Resident says rationale to eliminate federally funded program baffles

Letter to the Editor,

It would be an understatement to say that I was stunned, dismayed and disheartened when I read the article in the Dec. 7 edition of The Western News about how the county commissioners are critical of a current federal grant for the Maternal Infant Early Childhood Visiting Program. 

Then to read further on in the article that they will likely oppose any renewal of the grant next spring, I just had to shake my head and wonder what the commissioners can possibly be thinking? For certain, they are not thinking about the needs and potential benefits to one of our most vulnerable population segments: infants, children and their families.  

Using the concerns expressed in the article for discussion points, here are the facts about this grant that should dispel any criticism and make it a no-brainer why the program is vital for our community and why it should be supported:

• “It is too costly:”The costs are borne by the federal government 100 percent. Not one penny of the cost comes from Lincoln County directly.

• “It is not helping enough children:” I actually agree with this point, in that I would love to see all children who qualify be covered.  But if 96 children and families are getting services that they would not be getting without the grant, is that not better than ZERO children and families being served?

• The grant provides employment for several home visitors. Have I missed something here, or is not job-creation a goal for Lincoln County?

• “Seventy-three percent of Lincoln County residents don’t want people in their homes:” I confess I don’t have any idea what study this statistic came from, but it’s just another glaring example of how our commissioners are badly in need of some education about the role of the Public Health Department and its nurses and staff. Micki Carvey, RN, was absolutely correct that building trust is key with any family visiting program, and for many years, public health nursing staff have been very successful in doing just that thing, all for the betterment of the health of not just the individual or family, but of the entire community. Bottom line: The workers in this program are welcomed into the homes, so this is a non-issue.

The county commissioners essentially gutted the Public Health Department a year ago when they severely cut the budget, thus eliminating staff and long-established programs.  

Now we have a program, because of the efforts of Ms. Carvey, that helps restore a small segment of what was lost to a vital group of infants and children. They are our future, and to deny them the best possible healthy start to their lives is, in my opinion, not just short-sighted, but unjustifiable.  

The article only quotes one commissioner, but since Commissioner Berget voted against the original grant last spring, it is doubtful he would change his mind about renewal. Perhaps he can explain his rationale in another article.  

Commissioner Downey said, “Everyone has a vote they regret. This one is mine.” As I reflect back on the 2010 election for Ccommissioner, I can assure you that, at this point, those are my exact sentiments. 

—  Susan Horelick

Libby