work could lead to criminal charges, our gaps in care could become chasms. To benefit patients and these practitioners, Pennsylvania leaders should implement the policy enacted in Kentucky.

Amy L. Davis, Philadelphia

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 200 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.