In State Care

Mr. Danny Hakim and Mr. Russ Buettner

Journalists, The New York Times Company

620 Eighth Avenue

New York, NY 10018

Re: In State Care, 1,200 Deaths and Few Answers

Dear Mr. Danny Hakim and Mr. Russ Buettner,

After reading your article on the mistreatment of disabled individuals in state care and the continued lack of proper precautions taken by the state in order to break the continuity of casualties I am no more or less an advocate for your cause. I understand the intent of the article to raise awareness of the callous nature the government takes toward the losses of so many who depend on state care in order to survive but I was barely persuaded to do anything about it. There were many examples of cases that any reasonable mind would have immediately inspected due to the unnatural patterns but in all honesty this is the state your berating. There are a million different people working in the state that may or may not care that care for the disabled is insufficient. The issue is too complicated, there are much too many hoops to jump through to ever change something within state policy. That is why sometimes many issues are pushed to the side and labeled as unimportant, which I think is the case for state care for the disabled.

Of all the issues that the world has to present to the state disabled care is not at the top of the state's priorities. This is written, of course, with no disregard on my part but with an strident realization that the state is not run with the good of the few in mind. Although the death of over 1200 people and counting may seem large to many the state sees this number as only a statistic. In fact, New York City alone has over a million residents to look after, let alone New York State. There is just too much to be done and relying on the state to do all that is necessary is just the same as wishing on a star.

Now, the argument can be brought to light that it is the state's responsibility to take care of its citizens. We, the tax paying, family oriented majority deserve the reassurance of excellent care for our loved ones, disabled or not. The question can also be asked why a problem important to some of the people should not be regarded with as much clout as issues affecting a larger number of people. All the debates in the world could be held on this topic alone and still no answer will ever be as sufficient because in reality there is no answer.

No answer implies no solution but in a way that is not true. There is a solution to the issue of insufficient care to the disabled addressed in your article. However, the solution may very well seem like a compromise to some and to others absolutely indigestible. The solution is to understand the limits