October 21, 2002

Dear Sir,

How can teachers call a wildcat strike! It boggles the mind. Obviously they have no regard for the students put, in good faith, in their hands. It is apparently just a job for them. Now they are demanding parity with other civil servants. A letter to the paper claimed other government employees with a bachelor's degree start at $52,000. Where? Not in my wife's department! Do other civil servants work two thirds of the year and go out and make big money during the summer break? I have friends in teaching in USA who earn between $25,000 and $30,000 a year, after many years teaching.

And as for the greed of the doctors. Perhaps they should move to USA and pay $200,000 to $300,000 per year in professional indemnity insurance. I have been in hospital. The doctor sticks his head in the door and asks if you are okay and then goes off and puts in a claim for his fee. I agree with Dr. McPhee's comments in the Bermuda Sun, October 18th. I haven't as yet met a struggling doctor in Bermuda. How about in Canada? Doctors there are paid civil servants without benefits. Bermuda's teachers and doctors should be thankful and cease being greedy.

WRONG CAREER

Southampton

October 21, 2002

Dear Sir,

I have noticed the many letters appearing in the paper regarding the Child Watch organisation and on the issue of equal rights for fathers. While I agree that fathers should play a vital role in their children's lives, I still feel that custody should continue to be granted to the mother unless she is proved unfit. Let's be realistic here, women do provide better care for the children - that's a mother's inherent nature. These men are complaining about losing their rights - I wonder how many of them helped their wives or girlfriends with childcare when they were in the relationship, or did they just let Mom do it all.

Let's face it, from the day the baby comes home, mom feeds it, bathes it and makes sure all it's needs are met - sometimes at great sacrifice to herself. Mom is usually the one that makes sure that baby has all his or her shots, enrols it in school, goes shopping for clothes and school supplies, makes lunches, keeps track of PTA meetings, and extracurricular activities - the list is endless. Ask Daddy to do this and 99 percent of them would be lost. Some of these men are complaining about the way they are being treated by these women, that they're not being allowed to see their kids, etc. What I want to know is how many of these men offer practical assistance to their ex-wives or girlfriends. Do you offer to go to her house and do a load of laundry, or to help the kids with their homework, or take them to school in the morning? Or do you just show up to take them to town or the Aquarium and all the other ‘fun' stuff on the weekends?

Finally, one comment that Eddie Fisher and other advocates keep making really bugs me. They say that due to all the opposition, expense and aggravation that these fathers go up against, that some of them just get frustrated, ‘give up' and walk out of their children's lives. Well, that statement sums up why women are looked at with preference in these cases. Because, guess what? In 99.9 percent of cases, no matter how much opposition a woman - a mother - goes up against or no matter how frustrated she gets with the system, once that little baby is out of her womb and she holds it in her arms, a woman - a mother - will NEVER just ‘give up' and walk out of her child's life. A woman - a mother - will fight for her child if it takes a million dollars or a million years!

A MOM

City of Hamilton

October 16, 2002

Dear Sir,

It has been pointed out in numerous articles appearing in your paper that the registration of voters in relation to the upcoming 36 single seat constituencies can be accomplished without the need of a new registration. We are told that the Parliamentary Registrar (PR) will be able to advise each voter in which constituency he/she lives using the street address.

Anyone can look at the current register in their post office which is as of June 15th, 2002. This is published annually as prescribed by law. When notice of the next parliamentary election is posted, a new register will be published which will incorporate all updates of information submitted to the Parliamentary Registrar since June 15, 2002. The operative word here is “submitted”. It appears that the electorate is somewhat lackadaisical in this respect. I suppose, assured that one does not need to re-register every year, many have forgotten that changes do have to be submitted.

The upshot of this is that there remain many names on the register, in any particular constituency, of persons who have moved elsewhere but have not advised the PR. This being so, the scenario could come about whereby a number of people move into an area and register there but many others remain in the ‘old' area incorrectly. This defeats the whole ideal of “one man, one vote of equal value”. Indeed, in my own constituency, perusing the register at my post office, and with my own knowledge of the area, I was able to come up with the following:

43 discrepancies out of 180 voters in zone x or 24 percent

10 discrepancies out of 73 voters in zone y or 14 percent

89 discrepancies out of 226 voters in zone z or 39 percent

Equals 142 discrepancies out of of 479 which is an average of 29.6 percent

By that time my poor old eyes - and brain - were creaking so I didn't do any more but I hear from my friends that they have a similar sense of the listings in their areas. People have to be made aware of their responsibility to notify the PR of “registered particulars” ...the blue form at your post office! C'mon folks - respect your privilege of voting. Beware - you could lose that privilege if you are not correctly registered.

UNCOMMON SENSE

St. David's

October 17, 2002

Dear Sir,

I would like to respond to the number of critiques about Fair Haven and treatment here in Bermuda. In the name of recovery, is it not time to move beyond this and get on with the job we are here to do? Let me put the record straight - at least at this point in the history of Fair Haven. The Bermudian treatment staff at Fair Haven is dedicated, hard working and professional - having been trained at some of the foremost international treatment Centres to be found anywhere.

The programme is designed for Bermudians and modelled after successful treatment programmes in the USA, UK and Canada. It treats women of all ages and from all backgrounds - from the woman who medicates herself into addiction with sleeping, pain, tranquillising or other prescription drugs, to those who smoke crack and inject heroin - from the woman who continually abuses alcohol at cocktail parties to the ones who face life every day in a despairing alcoholic/drug haze.

Our job is to change bodies and minds. Putting women on the road to repairing their lives by getting them physically well and off their drug of choice. This is done through a course of medical treatment, addiction counselling and other courses of treatment specific to their needs. As well we have a Family Programme as a vehicle to help repair relationships with the family and other people harmed by addiction behaviour. The Family Programme is also there to help family members understand addiction - and cope and recover from the destruction and pain addiction has brought to their own lives. Beyond this, Fair Haven's programmes are far-reaching and much too complex to explain here in a Letter to the Editor. And to clarify a few misconceptions about Fair Haven. In almost every case we ask for a fee - if you like, a gesture of serious commitment by the client toward their recovery. It is $500 for a month or $16.00 a day - the equivalent of eating lunch at a local restaurant. If someone cannot afford the fee it is waved. In no way does it cover a month of treatment or even the medical services we provide. But we are not here to make a profit.

What Fair Haven is not is a holding tank, a place to hang out as an alternative to jail, a retreat from the streets or a facility where you play the game of check-in/check-out. This is not a cold-hearted rejection of some women, because I do believe Bermuda needs a shelter and other facilities to meet other needs. But Fair Haven is not - and should not be - that place. Spending time and money that way simply ignores the nature of this disease and defeats the resolve of people who are here and really do want to change their lives.

There are groups of people all over this island who understand the problem and want to help in a positive way. They are in the government, independent agencies, our churches, clubs, major local and international business, many, many individuals as well as our volunteers. Very recently I had a call from a school where the children had taken up a collection to help women at Fair Haven. It was enough to melt even the coldest heart. I hope cold hearts are listening.

ANNE VANCE

Executive Director

Fair Haven Treatment Centre