(An important topic that deserves our attention, so I moved it “upstairs.” – promoted by Sue Prent)

 Police discovered a Meth lab in the basement of two of the welders working on Vermont Gas’s new natural gas pipeline in Franklin County, VT. Investigations are unearthing evidence that Charles Davis and Dustin Hollis have been cooking and distributing the drugs to other workers as well as supervisors who were allegedly taking the methamphetamine while on the job.

 In a remark clearly indicative of the priorities of Vermont Gas, vice president of operations Marc Teixeira released a statement saying, “We’re obviously disappointed that this would happen. The project is too important.” The project is of utmost importance to Teixeira, that much is abundantly clear.

       The media coverage of this pipeline incited others to express their concerned about the importance of the safety of the people and habitats along the five miles of pipeline from St. Albans to Georgia where this potentially compromised pipe has already been built by C&G before the drug use was uncovered. Vermonters are justifiably angry at this corporation for putting profits before people and endangering communities and ecosystems when the next segment of pipeline is being granted political immunity in many regards under the guise of providing for the “public good.”

       One more group to add to the list of those who’s “public good” would be a whole lot better off without the meddlesome greedy interventions of VGS is the construction workers they employ. These crews are being forced to work 12 hour days, 6 days a week, because of pressure by VGS to make up time and push through as quickly as possible before anyone has time to muster a counter-attack to the obscenities that companies who engage in the extraction and transport of fracked gas commit (in the name of job creation and environmental efficiency, of all things).

            One of the many fundamental problems with Vermont Gas is that they bully everyone else into corners where they have no choice. In an economy where jobs are hard to find, people can’t afford to be choosy about how they earn a living, even if that necessitates finding extreme, dangerous, and illegal methods of getting through the workweek. These men were not dabbling in high-risk substance abuse for fun, they were not doing it because they don’t care about their job; they are not inherently incompetent employees. They were doing it because they needed a job and Vermont Gas set unreasonable demands that no one short of a superhuman could keep up with. Though fear due to potentially faulty welds is entirely justified, reasoning should not be that the crew was negligent. Safety hazards, leaks, and environmental sloppiness and destruction that will surely ensue from this project are byproducts of corporate policy deliberately leaving workers no choice but to rush at the expense of their health and their craftmanship.

      Vermont Gas must rush their processes so carelessly fast in order to keep just ahead of common sense because any amount of logic employed leads to the conclusion that fossil fuels and especially more dangerous and dirty forms such as fracked gas are never a good idea.

If they can’t allow enough time for their workers to keep up without resorting to desperate measures,

If they can’t allow enough time for reasonable negotiations with landowners battling for their rights to choose not to have a demonic river of toxicity leeching from out of their backyard into their family’s drinking water,

If they can’t allow enough time for the very serious and legitimate concerns of the public to be heard and adequately addressed,

 How can they even begin to claim that anything they do is in the name of the “public good?”

For the details of the arrest and bust, here’s the news story on wcax https://www.google.com/search?…

 Loading ...

Sometime last week, when no one was looking, Governor Shumlin signed the Peter Shumlin Bailout Act of 2014 — er, that is, the campaign finance reform bill. You know, the one stitched together by a team of mad scientists during the Legislative offseason? The one that’s far worse than the watered-down version that got stuck in the mud last spring?

The one that puts the lie to the notion that Democrats are in favor of limiting the influence of money in politics? Yeah, that’s the one. As first reported last week by Paul “The Huntsman” Heintz:

Asked Thursday afternoon when it would be signed into law, Gov. Peter Shumlin’s spokeswoman Sue Allen said the deed’s already been done.

… If you were waiting for a public signing with a crowd of supporters and plenty of pens to give away, you apparently didn’t miss anything.

Following Heintz’ inquiry, Allen released a public statement. Here it is, in its glorious entirety:

Jeebus H. Christ. If that announcement were any briefer, it’d disappear into a black hole of its own formation. It’s safe to say the Governor’s office is fully aware of how embarrassing this bill is.    

