updated 11/27/1989 AT 01:00 AM EST
•originally published 11/27/1989 AT 01:00 AM EST
We always thought your cover with Burt and Loni's wedding picture was the best cover ever until we saw the one with their son, Quinton (PEOPLE, NOV. 6). What a beautiful family.
The more I thought about the article on Burt Reynolds, 53, and Loni Anderson, 43, the angrier I became. They waited only four months to adopt a child. My husband and I have been waiting seven years. My husband is 33 and I am 29. We were told by agencies that after my husband reaches 45 and 140, we will no longer be able to adopt a child. Did Reynolds and Anderson adopt from a lenient agency or a very well connected attorney? I guess fame and fortune says it all.
I would like to know how these two people, after only four months of marriage, were handed a relatively newborn, white baby when childless couples across the nation have been on waiting lists for years to adopt a child and have been told they may never get a newborn because so many couples are ahead of them. What the hell is this! Famous people with lots of money make better parents than anyone else? Or is it that they have so much money, therefore they get to go to the head of the line?
Stanley Coren is deliberately and irresponsibly scaring the hell out of lefthanders (and the parents of left-handed kids) with questionable data and then drawing ridiculous conclusions that would be funny if they weren't so pernicious. I've been keeping tabs on left-handed research for 30 years (my most recent book on the subject, Left-Handed Kids, was published last month), and I know dubious conclusions when I see them. He claims left-handers are five times more likely than righties to die accidentally. That means that the 10 percent of the population that is left-handed accounts for over a third of all accidental deaths! Could such an astonishing statistic lie unnoticed until the arrival of the redoubtable Dr. Coren? Come on! Coren can't find enough 80-year-old lefties, so he posits that left-handers must die young. Bushwah! The fact is that almost everyone born in 1909 was vigorously trained to be right-handed regardless of their natural orientation, so of course they don't show up as left-handers 80 years later. Left-handedness isn't life-threatening. It's challenging, and in a funny way liberating. I've never found a lefthander who didn't secretly enjoy being left-handed. (And I'll bet writer Doris Klein Bacon agrees.)
James T. de Kay
"Yes, I do," says Bacon, "but nobody can read my handwriting."—ED.
RON & NANCY REAGAN
I don't know what the big deal is with the Reagans receiving $2 million for a few speeches in Japan. The Japanese are buying everything else in this country; why not a former President?
Toms River, N.J.
It galls me to think that PEOPLE and Henry Graff would raise their liberal eyebrows at the fees President Reagan collected for his Japanese visit, especially in light of rock stars and athletes (whom you apparently endorse) who make that much money regularly. "Mr. America" would have been a bargain at twice the price.
C.W. Littlefield Jr.
I am a senior citizen collecting Social Security and working part-time. I am allowed to earn only $8,800 a year without my Social Security checks being reduced. Yet a President on a government pension, paid for by the taxpayers, can earn millions. More power to him if he can get this kind of money, but I feel that there should be a limit on how much he can earn in private life, and anything over that would affect his pension. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Thank you, Ron and Nancy, for reducing the trade deficit by $2 million.
James W. Neuman
Costa Mesa, Calif.
The Japanese paid the Reagans for eight years of soft trade policies, not two weeks of lectures and tours—they got a bargain for their $2 million! To add insult to injury, the taxes of our downwardly declining middle class helped pay for the Secret Service agents who traveled to Japan with Ron and Nancy.
Seven Hills, Ohio
The photograph of an 18-month-old child lying under a massive circus elephant was the most despicable thing ever displayed in your magazine. It would be a very close race for the Moron of the Year award between the baby's parents, who had total disregard for their child's safety, the photographer, who evidently couldn't care less, and PEOPLE for printing the photograph. Shame on all of you!