Parents & kids, then & now |

Parents & kids, then & now

The news story “Pitt gathering for Salk focuses on global sustainability, climate change” about the 100th-birthday symposium honoring Dr. Jonas Salk raised powerful memories for me. My father, a doctor, spent a year of his Navy tour of duty giving the American public Salk’s polio vaccine. I was very proud he had done this lifesaving work.

A few years later, we stood in line at a school building, waiting for our polio vaccines so we wouldn’t get the polio virus. Even we kids all knew it had put President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in a wheelchair. It was an amazing event from my kid perspective. The whole town went to school after dinner to get a sugar cube with Dr. Albert Sabin’s vaccine on it. I particularly remember a collection basket full of dollar bills, voluntary contributions from grateful people.

Imagine if parents today listened to scientists’ warnings about climate change, feared for their children and felt gratitude that they were warned before it’s too late to fix. Would parents only vote for candidates who promise to enact climate legislation? A University of Texas poll found that 56 percent of younger consumers are willing to pay higher prices to reduce emissions and protect the environment, but only 20 percent of older respondents are willing to do so.

What happened to respect, gratitude, altruism and concern for our children?

Judy Weiss

Brookline, Mass

The writer is a member of Citizens Climate Lobby (

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.