The bill, for those just joining us, substantially raises the limits on individual and corporate giving in a way that immediately benefits precisely one person: Peter Shumlin. He’s the only state officeholder or candidate who’s maxed out a significant portion of his donor base. He’s already got a campaign kitty rich enough to discourage any sensible Republican, and now he’ll be able to go back to his core supporters and ask for even more.

In the slightly longer run, the bill will solidify the two major parties by allowing them to collect lots more money and funnel unlimited amounts to their candidates. This will help offset the influence of big-money independent groups like Vermonters First and Campaign for Vermont, but it will also make it a whole lot harder for independent and third-party candidates to compete. Hence my other name for the bill, the Screw The Progs Act of 2014.

A few good provisions survived the behind-the-scenes hacksaw surgery that produced this bill: a slight increase in campaign finance reporting, a requirement that large single donors to superPACs be identified in the groups’ advertisements (read: Lenore Broughton), and the long-overdue institution of online filings. Currently, campaign finance reports are filed on paper and the information is not searchable; the new system is a genuine step forward in transparency.

But otherwise, this bill is a gigantic disappointment. Lawmakers who’d sought tighter limits on money in politics gamely defended the bill as, basically, better than nothing, and a starting point for future legislation. Yeah, well, when the party supposedly interested in limiting money in politics has total control of the process and THIS is the best they can come up with? I’m afraid it’ll be a cold day in Tegucigalpa before this issue sees the light of day again.  

(Big problem. There is also a bill in the Senate that would have the same effect. Enough of this crap already.   – promoted by kestrel9000)

Hunters and gun owners beware. Now is the time to get on the phone and end the silence. These anti gun “nuts” are relentless. They have just introduced yet another bill and this one will effectively remove your ability to hunt on thousands of acres of Vermont land and no I am not being overly critical in the slightest bit.  

Presently we Vermonters have been able to hunt on the various lands possessed by schools and according to this new bill, you may not possess a firearm on any land that is owned, leased, controlled, or subcontracted by a school. This is entirely disgusting. First of all, simply driving or walking through Howe Center and accidentally venturing too far over onto one of the parking spots or sidewalk will get you up to 1 year in prison, a $1000 fine or both for the first offense and up to 3 years in prison and a $5000 fine or both after the first offense as RHS leases a building down there. Now that is the least bothersome of it. Go to google maps and type in “Vermont schools” without the quotes and then tell me you don’t hunt in one of those locations with the pink balloons and that doesn’t even begin to show just how much land some of those schools actually own. On the list of sponsors for this bill are Representatives Keenan of St. Albans City, Branagan of Georgia, McCarthy of St. Albans City, Weed of Enosburgh, Connor of Fairfield, Consejo of Sheldon, Dickinson of St. Albans Town, Krowinski of Burlington, Michelsen of Hardwick, Toleno of Brattleboro and Rutland’s own Peter Fagan.

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/doc…

Republicans in Oklahoma are showing that, like the rest of the Republican Party, they are taking their cues from the racists who brought us the strategy of massive resistance during the civil rights movement.

 Of course, the new civil rights movement is for marriage equality and equal treatment and dignity in general, and the dead-enders don't like it one bit. They especially don't like that the federal courts are ordering them to stop discriminating, so in Oklahoma they're resurrecting a favored tactic from the Jim Crow days.

You know that a couple of weeks ago a federal court found Oklahoma's marriage equality ban to be unconstitutional, but you might not have heard that the legislature has been trying to decide what to do about it.

For their solution they are looking to the ideas of the old South, when cities under pressure to integrate their public schools closed the public schools entirely, creating what were colloquially known as seg academies, private schools with the ability to keep discriminating. Or, if the city was told it had to integrate its swimming pools it would just close down the public schools.

Bingo, problem solved, no race mixing allowed.

What's the marriage equivalent? Pure simplicity, really. Just abolish marriage.

No, really, I'm not kidding. Watch this:

I'm thinking they may not have thought this whole thing through, though. For instance, lots of people like being married. In addition, lots of people, even straight couples, like the tax and other benefits that being married brings.

