Letters: What Do You Think?

Post-Partum Mom “Struggling”

I have post-partum depression. And I am struggling because the resources for women like me are so scarce, as explained in “Wellness: Motherhelp” [March 1, 2012]. Sadly, I feel that I am on the verge of a crisis because the help I so desperately need is not available due to a lack of education on the parts of healthcare providers, and continuity of proper care.

I applaud the post-partum depression bill because it is a step in the right direction, but we have so much work to do to fulfil the intentions of the bill’s passage. Although my primary care physician and midwives knew that I was at an increased risk of developing PPD, I never had a formal screening. I began seeing a therapist, but we realized that I needed medication just to be able to perform day-to-day tasks. I was prescribed medications by my physician, but he is far from properly educated on the subject and their use was unsuccessful. I continue seeing a therapist, but am no longer on medication and the wait list for a psychiatrist is months.

Something is very, very wrong with this picture. Why should it be so difficult to receive treatment for a condition that can affect up to 20 percent of the female population? I cannot put into words how thankful I am for MotherWoman and its unique support group, which has been instrumental to my wellbeing. Having the opportunity to sit with other mothers who were going through some of the same trials and tribulations that I was experiencing was comforting and empowering. It was a very needed space to share my uncensored thoughts and feelings about being a mother. However, it enrages me to know that there are thousands in this state and millions more around the country who are suffering because of a lack of resources and education. I hope that this article sheds some light on this subject and brings post-partum depression into further awareness not only for health professionals, but also in our community.

Elizabeth Reinke, R.N.


Cannabis Reform Needed

Thank you, Advocate, for choosing to feature this news [“Pot Tolerance,” March 8, 2012]. Thank you, Maureen Turner, for your reporting, and thank you, Dick Evans, for your energy and intellect. Marijuana prohibition worsens health and safety for our families and neighborhoods, raises the profits from distributing this nontoxic substance and distributes them to criminals (and corrupts police), and worsens the racial discrimination inarguably demonstrated by the government’s own criminal justice statistics on arrests and imprisonment. The sooner states stop enforcing this counterproductive policy the sooner national policy will change, as the feds rely on state and local police for more than 99 percent of national arrests annually. Thanks for putting this issue in public discourse, as its reform flows from public scrutiny.

Mike Cutler
via Internet


Cannabis prohibition has always revolved around ignorance and fear. There needs to be a well funded superPAC with the purpose of raising money to educate the public. It’s as simple as that.

In addition to the basic fact that [cannabis] is simply less harmful than alcohol and tobacco, more needs to be done to demonstrate the economic benefits of legalization. Innocent people are incarcerated because cannabis has arbitrarily been demonized. It is my hope that those who support cannabis prohibition will be remembered as being on the wrong side of history in the same way as those who justified slavery and eugenics, and those who fought against a woman’s right to vote. What also needs to be brought into the discussion is the deleterious side effects of legal synthetic drugs. Pharmaceutical companies are always airing commercials disclosing those side effects. The texts of those disclosures are longer than the text of the main message of the commercial itself—and those side effects sometimes even include death! Legislators make themselves look like bumbling idiots when it comes to cannabis reform.

Michael Seward
via Internet


Nonviolent Protest Works

Yard signs reading “Nuclear Free Vermont in 2012” began appearing on roadsides in the Brattleboro area at least five years ago. Around that time, at town meetings, the people of Brattleboro, Dummerston, Guilford, Putney, Marlboro and other towns voted overwhelmingly to close Vermont Yankee in 2012. Entergy now says it will run Vermont Yankee until at least 2032, and it seems likely that the government will let that happen unless hundreds of people take inspiration from the history of social change and environmental protection and get arrested for nonviolent civil disobedience.

Such actions are planned for dates on and around March 21, when Vermont law says Vermont Yankee must close. Organizers of the planned civil disobedience can be reached via safeandgreencampaign.org (click “Contact us,” then check the box to “receive more info about affinity groups”) or by calling 413-339-5781.

History shows that nonviolent civil disobedience works. Protests preceded the shutdown of the Shoreham, Yankee Atomic, Millstone I, Rancho Seco, Maine Yankee and at least a dozen other U.S. nuclear power plants. A 2007 article in the Journal of American History did not hesitate to give protesters credit for the decline of the nuclear power industry: “The protesters lost their battle [when Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant opened in 1984], but in a sense they won the larger war, for nuclear plant construction ended across the country in 1986.”

The time for direct action to close Vermont Yankee is now.

Eesha Williams
Dummerston, Vt.

Correction: The photo of band Crescent Hill in “Bridge Out of Darkness,” March 8, 2012, was incorrectly credited to photographer Andrew Snyder. The photographer was Dean Snyder.


Author: Our Readers

Share This Post On

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our mailing list to receive the latest stories and posts from the Advocate. 

You have Successfully Subscribed!