It is impossible for me to imagine that, first, your photographer even took this picture - and second, that it had to go through the scrutiny of the editors, yet still ended up being approved for print. A professional and humane photographer would have taken this opportunity to shield this broken father from the public eye, and allow him privacy in his grief. How can you justify your indifference to this father's despondence?
Has the newspaper offered public sympathy to this family? Or is unrestricted publication of personal torment its only means of profit?
Please offer a personal apology to this family, for you were wrong to subject them to public scrutiny in their anguish.
Susie Tompkins, Glennville