Letters, Jan. 6

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 06/01/2025 (445 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Soothing the spirit

Re: Care for the soul (Jan. 2)

I want to express my gratitude to John Longhurst for bringing to light the critical importance of spiritual care in long term care.

The stories of spiritual care encounters at the end of life are truly inspiring. As I write this, I find myself on an unplanned trip to a so-called developing country in South America, to help my mother transition from her home into a long-term care facility, perhaps her last station in life. What strikes me most, in addition to the high standards of care for the body and mind, the spiritual well-being of residents and patients there is paramount.

There is much to be learned about meeting the spiritual needs of those who access health-care services. As a seasoned spiritual care practitioner in a faith-based personal care home, I am familiar with the spiritual needs and challenges that accompany the elderly on their journey into the last stages of life, including long-term care and end-of-life care. I am also familiar with the unpleasant perennial threat to the continuation of spiritual care services if the necessary support from donors does not come in. The positive impact of trained spiritual care practitioners in terms of patient/resident experience, quality of life, length of stay and savings to the health-care system cannot be overemphasized.

In some health regions, fiscal realities are such that spiritual care services can only be provided by trained volunteers in collaboration with faith community leaders and Indigenous cultural and spiritual leaders. Furthermore, in the absence of professional spiritual care practitioners, well-meaning health-care staff, doctors, nurses, housekeepers, etc. frequently scramble to address the spiritual and religious needs of patients, residents and family members, often feeling ill-equipped to respond to life’s most complex spiritual concerns.

I have great respect for those who do the best they can to alleviate the spiritual pain of patients and residents in their darkest hours. However, when “the best they can do” is not enough, it takes someone who is versed and fluent in the language of spiritual distress and healing. The shelving of the provincial spiritual care strategic plan in 2017 has caused a significant setback in the efforts to integrate spiritual care into whole person health care.

However, the need for competent spiritual health care in Manitoba continues to demand our full attention. I too am hopeful that spiritual health care will once again find it’s rightful place in our holistic health-care system. When I return home from my unplanned trip, I feel comforted that my mother will be in good hands physically, emotionally, socially and spiritually.

I long for that feeling of confidence for all Manitobans who need to access our health-care services.

Ferdinand Funk

East Selkirk

The science of speed

Re: The politics of traffic safety in Winnipeg (Think Tank, Dec. 30)

Recently, the conversations around road safety have reached a fever pitch in Winnipeg and many other municipalities. Consider the conflict that is most in style to talk about: automobiles versus cyclists. On one hand, there are gigantic lozenges weighing 2,000 to 5,000 pounds with big blind spots and fast acceleration, capable of sustained speed. Much research has gone into their passengers’ safety, and very little has gone into the safety of everyone else.

On the other hand, there is a (typically much) slower machine with virtually no blind spots, capable of comparatively slow acceleration and speed sustained based on how long it’s been going. There’s recently been an opinion piece in the Free Press from Curt Pankratz, who claims the science has been discarded in favour of the emotional by the cyclist lobby here in Winnipeg. He goes on to note that this is a structural issue caused by the dissolution of a traffic safety board in 2019. He then asserts that the cycling lobby has politicized safety. Well, if the safety of a human being is political, sure. I am a cyclist, I have not owned a car since 2012 and I plan to not own one again. I guess whether I live or die is political, then.

So back to the science of speed. Councillors and traffic engineers happen to be human. Humans aren’t swayed by data, generally. The cycling lobby has presented much data from studies all over the world, supporting slower speeds and infrastructure changes, and nothing has changed.

Ian Walker, a teacher and cub scout leader, has appeared multiple times in council and other city hall committees with the children he teaches. How on the nose do you have to be? This slower, safer streets business is all about the children and more vulnerable. How many families must be broken before our systems change?

Cynthia Ratelle

Winnipeg

Low bridge or no bridge

Re: Troubled waters (Dec. 17)

My wife and I walked from Raglan and Wolseley to the Omand’s train/foot bridge shortly before the new year. I took the long route at Portage Avenue (not cutting through the church parking lot) and it took me seven minutes. Barb took the short route over the small foot bridge and it took her three and a half minutes. Therefore the saving is about three and one half minutes. Experience tells me running is twice as fast as walking and biking is twice as fast as running. Therefore, a cyclist will save about a minute or less using the proposed new bridge.

The current bridge does not flood every year and when it does, it is only for a few weeks or perhaps a month or two. Big deal. Coun. Janice Lukes said “It’s either a high bridge or no bridge.” I say low bridge or no bridge.

Lukes and others want to spend $3 million to $5 million so a few dozen cyclists can save about a minute on their rides for about a month every other year or so when the river floods the current bridge. This is a terrible waste of money and it will seriously change the nature of the park, for the worse, not for the better.

Winnipeg is in terrible financial shape and has much more pressing needs than a long, high bridge at Omand’s Creek. Think crumbling streets, an inadequate sewer system that frequently pumps raw sewage into the rivers, a growing homeless problem and violent crime that is causing businesses to close up. Oh yes, and some people are seriously injured by the criminals.

Winnipeg has a history of budgets that balloon out of control, so $5 million is probably too low. Also, I’d like to see the engineer’s report that says that the current bridge is close to being unsafe. It is made of concrete slabs with steel reinforcing and is only about 50 years old. There are no obvious signs of it being unsafe.

The Arlington and Louise bridges are made of steel and are both over 100 years old. I want the city to show us information from qualified and independent sources that the current bridge has safety issues. It appears to me this push for a high bridge is driven by dogma, not facts.

Ray Hignell

Winnipeg