I don't think this is going anywhere, but if you want to have a clue to their mindset this is a good place to start. 

On Friday afternoon, a judge ordered the release of Christina Schumacher from Fletcher Allen Health Care. And I’m sure that First Amendment blunderbuss Mike Donoghue feels vindicated for repeatedly plastering her case all over the Burlington Free Press.

His editors apparently did; they went full-on tabloid with the story — the front-page headline screaming “COURT: RELEASE HER IMMEDIATELY” in bright red print and a font size normally reserved for national emergencies.

But I still believe he was wrong. There are good and valid reasons for medical privacy protections. Donoghue was alone in violating those protections. Everyone else kept silent: her caregivers, FAHC, her Legal Aid attorney, her family. Even the judge, who publicly released his bare-bones ruling but did not release the findings of fact and conclusions of law underlying the decision.

And even other news media: While Donoghue and the Free Press were tabloiding it up, nobody else reported on the case. I guess they’re all in on the plot, too.

So Donoghue gets to run a victory lap and move on to the next crusade, and Schumacher will return to her shattered life. I hope she makes it, I really do. And I hope the Free Press’ invasion of her privacy never rebounds against her — say, if she ever applies for a job and her prospective employer does a Google search.

We will never know why she was hospitalized, because the health care system protected her privacy. And in the process, allowed itself to be defamed without response. We will never know why the judge disagreed with her doctors, because he protected her privacy as well.

We will never really know if Donoghue’s publicity made any difference; the judicial process would have continued even if he’d never written a word. Presumably the judge’s ruling was based on his interpretation of the facts and the law, not on a blast of sensationalized reporting. If so, then Christina Schumacher would have been released regardless of Donoghue’s attentions.

Congratulations, Mike. I’m sure you got a nice little First Amendment stiffy when you heard the news. I still think you were wrong.  

When last we saw Mike Donoghue, Dragoon of the First Amendment, he was hovering, vulture-like, outside a court hearing for Christina Schumacher, the woman who’s been in Fletcher Allen’s psychiatric unit since late December — shortly after her estranged husband murdered their teenage son and then killed himself.

Donoghue was outside the hearing because he’d been kicked out — on the insistence of Schumacher’s attorney, Duncan McNeil. And if anyone still believes that Donoghue is the good guy in this tale, please explain why her attorney wanted no part of Donoghue in that courtroom. McNeil, after all, is from Vermont Legal Aid, an institution known for its dogged defense of the rights of the mentally ill and disabled. If Schumacher’s hospitalization is unnecessary, why wouldn’t McNeil welcome Donoghue’s presence? Why does he refuse to speak to the reporter?

Maybe because he knows it’s not in his client’s best interest.

For that matter, why isn’t anyone associated with her — a caregiver, a friend, a relative — siding with Donoghue and publicly calling for Chrstina’s release from the hospital? She has a pretty large extended family. Are they all part of the conspiracy, too?

But there is a story to be told about the Schumacher case: one that wouldn’t violate her privacy and would actually serve a socially constructive purpose. Donoghue knows what the story is, because he’s reported it in the past. He has chosen to drop it in favor of his current crusade. The story?

Christina Schumacher was a longtime victim of domestic abuse. She’d been beaten down (literally and figuratively) to the point where she was incapable of taking the initiative against him in the legal arena. The authorities knew about it, and they did nothing to help or protect her. And it’s quite possible that personal relationships and connections played a part in their failure.

Please understand, this formulation is not based on any inside information. It’s based on (1) the public record, (2) my (educated layperson’s) knowledge of the dynamics of domestic abuse, and (3) logical inference and deduction. Take it for what it’s worth.

There is abundant evidence that Sonny Schumacher was an abusive husband as well as a murderer:

WCAX News obtained multiple police reports filed by Christina Schumacher outlining a pattern of fear. In July, an Essex police officer served Sonny with a temporary relief from abuse order. That same month, Christina’s brother came to the police department, concerned Sonny had violated the order. In August, Christina called the police to report a suspicious van outside her home, telling police her husband had made threats to her safety if she ever “crossed him.” And in October, police were called to Christina’s home to stand guard as Sonny removed personal items from the home. Officers said Christina seemed “nervous.”

