Don't disparage the dyslexic
As the founder of a national mentoring organization for students with learning disabilities, I'm accustomed to misconceptions about dyslexia, which causes intelligent people to experience difficultly reading and writing. But it was startling to read the letter “The dyslexia of liberalism” (April 24, VND & Triblive.com) that lumped dyslexia with thought processes that are “backward,” “upside down” and with actions that are motivated “with little regard for facts, reality and common sense.”
The letter's author attempted to insultliberals, but the terms he used attacked the 10 percent to 17 percent of the American population who have dyslexia. I can assure you that dyslexia is bipartisan, affecting those on the left and the right equally.
People with dyslexia have challenges decoding words, but with the right educational support go on to achieve greatness – investment mogul Charles Schwab or Academy Award-winning actress Whoopi Goldberg are two.
Yet under the best circumstances, students with dyslexia are more likely to be bullied, stigmatized and suffer with a poor self-image. They certainly should not be disparaged on the editorial page of their local newspaper.
New York City
David Flink is CEO of Eye to Eye.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Bible under attack
- Voting insanity
- Gruber, then & now III
- Gruber, then & now II
- Gruber, then & now I
- Postal questions
- Family first
- Quarantine quandary
- EPA impoverishing seniors
- On right track
- Not ‘too stupid’