To the editors:

I was somewhat disturbed by the administrative response to disabled students reported in The Crimson (News, Oct. 25).

While I understand that Harvard, as an old institution, must abide by laws protecting historic landmarks, I cannot understand why buildings which are not considered historic landmarks should not immediately be made accessible to all Harvard students. For what purpose do these historic buildings exist? To educate Harvard students or to exclude them from the education that they deserve and have paid for? The Crimson reported that Robert L. Mortimer, associate director of building services in the Office of Physical Resources, asks himself what he considers tough questions. "You have to say to yourself, What piece of architecture would I like to remove from Adams House forever and ever?" he adds.

Perhaps I don't understand the full implications of such a question, but based on my limited knowledge, I don't consider that a tough question. Harvard has ample money, as illustrated by recent announcements regarding their endowment. Call in an architectural consultant and remove any piece of Adams House architecture that is preventing some students from getting full use of their dormitory! I would gladly trade my difficult questions for yours, Mr. Mortimer.

What I find more disturbing, though, is the attitude of Dean of Freshmen Elizabeth Studley Nathans, who said, "It's a reality of coming to Harvard and one that people need to think about when deciding to come here. It's not ideal." I think it is deplorable that students should have to base their educational decisions on accessibility issues, especially when the institution in consideration has the power to make things accessible, as exemplified in the dorms and buildings which have been made accessible over the past few years. Is Harvard a first-rate educational institution, open to all who are academically qualified, or is it reserved for students untouched by physical or mental hardship?

While it is important to realize that the problems and inconveniences that physically and mentally disabled students face on campus are insignificant compared to those that they will face in the real world, that is not a valid reason not to protest those problems and inconveniences at Harvard where they can be so easily remedied. So many of the obstacles that students face when they come to Harvard are easily preventable as long as the administration is willing to adopt the right attitude. I dont understand why "It's a huge issue in terms of balancing historic buildings...with the needs of students who deserve and earn a chance to be here." It seems pretty simple to me.

Adina L. Gerver '02

Oct. 28, 1999