Letters to the editor Feb. 3

Cause and effect

Recently the Flathead commissioners published a letter to the community outlining a strategy to decrease the homeless population in our area, saying “the simple truth is that providing homeless infrastructure has the predictable consequence of attracting more homeless individuals to our community.”

Have the commissioners swapped cause and effect? If there were no homeless dying in our community (seven in 2022), then the Warming Center would not have been needed, and would not be open. It’s the presence of the homeless that led to the presence of the Warming Center, not the other way around.

I agree that there is a problem and we need to address it, but those who take the time to look at the facts find that the vast majority of homeless in the Flathead Valley are local. They didn’t “come here” when they heard there was a Warming Center. The commissioners think the homeless come here for the services, whereas if I were homeless in the winter I’d darn sure move to Arizona for the climate. I laud the commissioners for publishing a letter that will ultimately promote constructive discourse.

The implied message of the letter is asking the people of our area to defund the Warming Center. Given that the purpose of the Warming Center is to prevent people from dying, removing this “homeless infrastructure” might well result in decreased numbers of homeless. Is this really the type of solution that the majority of local voters want?

Local aid organizations have a more nuanced and informed view of the systemic causes and potential solutions. I’d urge the commissioners to use these organizations as a resource to learn more about this complex problem, and then join them in instituting sensible solutions our community can feel good about. Please email the commissioners with your thoughts.

— Walter Rowntree, Kalispell

April Fools?

When I read the recent letter from the Flathead County commissioners, I was astounded and thought perhaps the date was April first. Then I was prompted to ask when the next election for a county commissioner is.

— Skeeter Johnston, Whitefish

Motivated to donate

I want to thank the Flathead County commissioners for their message about homelessness in the valley. I could say a lot of things — mock them, get angry and call them names, or shake my head in absolute disbelief at their lack of compassion.

But instead I want to thank them for reminding me it is time to send my donation to one, or perhaps several, of the wonderful, caring organizations working here in the Flathead to help the unhoused. I call on the rest of my caring neighbors to do the same.

A few suggestions: Abbie Shelter, Flathead Warming Center, Housing Whitefish, Samaritan House, Sparrow’s Nest of NWMT, and I’m sure there are more I have missed.

Do it today, it is still cold out there, even if the commissioners haven’t noticed.

— Kris Bruninga, Kalispell

Partisan manifesto

Recently the Flathead County commissioners penned a letter to the public condemning homelessness and in particular Kalispell’s handling of homeless services. They have essentially adopted a Field of Dreams mentality of “if you build it they will come” believing that if you provide services to the unhoused you’ll be overrun by neighbors in search of such services. As a former public policy analyst for the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless I can guarantee you this is a false relationship and a partisan proclamation not an informed statement based upon research.

Locally and nationally, the leading causes of homelessness are a lack of affordable housing, a lack of health care, unemployment/low wages and of course addiction, mental health and trauma struggles. For women and children violence and divorce are too often the leading causes. All of these causal factors are rooted in bad public policy and unsympathetic elected officials like our Commissioners who have demonstrated no leadership in housing, health care, balanced job growth, living wages or preventive services like counseling and in patient care. In fact, their love affair with short-term rentals has worsened the problem.

If supportive services were the cause of homelessness, then states like Colorado, Georgia, Oregon, New York, California, North Dakota and Idaho would be overrun because in 2020 they were rated by the National Alliance to End Homelessness and the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness as among the best in offering homelessness assistance programs (while Montana joined West Virginia, Arkansas and Oklahoma as among the worst).

But then, this letter has little to do with a community challenge like our unhoused neighbors. It is clearly a partisan manifesto the likes of which Marjorie Taylor Greene, Paul Gosar and our own Matt Rosendale and Annie Bukacek would be proud. Here’s what happens when hate comes to town.

— Pat Malone, Columbia Falls

Artificial Intelligence

If we needed one more clear sign that humans as a species may be doomed, look no further than the current surge of Artificial Intelligence (AI).

