There’s a photo on the front page of The Herald today that should make a lot of people angry.

It should make them angry because adults allegedly forced a child to endure extreme hardship and neglect. It should make them angry because state workers who had the power to protect the child did not act.

But I expect to get phone calls from people who are angry at The Herald itself – for making them look at the face of this 4-year-old. Or for publicly memorializing an image that the young victim, himself, may hope to erase someday.

As an editor, as a father, simply as a human being, I can assure readers that this kind of decision forces a newspaper to wrestle with a number of questions.

Does the story need to be told? Without a doubt.

Is the story important enough to justify making some readers uncomfortable? Child neglect is an uncomfortable topic, and it deserves public awareness.

Does the photo contribute to the essential facts of the story? Certainly this one does.

Could publication of the photo prolong the injury or inflict new pain on the victim? Possibly. Here’s where we paused and took a deep breath.

A lawyer acting on behalf of the boy chose to reinforce his case by publicly releasing several images, including some that showed the victim’s wasted torso and frail legs. Other media have broadcast those images.

Knowing this, I was convinced that The Herald’s decision – either way – would do little to inflict additional pain or erase this child’s long-term trauma.

Having made the hard decision, I now hope publication of the photo will remind all of us that child neglect is not an abstract or statistical problem. It is a flesh-and-bone reality.

If you have read the story, you know that there are criminal charges in the case – household members are accused of starving the child almost to death.

But another set of adults also has been implicated: The children’s division of the Department of Social and Health Services says it had reason to know the child was at risk and should have checked on his welfare. But those state employees, who are paid to protect vulnerable children, did not take action.

So if you feel outrage over the image itself, you should allow this admission by the state to intensify those feelings.