Essex police withheld two additional police reports Christina Schumacher made, saying they directly relate to the ongoing murder-suicide investigation.

And this, also from WCAX:

…court papers reveal allegations that Schumacher abused her and their kids, physically attacking Gunnar and flipping furniture on multiple occasions.

That’s quite a bit of evidence, unless you’re one of those people who thinks that women make up abuse allegations for the heck of it.

To the contrary, the vast majority of abuse incidents are not reported. And in the case of someone living in fear of her husband, it’s almost certain that this is the tip of the iceberg. My logical inference: Christina had been abused for a long time.

And yet, in spite of an extensive trail of official reports, Essex Police Chief Brad LaRose told WCAX:  

“There was no complaint of domestic violence ever made to the police department.”  

There might possibly be some technical truth in that, depending on how you parse the precise definition of “domestic violence,” but Chief LaRose had to know that all was not well in the Schumacher household.

And then, the day before the bodies of Sonny and Ludwig Schumacher were discovered, this happened:

Christina Schumacher, 48, called Essex police at 9:33 p.m. Dec. 17 to express concern about her son, Gunnar, 14, the records show.

She said she feared her estranged husband, Ludwig “Sonny” Schumacher, might try to take the teenager out of the country, Essex Detective Lt. George Murtie wrote in a court affidavit…

What did the police do about her report? Apparently nothing, except to write it up. There is no sign that officers were dispatched. The bodies were found the next day, after a “friend” of Sonny’s called police about “a possible homicide/suicide.” From the evidence released so far, the crimes were probably committed on the 17th. If police had followed up on Christina’s call, they might have prevented the tragedy.

It certainly looks like the authorities downplayed, or ignored, Christina’s complaints. This happens distressingly often in abuse cases, and is one big reason why women so seldom report incidents. But in Sonny Schumacher’s case, I suspect that personal and professional connections also played a part. His background, per WCAX:

Sonny Schumacher was a former lieutenant colonel with the Vermont Air National Guard, a career that started in 1989. He was an F-16 pilot who rose through the ranks to become the director of operations for military support. He left the guard in 2011.

A longtime member of the National Guard, a prominent officer. How many friends did he have in official places? There’s a whole lot of cross-traffic between the Guard and law enforcement. Schumacher lived in Essex and the Guard’s headquarters is just outside Essex in Colchester. How many members of the Essex police department serve (or have served) in the Guard? Did LaRose? Did he know Sonny Schumacher? Did Detective Murtie?

And if it wasn’t an actual case of cronyism, was it a case of professional courtesy? Were police less inclined to believe Christina or take any action because her husband was a longtime National Guard officer?

For that matter, what did the Guard know and when did they know it? If, as is reasonable to assume, the abuse had been going on for a long time, did Schumacher’s superiors hear about it? What did they do?

One more sign that Schumacher was a well-connected guy: he managed then-Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie’s re-election campaign in 2004.  

And to bring this back to journalism, did Mike Donoghue drop this angle and pursue the hospitalization story because the Burlington Free Press didn’t want to expose a big hairy mess that might bring dishonor to the Guard and to law enforcement?

That’s pure speculation on my part. What I do know is that Donoghue would be performing a real public service by going after the Guard and the police, rather than taking advantage of a vulnerable woman who’s already suffered through years of abuse and the loss of her son.

I don’t expect Donoghue to reverse course; he’s too stubborn and narcissistic and myopic to see the damage he is doing. (Aside from everything else, he’s putting one more brick in the wall that discourages women from reporting abuse.) But there’s plenty of room for another enterprising reporter to pursue this story. A lot of attention has been paid to cases like Wayne Brunette’s and Macadam Mason’s and Woody Woodward’s; it’s time to look closely at law enforcement’s handling of the Christina Schumacher case.

And perhaps it’s time, once again, to see if the law can do anything more to protect victims of domestic abuse.  