The latest news reports that AI now has an app that writes homework assignments as well or better than the average student. So of course there’s another new app that aids teachers in detecting AI generated papers vs. a students real work.

Being an old guy from another era (born in 1945), I was somewhat alarmed some 20 years ago as a substitute teacher in local schools, when I discovered students in math classes were allowed to use pocket calculators to solve math problems, instead of adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing in their head, or with pencil and paper working it out. Now of course they use phones to answer most everything.

What’s next? An app that speaks for you? Two students meet in the hallway, and without even looking up, punch in an app on their phones that spits out a greeting, carries on a brief conversation with the other students phone, says goodbye, and the students continue on their way with nary a spoken human word between them.

How long before the only thing students learn in school is how to operate a so-called smart phone? How long before they lose completely the ability to write, do math, speak to one another? A brief conversation with some of our current students might confirm that many have already lost the ability to articulate a complete sentence or use any proper English other than slang.

Thanks goodness for our speech and debate programs where some of the best and brightest are still learning to communicate orally in understandable English. But even there I noted while judging two rounds of debate at the recent Whitefish High tournament, students are now allowed to have their laptop computers with them, and even use them at the podium to look up and read evidence.

At what point will our young people no longer be able to function in the real world without the aid of electronic devices? Or for some, has that moment already arrived? Perhaps it is time for us to look up from our phones and computers, make eye contact with our fellow humans, speak and write some actual, intelligible words, and communicate with one another about not only the perils we face, but to experience the joys of actual human contact. Our lives may depend on it.

— Gil Jordan, Coram

Grizzly ‘invasion’

In his Jan. 19 column, after claiming to love wildlife, Warren Illi conjures up disproportionate fear and hatred of grizzly bears in detail including complaining about threats to his fruit trees and vegetable garden.

Amid his diatribe, apparently without any self-consciousness, he says that grizzlies have “well-known short tempers and natural tendency to lash out and attack and kill anything they feel is a threat to their food or personal space. Grizzlies can and do attack and kill humans as well as domestic animals.”

Sounds to me like Warren is looking into a mirror and describing some human behavior.

He portrays grizzly bears as “invading” as they return to their former habitat that has been recently overrun by humans, including, as he points out “the Flathead Valley with its current 108,000 residents and millions of annual recreation visitors.”

Warren’s cognitive dissonance is remarkable and self-serving.

He ends his case against grizzly bears with, “Do you want dangerous wild animals in your backyard?” Supposedly civilized humans are generally more dangerous, and we moved into grizzly bears’ living room. I think most of us do want to protect grizzly bears and are willing to make some adjustments to our lifestyles.

— Larry Campbell, Darby

Unsettled science

I feel compelled to challenge the statements made on these pages regarding the “safety and success” of gender affirming care.

Just recently, researchers examined the “Dutch Studies” the “gold standard” supporting such therapy, and discovered major flaws. The methodology in these studies reveals cherry picking of data, outcome bias and agenda-driven conclusions while failing to rigorously evaluate the risks of the therapy. Additionally, the assertion of reduced suicide rates following transition, often used to convince reluctant parents to consent to treatment, remains unsubstantiated.

These discrepancies led Finland, Sweden, England and Florida to place a hard pause on gender-related therapies in minors.

Those of us reaching a certain age with normal genitourinary anatomy know how problematic this system may become as we age. I can only imagine the extent of lifelong complications that are bound to occur when such fragile anatomy is surgically altered at an immature age. Combine this with the likelihood of life-long and irreversible sterility from hormone blockers and arrested normal maturation processes, and it becomes clear that gender-affirming care should be a decision for a consenting adult. One who can agree to live with the consequences, not a minor who can’t yet envision him or herself beyond the age of 20.

As the justification for so-called gender-affirming care becomes more questionable and the victims reach adulthood, I can foresee a significant rise in litigation. During my 40 years as a physician, I confess I have never been a fan of malpractice attorneys. However, when I contemplate what physicians do to children in the name of gender affirmation, I may have to re-evaluate my position. I fear the oath we took to “do no harm” is being violated.

— Dr. David Ingram, Kalispell