Letters to the Editor (April 11, 2024)

Your voice matters 

Editor: 

We all face challenges both big and small, yet we who are survivors of domestic violence and abuse face the ongoing battle of acknowledging those negative emotions throughout the course of our lives. You don’t have to live in silence forever. 

Take that first step and make that appointment here at VSS Serving Central New Mexico (formerly Valencia Shelter Services)!  

Expressing your pain is the first step towards personal healing, and I encourage you to make time for yourself and others who may be going through a difficult time right now in their life. Our advocates at VSS Serving Central New Mexico are present and ready to help you, your family, and friends who are facing the negative effects of child or sexual abuse and domestic violence.   

The door to our counseling services is always open, and if you cannot make the appointment in person, we offer extended services for our clients, including web, phone, and Spanish counseling as well.   

We’re always ready to serve our community here in the valley, but also to the rest of la gente across the state of New Mexico as well! The healing is worth the trip, and you’re in a community of survivors who’ve stood strong and tall in the face of challenges like the one you’re facing at this moment.   

Don’t hesitate, make the call! You’re are the captain of your team, and you can be the difference that brings healing to the rest of the people around you. Be strong and remember that to care for another is to care for yourself also!  

Michael Sanchez  

Belen 

  

Give judges credit 

Editor: 

You might call it the “in vitro furrorization” — the uproar over the Alabama Supreme Court’s recent decision on “in vitro fertilization,” or IVF.   

A fertility clinic at an Alabama hospital was holding several embryos. A patient a the hospital wandered into the clinic, reached in the freezer, took embryos, got a burn from the low temperature, and dropped embryos on the floor. Parents sued.   

The question was whether the parents might have a case because the embryos were unborn children under the Alabama Wrongful Death of a Minor Act.  The Alabama Supreme Court said “yes.” 

The decision was not unanimous. Three judges concurred specially, one concurred in the result, one concurred in the result in part and dissented in part, and one flat out dissented. There were six opinions across all members of the court. A divided opinion went out into a divided nation, and now the case has thrust IVF forward in the public consciousness.  

Despite the divisiveness, there is a point about which much of the  Alabama Supreme Court can agree: judges should stay in their lane.  Policy decisions should be made by the Legislature.   

Consider language from the main opinion, “these types of policy-focused arguments belong before the Legislature, not this Court.” Chief Justice Parker says of IVF regulation “it is for the Legislature to decide how to address this issue.” Justice Mendheim says, “Ultimately, it is the Legislature that possesses the constitutional authority and responsibility to be the final arbiter concerning whether a frozen embryo is protected by the laws of this State.”   

The dissenting Justice Sellers says, “all policy determinations are vested in our legislature[.]” Dissenting Justice Cook, who wrote the longest opinion by far, says, “our Court must stay within the bounds of our judicial role.”  

Now, of course, it is possible for judges to disagree about what staying in their lane looks like. Give them credit for recognizing the need to stay there. It is good for the rule of we, the people, when the courts leave it to we, the people to make the rules. 

Jonathan Gardner 

Los Lunas