Glad tidings on VTDigger’s front page:

More than 200 Vermont inmates in a Kentucky prison have been on lockdown since Jan. 15 after a series of assaults and fights broke out, a Department of Corrections official told lawmakers Tuesday afternoon.

… “I’m concerned. Hopefully we can get to the bottom of this and find out who the culprits are and find out, if anything, how they’re operating,” Byrne said.

“Byrne” is Richard Byrne, out-of-state unit supervisor for the Vermont Department of Corrections. Which makes him the guy directly responsible for the inmates we’ve shipped to for-profit prisons in other states. And he doesn’t know what’s going on.

So he’s “concerned.”

And “hopes” he can get to the bottom of this.

It’s times like this that brought the phrase “WHAT THE F*CK” into our lexicon.

I mean, we the people of Vermont send people to prison. Shouldn’t we bear at least a little bit of responsibility for their wellbeing? Er, no: shouldn’t we have complete responsibility for their wellbeing? The lockdown happened on January 15 after a series of violent incidents; Byrne was still clueless as of January 20. Some oversight.

Byrne told lawmakers that Vermont’s contractor, Corrections Corporation of America, “is handling the situation.” Well, that’s reassuring.  

CCA is a key player in the lock-’em-up industry, which tries to cash in on America’s rampant tough-on-crime sentiment. And helps fuel that sentiment with hefty campaign contributions to tough-talking politicians, mainly Republicans. According to the National Institute on Money in State Politics, CCA ponied up $2.2 million in political donations between 2003 and 2012. Other prison operators have been equally generous. In recent years, the industry has tried to cash in on anti-immigrant fervor by promoting harsh policies toward the undocumented.

(CCA has spent a relatively measly $38,000 in Vermont; the biggest beneficiaries are Jim Douglas at $2900 (three election cycles), Peter Shumlin at $1,000 (one cycle), and Senate Judicary Committee chair Dick Sears at $1,700 (four cycles). That’s a good example of the political savvy behind CCA’s high-priced advocacy: they couldn’t pick a better target than a well-connected veteran Senator from the ruling party who chairs the Senate committee directly concerned with law and justice.)

A few more tidbits from the Digger piece (by talented newbie Laura Krantz):

Only Vermonters are housed in the 816-bed prison after Kentucky did not renew its contract with CCA in July.

So. Kentucky, the progressive hotbed that gave us Rand Paul has cut its ties with CCA. More on that from the Nashville City Paper:

Kentucky has run into issues with CCA facilities in the past. Gov. Steve Beshear ordered all female inmates transferred from Otter Creek in 2010 after a sex scandal involving guards and allegations of sexual abuse of inmates at the facility.

… Hawaii also removed 168 female inmates in 2009, sending them to a prison in Arizona. Multiple lawsuits were filed over the sex accusations. Most were dismissed.

Inmates at Lee Adjustment Center rioted in 2004 after allegations of inmate abuse and mistreatment increased and visits from friends and family were cut back.

And, CCA is being sued by a group of shift supervisors Marion Adjustment Center who allege the company forced them to work extra hours and denied them overtime.

This is the corporation that, five days after a lockdown, is trying to “locate the source of the recent violence.” What kind of prison are they running, anyway? VTDigger’s Krantz:

“This is a tough period of time down there because we are seeing some things that we have not seen in the past,” Byrne said.

… During his hour of testimony Tuesday afternoon, Byrne made it clear that prisoners in Kentucky are less supervised than inmates in Vermont prisons.

Yeah, so CCA can offer rock-bottom prices, satisfy its shareholders, and fund a self-serving political action effort.

And even on the pure basis of the bottom line, without regard to the human cost, CCA is a questionable enterprise. Kentucky’s decision to pull out was partly based on past CCA transgressions, but state officials also calculated that they could actually save money by relying on public facilities. So maybe this whole industry is built more on political connections and free-market bullshit than on actual performance.

Y’know, I’ve always had doubts about the wisdom of for-profit prisons, and even more doubts about the idea of shipping inmates hundreds of miles away. If we want them to reform, wouldn’t it maybe help a little bit if they were within visiting distance of EVERYBODY THEY KNOW?

