Letters to the Editor | June 19, 2024

Mayor Cherelle L. Parker’s cleanup initiative is to be applauded, but the thought process is backward. It is great to clean up the layers of trash, but how did the trash get there in the first place? This is the question that should be asked and addressed to implement a solution. Is there a cultural problem in Philadelphia (and other large cities) that accepts the populace discarding trash improperly? An anti-littering initiative — with consequences for offenders — would make more sense. Prevention.

Richard Smith, Lansdale, rgrantsmith@lansdale.us

A recent article shared great news about decreasing gun violence numbers in Philadelphia, but The Inquirer couldn’t seem to imagine a version of success based on anything but punitive enforcement. Neither thought nor mention was given to the many community organizations that are actively working for peace or the tens of thousands of dollars distributed under anti-violence grant initiatives. A vast neighborhood movement has been underway, addressing violence through mentorship, community-building, food distribution, diversionary programming, etc. — all focused on restoring our community.

Nor did The Inquirer consider the possibility that, after six years, the seeds planted by reform-minded District Attorney Larry Krasner might be bearing fruit. The purposeful reduction in years of supervision that started in 2018 means that, in 2024, many men are finally returning to their neighborhoods. We know, empirically, that an increase in fathers and male mentors in communities corresponds with a decrease in violent crimes. Given that most incarcerated Philadelphians are Black, male, and from the neighborhoods most plagued by crime, might this deep drop in crime be proof of Krasner’s concept? After four years of talking about changing an incarceration-based model, isn’t it time The Inquirer considered exploring answers beyond policing and convictions?

Robert Kaplowitz, cofounder, We Embrace Fatherhood, Ardmore, rob@wefphl.org

On April 22, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services released the long-awaited regulations on minimum staffing in nursing homes. The staffing standards are a good first step: Nursing homes are required to have a registered nurse on duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and there is a minimum staffing standard of 3.48 hours total direct care per resident per day. This is a minimum, not a ceiling. Nursing homes will still have to staff according to residents’ care and acuity needs.

However, the staffing rules are under threat due to the introduction of a resolution under the Congressional Review Act, which would repeal these protections and prevent the agency from ever developing any staffing standards. Additionally, the powerful nursing home industry has filed a lawsuit to dismiss the new standards on the grounds that implementation is not practical, and CMS is acting beyond its authority. Three-quarters of all U.S. nursing home residents, including those in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, live in facilities that do not have sufficient nurse staffing to provide them with a safe environment and meet their care needs.

Consequences of inadequate staffing diminish residents’ quality of life and lead to delayed care, poor quality care, harm, injuries, and deaths of residents. I urge our congressional representatives to stand up to the nursing home industry and stand on the side of protecting our most vulnerable. There are some excellent nursing homes, including many in the Philadelphia area. However, the industry’s lawsuit takes focus, time, and money away from what is needed: adequate and appropriate care for their residents. It is our hope that advocates, the nursing home industry, and government regulators can all work together to take care of those unable to take care of themselves.

Jerold E. Rothkoff, Cherry Hill

Language is important; words do count. Would someone please tell the folks in Alabama or anywhere else who crusade against in vitro fertilization because “embryos are people” that IVF does not involve embryos; it involves fertilized eggs, or zygotes. Many are dispelled before women even feel their presence. It takes about two weeks for the zygote to travel to and become embedded in the uterus. Only then do zygotes become embryos. There is no religious or philosophical agreement on when human life begins, but biologically, the critical moment is not fertilization but implantation.

Marie Conn, Hatboro

Several months after the deadly terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, my husband and I took a trip to Marrakesh, Morocco. Our guide was a friendly, knowledgeable man with whom we shared long days, meals, and informative conversations. We thought he had become a warm acquaintance we would keep in touch with. However, at the conclusion of our last dinner, his eyes and voice changed, and he gave us a prescient warning. “9/11 was only the beginning,” he said. “Do you know that as we speak, we are infiltrating your universities and the minds of your young?” The horror in Gaza today, beginning with the long-planned Hamas attack on innocents in Israel on Oct. 7, has unleashed a torrent of palpable antisemitism, staining long-respected American universities and making acts of antisemitism commonplace. How else to explain the conversation I had outside of a store where I shopped for Father’s Day cards?

While paying my bill, a Muslim woman and her daughter, about 10 years old, were next to me in line. The woman was wearing a shirt that read “Journalist” in bold letters. Walking out of the store together, I asked what newspaper or journal she wrote for. She explained that her shirt was to honor the journalists who were killed in Gaza. I then asked, “How can a two-state solution in this tormented area be achieved?” In her response, her eyes held the same rage as our Marrakesh guide, her voice the same hatred. “There can be no two-state solution,” she said. “Israel must be destroyed, along with the Jews who protect it.” Unless addressed, this overt rise in antisemitism — an expression of hate, divisiveness, and discord — foreshadows catastrophe for our country.

SaraKay Smullens, Philadelphia

5th Square, Philadelphia’s urbanist PAC, feels compelled to respond to some of the points made in a recent Inquirer article about the bid to designate Washington Square West as a historic district. Our primary reason for opposition is because several parking lots are included as being historically “contributing properties.” Designating parking lots as historic properties is irresponsible in an era of skyrocketing housing costs and climate change. Surface parking lots are ripe for building dense housing rather than being impermeable concrete wastelands.

Preservationists claim the soil underneath parking lots may contain “valuable archaeological artifacts.” We agree, and preservation of history is important. However, there is no one in Philadelphia who is paying the likely exorbitant funds to find these artifacts. Secondly, historic designation raises housing prices and discourages developers from building housing. Fewer homes mean higher housing costs and these higher housing costs won’t stay in Washington Square West. A historic designation in one neighborhood results in gentrification and displacement across the city.

Finally, housing density in amenity-rich neighborhoods is an important way to keep people in their homes. When demand outstrips supply, homeowners face rising property taxes and limited solutions. Homeowners feel pressure to sell and leave the neighborhood. When there is an abundance of new housing — affordable and market-rate — there is less demand on existing housing stock. We recognize that the need for housing affordability must be balanced with the need for preserving history. While we oppose blanket designations, we support designations on a more thoughtful, property-by-property basis. This will allow more people to experience Washington Square West’s rich history, rather than leaving these to be the province of a wealthy few.

Fae Ehsan and Steph Davis, volunteers, 5th Square, 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.