Thank you for your editorial, “Improve access to psychiatric care” (Star-Advertiser, Our View, March 22). We need better access to good mental health care in rural areas, not more prescribers of medication.
Not every person with mental health problems needs medication.
The increase in the number of psychiatric medications prescribed in the past several years has not led to a concomitant improvement in the mental health outcomes.
Instead, there have been serious issues of addiction and life-threatening side effects.
Inadequately trained prescribers will only add to this problem.
Common psychiatric disorders such as anxiety, depression and PTSD respond well to psychotherapies, often better than medications.
Mental health outreach, crisis intervention and psychotherapy are needed in the rural areas.
Psychologists can and should provide these treatments.
As your editorial noted, we are working on safer and innovative models to address the access issue, while also looking to increase the number of providers.
Iqbal “Ike” Ahmed, MD
Manoa
High court nominee a consensus builder
A newspaper cartoon (Star-Advertiser, March 18) hilariously suggests that if Hillary Clinton were elected president, she might nominate Barack Obama to the Supreme Court.
This recognizes that Obama, a graduate of Harvard Law School and former lecturer on constitutional law at the University of Chicago, would be qualified.
Another qualified candidate is Merrick Garland, recently nominated by Obama for the U.S. Supreme Court.
Among other outstanding qualities, he has a reputation as a consensus builder.
That is just the opposite of U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell, who right after Obama’s 2008 inauguration vowed to do everything possible to render him a one-term president. Since then, obstructionism has been the hallmark of McConnell and most other congressional Republicans — the opposite of consensus building.
Also the opposite of Garland are most congressional Republicans, who have proven to be extraordinarily incompetent and ineffective.
Apparently, they are either ignorant of or opposed to the American Constitution and democracy.
Leslie E. Sponsel
Hawaii Kai
Obama should close gulag at Guantanamo
Peace activists across the planet, including myself, welcome the symbolic gesture of President Barack Obama providing a “nuevo dia” (new day) in starting the long process of normalizing relations between the U.S. and Cuba.
However, our own “Punahou Barry” could make a concrete proposal to dismantle the gruesome gulag at Guantanamo Bay (itself a legacy from America’s imperial past), and then seriously negotiate with the Cuban government to return that territory to its rightful owners, the Cuban people.
Beyond that, truly democratic citizens could perhaps even hope for the day when a more peaceful United States would also dismantle its other imperial naval base at Puuloa (the original place name for Pearl Harbor), and negotiate its return of sovereignty to its rightful owners.
Danny H.C. Li
Keaau, Hawaii island
Mayor’s ‘bromance’ with ‘guru’ befuddling
After reading the article on the visiting “guru” from Utah, Lloyd Pendleton, I concluded that this is the gist of it — Mayor Kirk Caldwell is having a “bromance” with the guy, who has made some progress on homelessness in Salt Lake City (“Expert on fixing homelessness ‘gets it,’” Star-Advertiser, March 17).
“I love the guy,” said Caldwell.
Pendleton said he was “talking to the big guy in the sky” about whether he should consider the offer that the mayor is preparing to make — to have him come here in his retirement and take a position to offer counsel to all the people already attempting to do something about the homelessness problem.
This all befuddles me. I don’t believe we need to pay more people to do what others are supposedly doing.
Darrell Schuetz
Kaneohe
Lying politicians laid groundwork for Trump
Why do protesters want to disrupt their political opponents during and inside their opponents’ political rallies (“Voting for Trump supports violence?” Star-Advertiser, Letters, March 22)?
Why not protest outside, instead of inside, the rallies?
Would there be a different outcome if Donald Trump supporters disrupted their opponents’ rallies?
Political rallies have been degenerating with disruptions since the 1960s. The issues are no longer important during the campaign season. Finding dirt on one another is the accepted political strategy. Career politicians who made false campaign promises have made Trump a growing favorite.
Keoni R. May
McCully-Moiliili
FROM THE FORUM
Readers of the Star-Advertiser’s online edition can respond to stories posted there. The following are some of those. Instead of names, pseudonyms are generally used online. They have been removed.
“Scientists are making gains despite obstacles” Star-Advertiser, March 21:
>> A big mahalo to the Star-Advertiser for bringing forward the outstanding work of the University of Hawaii Cancer Center. There are many Hawaii residents and visitors who are survivors of cancer because of the work done by the Cancer Center.
>> It looks like the center has moved beyond the management issues and has some impressive Hawaii-focused science. I hope the Legislature and UH will support it. This is important for Hawaii.
>> On the cusp of significant breakthroughs, you say. Well, that is what these guys have always said, yet cancers of all kinds have continued to increase, and treatment outcomes are no better than before the so-called war on cancer. Not only that, but the focus is on treatment and management and not cure. In fact, cancer doctors do not even talk about cures but talk only in terms of survival times. This despite billions of dollars being spent on cancer research and treatment. Maybe the intent was good but most of what has happened is those in the cancer research/treatment business have all done very well.
———
“Joining Dems and GOP is possible but unethical”
Star-Advertiser, March 21:
>> If you’re going to have open caucuses, preference polls and primaries, there shouldn’t be any party declaration involved. That’s what “open” means. If the parties don’t want the people to pick their candidates, then they should change the rules.
>> Only card-carrying party members should be allowed in primaries. Everything else is ridiculous.
———
“UH’s big wins could loosen coffers of state Legislature” Star-Advertiser, March 22:
>> In our media-driven society, success in athletics can do more to quickly improve the University of Hawaii’s national brand and its attractiveness to potential enrollees from the mainland (who pay premium tuition prices) than anything the school achieves academically. The faculty and administration may hate to hear that, but it’s the simple truth, and it’s why universities all over the country invest at least enough in their athletic programs to keep them competitive and visible. UH needs to do the same.
>> Any time you can get TV time to promote Hawaii is a good thing. For the Hawaii Tourism Authority to buy time on national television would be more than what was spent to field the team. Millions of people have come to the Islands. Seeing the UH team on TV is a reminder of how great a time they had while there were here.
———
“Rise in cigarette tax would aid center” Star-Advertiser, March 22:
>> Time to find new sources of funding for the University of Hawaii Cancer Center because this strategy is going to backfire. Higher taxes coupled with the recent ban on under-21 smoking will only reduce the revenue stream.
>> No new taxes! If there’s an outdated business plan, fix it.
>> I don’t smoke but this is ridiculous already. A $4 tax on a pack of smokes? As if cigarettes were the only cause of cancer. Eating too much chocolate cake can cause diabetes. Maybe we better tax that, too? Government needs to live within its means, just like the taxpayers.
———
“Zoo’s accreditation is denied” Star-Advertiser, March 23:
>> Is the issue here management or funding? It seems to me that no one is suggesting that the animals are not being cared for or the facilities are out of date. To that extent the staff of the Honolulu Zoo should be commended for their work. I have been to the zoo a couple of times over the past year and liked what I saw.
>> Zoos are for kids, and we’re all kids at heart. It’s a wonderful experience to see the exotic animals and birds. My objection is the prices. Lower the entrance cost, thus increasing attendance and ultimately profits.
>> I used to feel that way (that zoos are a wonderful experience), but now seeing all the animals out of their natural habitat and in cages is depressing. I think zoos should just fade away.
>> If the city can’t afford to fund this institution responsibly, then it should shut the zoo down.
>> If you follow that logic, we should close half our parks.