A little light at the end of this cold, dark tunnel:

Rep. Suzi Wizowaty, D-Burlington, clerk of the House Judiciary Committee, sat in on Byrne’s testimony Tuesday. Wizowaty for several years has filed an unsuccessful bill to stop sending prisoners out of state.

The public typically only finds out about a lockdown if word gets out from an inmate, Wizowaty said. She said she receives letters at least once a week from prisoners. Some report having seen a fight in a yard with no guard in sight, she said.

“There is a very low level of supervision,” she said.

Yeah, probably a whole lot lower since Kentucky pulled out, leaving CCA with a couple hundred inmates in a facility designed for 800.

(Correction: There are a total of 460 Vermont inmates at the Kentucky facility. 205 are housed in the locked-down unit; the others are elsewhere, and are not in lockdown.)  

I say we face up to our responsibilities. If we want to send people to prison, we ought to have direct responsibility for them, not depend on the bona fides of a for-profit corporation with a spotty track record. Vermont prisoners should stay in Vermont. For their own sake, for the sake of our consciences, and so we can do our part to put this parasitic industry out of our misery.  

We like to think of Vermont as a “green” state; but, when it comes to just getting around, we have failed, so far, to be very proactive.

Our public transportation alternatives for moving around the state are abysmal; so much so that a few years ago, I recall reading that we have the highest carbon footprint per capita of any state in the nation.

Now, that negative impact threatens to grow even greater, as a steadily increasing volume of tar-sands-derived gasoline fills our tanks and chokes the landscape around us.

Quoting from a Natural Resources Defense Council report,  the Vermont Natural Resource Council tells us:

The NRDC report found that under current plans, tar sands-derived gasoline supplies in 11 Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states, including Vermont, would soar from less than one percent of the total in 2012 to 11.5 percent of the total by 2020, due to increased imports from Canadian refineries, fresh supplies of refined tar sands fuels from Gulf Coast refineries, and quantities from East Coast refineries that would obtain tar sands crude via rail and barge.

According to Danielle Droitsch, NRDC Canada Project Director,

“Dirty gasoline supplies in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic are set to rise significantly, unless states take steps to keep out high-carbon fuel,” said Danielle Droitsch, NRDC Canada Project Director.  “By 2015 the volume of tar sands-derived fuel in the Northeast could grow sixfold, compared to 2012. This shows how important it is to move as quickly as possible to clean energy of all types.”

The VNRC reminds us that Vermont has made a commitment to reducing green-house gas emissions by 50-percent, as of 2028; and by 75-percent, as of 2050.  That’s a commendable goal, but much of the value of those reductions will be lost if the emissions we do produce come from significantly dirtier fuel sources, like the Canadian tar sands.

Says Jim Murphy of the National Wildlife Federation’s Vermont office:

“Tar sands expansion – which requires leveling the land and stripmining the fuel – is threatening to turn much of North America’s most productive bird nursery into a Mordor-like wasteland,” he said. “We need to keep this dirtiest of fuels in the ground, not in our tanks.”

Cheap gas isn’t cheap at all, when you consider what lies not very far ahead if we accept the growing exploitation of tar sands fuels.

We, the consumers must make it clear to our representatives that we do not want to fuel our present-day transportation needs at the expense of the planet’s future.

Ask our legislature to take a stand against tar sands oil, and tell President Obama that Vermont doesn’t support the Keystone XL pipeline.

Last night Greensboro Bend and Stannard were shut off by the state police. My wife was at the circus by Walker Ford at about 5 PM when she was passed by the VSP’s military-surplus armored car which headed up Rt 14 in a hurry.  Helicopters flew overhead.  Residents coming home from work were escorted by VSP to their homes, specifically so the VSP could verify they were going where they told the police they were going.

CAX was the ONLY news outlet that even mentioned this in a news brief saying something was going on but the VSP weren’t talking and that a camera crew was on their way.

But after the 11PM broadcast that article went into the Memory Hole and this morning a short article appeared saying that the VSP was looking for the half-brother of a guy from CT that almost killed a cop.

