Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Some 'Profiles in Courage'

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Some 'Profiles in Courage'

    The Jewish Journal of greater L.A, CA
    Aug 23 2007


    Some 'Profiles in Courage'

    By David A. Lehrer and Joe R. Hicks



    The past two weeks have offered insight, as few times do, into
    whether our leaders and opinion molders can set aside personal and
    political agendas in the face of adversity and crisis and be willing
    to do the right and courageous thing.

    Locally, the closing of King-Harbor after a scathing federal report
    on its tragic shortcomings offered all the local players who have
    talked for years about King-Harbor or its predecessor, King-Drew, an
    opportunity to "do the right thing." It provided a moment when they
    could either transcend their prior rhetoric and recognize the gravity
    of the situation and the need for leadership, or return to the tired
    positions of earlier days.

    As anyone who has followed the issue knows, the stage had been set
    long ago; the "Killer King" moniker was not a new one on the streets
    of South Los Angeles. A Los Angeles Times series pointed out nearly
    three years ago that King-Harbor has long had serious, deep-seated
    problems for which there was more than enough blame to go around.

    Yet one could almost write the script: Los Angeles City Councilwoman
    Janice Hahn decried the County Board of Supervisors for spending
    money on consultants and advisers who didn't save the hospital from
    failing its accreditation tests -- it was the board's fault.
    Columnist and activist Earl Ofari Hutchison bemoaned the "lack of
    resources" that the hospital was forced to deal with and ascribed its
    failings to it being short-changed. Los Angeles Times columnist Erin
    Aubrey Kaplan assailed the "black middle class" for abandoning
    King-Drew and contributing to its demise. Each viewed the same stark
    facts through their individual, well-worn prisms.

    To each of their assertions one can only ask: For Councilwoman Hahn
    was the answer for the supervisors to give up three years ago after
    and numerous well-documented incidents had pointed up how profound
    the problems were, rather than pursue every avenue to remedy a
    manifestly desperate situation? For Earl Hutchison, was the answer to
    ignore the facts that King-Drew spent more per patient than 75
    percent of the public and teaching hospitals in California (according
    to a 2002 state audit), or ignore that it spent $685 per patient more
    than County-USC and $815 more than Harbor-UCLA (in 2002) or that in
    2003 it billed 299,804 hours of overtime -- 61 percent more than
    Harbor-UCLA, which has some 400 more workers and took in 91 percent
    more patients? Or for Erin Aubrey Kaplan, was the answer for
    middle-class blacks to put their lives at risk to evidence
    "solidarity" with King-Drew when even the disadvantaged folks who
    live in the neighborhood (not the "middle-class blacks" that Kaplan
    derides), when given a choice, went somewhere else. Births at
    King-Drew in 2005 were 15 percent of the total a decade before. Given
    that women have nine months to plan where to give birth, they had
    ample time to pick anyplace but King-Drew to have their babies. Who
    could blame them, except Erin A. Kaplan?

    Amid all the blame casting, there was scant attention paid to the
    courage that surfaced during the King-Harbor controversy. Supervisor
    Zev Yaroslavsky withstood being called a racist to lead the Board of
    Supervisors' to deal with what had been treated for decades as a
    sacrosanct part of another supervisor's domain and "racial spoils."
    Yaroslavsky made a very tough, but ultimately critically important
    decision. He forced change at virtually no political gain to himself
    -- few outside South L.A. were animated about this issue and there
    were virtually no voices that praised his commitment to make things
    right.

    Nor was much written or said about the Los Angeles Times' willingness
    to do an in-depth study of the hospital and its shortcomings. They
    too were (and are) accused of being racists and even assailed as the
    "cause" of the hospital's demise. Knowing the flack they would
    receive, they still chose to do a huge public service by publishing
    their expose (and win a Pulitzer Prize) at the risk of local attacks
    questioning their motivations and intent.

    Honesty and an opportunity for courage arose for the Jewish community
    as well over the past week. It had its own melodrama centering on
    legislation pending in the Congress.

    H.R. 106 may be voted on this fall in the House of Representatives.
    It would recognize as genocide the massacre by the Turks of hundreds
    of thousands of Armenians from 1915-1918. Several major Jewish
    organizations have refused to support the resolution (many of these
    organizations, ironically, have full- fledged Holocaust education
    programs).

    Over the past week, the disconnect between rhetoric and actions came
    to a head in Watertown, Mass., where the City Council and a large
    Armenian community chose to sever ties with an Anti-Defamation League
    "anti-hate" program in which it had participated. Their condition for
    participation: an ADL endorsement of HR 106.

    The ADL has explained its reluctance to endorse the resolution as
    being animated by concerns for the security of the Turkish Jewish
    community and the strategic relationship between Israel and Turkey.
    An ADL national spokesperson opined that the genocide question should
    be resolved by historians.

    Alan Dershowitz wrote in response to the controversy:

    "The matter [of the Armenian genocide] is not subject to
    interpretation.... For any organization or official to believe that
    there are differing sides to the Armenian Genocide is as much an
    outrage as it would be for Germany to say that the work of Jewish
    scholars, witnesses and victim testimonies represented merely the
    'Jewish side of the Holocaust.' To deny genocide victims their
    history and suffering is tantamount to making them victims again."

    And yet denial, for seemingly well-motivated reasons, is precisely
    what has taken place.

    The New England ADL regional board took issue with the national
    policy and the ADL regional director, in an act of personal courage
    and in the interest of truth, publicly questioned the national ADL
    position. He was promptly fired.

    In light of this week's controversy, the ADL has now, belatedly,
    decided to acknowledge that the Armenian massacre over 80 years ago
    was, in fact, a "genocide." It still refuses to endorse the
    congressional resolution (HR 106), which memorializes that fact.

    The credibility and position of minority communities are not advanced
    by the failure of their leadership to speak courageously and
    forthrightly about issues of the day, especially difficult,
    contentious and complex ones. Dissembling and post hoc rationales for
    failing to take tough stands don't cut it. Courage and straight
    talking will.

    South L.A. will, hopefully, have a hospital that won't have the term
    "killer" in front of its name, because of the very difficult steps
    that have been taken over the past two weeks and the hospital is
    reborn. Perhaps, Turkish governmental leadership will begin to
    confront its dreadful past vis-?-vis the Armenians when they realize
    they can no longer successfully bully organizations to ignore history
    to its benefit.



    David A. Lehrer is president and Joe R. Hicks is vice president of
    Community Advocates Inc. (www.cai-la.org), a Los Angeles-based human
    relations organization.

    http://www.jewishjournal.com/home/p review.php?id=18092

    From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Working...
X