OK, that’s fine. But such a huge and heavy police presence in the middle of nowhere in Vermont is highly unusual.  It is sad to me that Vermont’s journalists play down such monumental police activity, thus ‘normalizing’ it. The VSP weren’t talking and the only news media that responded weren’t about to ask any questions.

I seem to be writing an awful lot about the Burlington Free Press lately, but they’ve deserved it. They keep doin’ stupid shit, I’ma keep writin’ about ’em.

The Freeploid’s Mike Donoghue has a reputation as a transparency crusader, a hard-chargin’ newsman who refuses to take “No” for an answer when confronting official recalcitrance.

There’s some truth to that. But he’s also an absolutist, willing to publish anything regardless of whether it furthers the public interest or brings unnecessary harm to anyone. The most recent example, which he disgracefully revisits today, is his spotlight expose of a very troubled woman’s life. But first, let’s go back to November, when our alleged First Amendment bulldog wrote a nothingburger of a story on timesheet fraud by state workers. The article was larded with details from a single case: a state worker who was suspected of one instance of timesheet fraud. The worker’s identity was revealed in the story, even though he hadn’t been formally charged.

And, as it turned out, authorities decided not to bring any charges. Too late; Donoghue had already plastered his name and the (apparently unfounded) allegations against him all over the newspaper. Classy.

Having brought pointless harm to one life, Donoghue is now doing his best to sabotage Christina Schumacher’s.

His first story, published January 12, chronicled Schumacher’s accusation that she has been hospitalized against her will at Fletcher Allen Health Care. Hospital staff could not respond, because they are legally bound to protect her privacy. As they should be. The result is a completely unbalanced story which accepts Schumacher’s version at face value and employs it as a cudgel against FAHC and other institutions involved in her case.

The second story, published in today’s Freeploid, is worse than the first — starting with its placement on the front page, along with a huge picture of Ms. Schumacher. Just in case anyone in the greater Burlington area didn’t already know what the psychiatrically troubled woman who just lost her son to a grisly murder-suicide looks like. Y’know, so when you see her at the grocery store you can say hi. Or just point and stare, whatever works for you.  

Donoghue’s sadly thin pretext for returning to the story is stated in the inflammatory headline:

Slain teen’s mother held against her will, then billed for treatment

A couple of problems with that. First, it accepts Schumacher’s version of events. FAHC cannot even confirm that she is a patient, let alone whether or not she’s being billed.

Second, how big is the bill? Donoghue never says. The hospital cannot say. But according to the article, the vast majority of psychiatric inpatients’s care is covered by private insurance, the state Department of Mental Health, Medicaid, and/or Medicare. And according to an FAHC official, “For those without insurance, Fletcher Allen absorbs the cost.”

My conclusion? She’s probably being billed for some relatively small co-pays. No way she’ll pay full freight for several weeks of hospitalization. Which is what the headline would lead you to believe.

The article perpetuates the “against her will” allegation that is hers alone. Again, the hospital cannot give its side of the story. Now, as Donoghue might know if he, say, spent any time reading newspapers over the last two and a half years, Vermont has a critical shortage of inpatient psychiatric beds. Patients are spending days in emergency rooms waiting for beds. Many are not getting the treatment they need.

So at a time like this, why in the blue Hell would FAHC hospitalize someone who didn’t need it? Even if they were evil bastards intent on goosing their occupancy rate, they don’t need to do so in the psych ward. Indeed, psychiatric staff are under constant pressure to limit admissions and expedite discharges because there are always more people waiting for available beds.

I don’t know anything about Schumacher’s case. But all the evidence points to one conclusion: if she’s been in the hospital for five weeks, it’s because she has needed intensive care and no doctor will countenance releasing her into the community.

Mike Donoghue gets a lot of credit for practicing his First Amendment rights  But the First Amendment does not establish an obligation to publish whatever comes across a reporter’s desk; it simply protects the right to publish.

With rights come responsibilities. Mike Donoghue has lost sight of that fact.