Carol’s Death
What the heck is the matter with us?
My sister, Carol, passed away recently. She was the third person whom I have loved that died from a bout with cancer. I was at the bedside of the other two people I mentioned when they died, but I was not with Carol when she had her final moment. I did however hold her hand for an hour, just 12 hours earlier.
Carol was first advised of her illness about 17 yeas ago, so it is both a blessing and a miracle that she lasted so long. I am thankful we had that time with her.
I am old enough to understand that death follows every life and that some deaths are more unpleasant than others, but after watching the third death of this type I am coming to believe in assisted suicide. I know it sounds gruesome, but hear me out because I think we treat others better than we treat the people we love.
For starters let’s talk about our pets. When our pets reach their last days, and we know they can no longer experience an acceptable quality of life, we face reality and spare them the discomfort of unnecessary suffering. Nobody considers it to be animal cruelty when we opt for a passionate and brief death. In other words we show our pets (loved ones) mercy at the end.
The government also shows compassion when they are in charge of executions. After centuries of moral debate, nearly every type of state-sponsored killing has been allowed. Now, Texas is considered the most aggressive state in carrying out the death penalty, but they do not torture the condemned. They only use lethal injections.
What the heck is the matter with us?
My sister, Carol, passed away recently. She was the third person whom I have loved that died from a bout with cancer. I was at the bedside of the other two people I mentioned when they died, but I was not with Carol when she had her final moment. I did however hold her hand for an hour, just 12 hours earlier.
Carol was first advised of her illness about 17 yeas ago, so it is both a blessing and a miracle that she lasted so long. I am thankful we had that time with her.
I am old enough to understand that death follows every life and that some deaths are more unpleasant than others, but after watching the third death of this type I am coming to believe in assisted suicide. I know it sounds gruesome, but hear me out because I think we treat others better than we treat the people we love.
For starters let’s talk about our pets. When our pets reach their last days, and we know they can no longer experience an acceptable quality of life, we face reality and spare them the discomfort of unnecessary suffering. Nobody considers it to be animal cruelty when we opt for a passionate and brief death. In other words we show our pets (loved ones) mercy at the end.
The government also shows compassion when they are in charge of executions. After centuries of moral debate, nearly every type of state-sponsored killing has been allowed. Now, Texas is considered the most aggressive state in carrying out the death penalty, but they do not torture the condemned. They only use lethal injections.
When people face death by cancer, there usually comes a point when the medical experts allow for the withdrawal of medicine, food tubes and water. From that point on, the patient is only given large doses of pain medication. Thereafter, we are essentially choosing to let the person die from dehydration. That seems cruel to me.
According to Survivalist News it is possible to die within the first 24 hours of going without water, but ordinarily a person can survive for a few days. Eventually, the final moment comes, but not before a long and slow decline.
Regardless of whether you are against the death penalty or not, you would know the difference between a humane demise and a cruel execution, so why don’t we seek a quick and humane death for our loved ones rather than the slow torture of dehydration? If you have ever seen anybody pass on that way, you know what I mean. Is that really necessary?
In an attempt to make some sense out of the usual practice, one nice person said that suffering is necessary to let us know what Christ went through, but I find several flaws with that argument. First, if it is important to experience a Christ-like death, then why don’t we torture the patient for a while before we "pull the plug?" Obviously we would not do that. Second, I do not recall any Bible versus that suggest we ought to suffer in our deaths. Third, if suffering is a spiritual experience, then why do some people have instant deaths from heart attacks and accidents? Shouldn’t they also enjoy the theoretical benefits of suffering?
Somebody else said we are not supposed to play God, but compassion for the sick seems God-like to me. Besides, isn’t it "playing God" when we elect to treat people for diseases that would otherwise kill them or when we pull the plug, or even if we decide not to pull it? After all, we are still making life and death decisions. And aren’t we playing God when we administer medicine or create a baby or water a garden? Furthermore, if God is actually deciding when everybody should die, then God uses the hand of man to help in many cases. Are people who cause life-ending car wrecks, murders, wars and other situations helping God to accomplish His will? If so, isn’t it possible that God would also use loved ones to carry out His will with the terminally ill?
In a different religious twist, others site the 6th commandment (Ex. 20:13) and say we are not supposed to kill, and that includes the taking of our own lives; but, I have read several versions of the 6th commandment and none of them said that or even implied it. The underlying message has to do with hatred and murder, not suicide.
I have indeed heard religious experts, such as Bethel Church of God, make the case against suicide, but they post no scripture to support "their own" position. Another blog tries to make the case, but I think they are stretching the actual words in I Cor 6:19 to meet their own belief. It seems to me that if an earthly father would not want to see his children suffer, the Heavenly Father would also want to help his children avoid unnecessary suffering.
As my mind works through the possibilities, I just cannot come up with a good reason to force dehydration on our loved ones. We would consider that cruel and unusual punishment if we did that to a prisoner. The lethal injection is instantaneous and painless for them. It seems our loved ones deserve at least the same consideration.
Another detail gives me pause. I wonder how such a decision would be made. It is easy to see how somebody would want grandpa to "go away" if a big inheritance was on the table. There would have to be good checks and balances to prevent abuse, but our law makers ought to be able to figure out the details. It would certainly open up new chapters of the pro-life vs. pro-choice debate.
In the final analysis, assisted suicide should not be adopted in haste, but the more I consider it the more I support Dr Kevorkian, who went to jail for 8 years for assisting the terminally ill to end their lives without unnecessary suffering.
Our society handles the final moments of pets and prisoners with appropriate compassion and swiftness (Even so, I am opposed to the death penalty) and I am quickly coming to the conclusion that the same compassion ought to be afforded our human loved-ones.
According to Survivalist News it is possible to die within the first 24 hours of going without water, but ordinarily a person can survive for a few days. Eventually, the final moment comes, but not before a long and slow decline.
Regardless of whether you are against the death penalty or not, you would know the difference between a humane demise and a cruel execution, so why don’t we seek a quick and humane death for our loved ones rather than the slow torture of dehydration? If you have ever seen anybody pass on that way, you know what I mean. Is that really necessary?
In an attempt to make some sense out of the usual practice, one nice person said that suffering is necessary to let us know what Christ went through, but I find several flaws with that argument. First, if it is important to experience a Christ-like death, then why don’t we torture the patient for a while before we "pull the plug?" Obviously we would not do that. Second, I do not recall any Bible versus that suggest we ought to suffer in our deaths. Third, if suffering is a spiritual experience, then why do some people have instant deaths from heart attacks and accidents? Shouldn’t they also enjoy the theoretical benefits of suffering?
Somebody else said we are not supposed to play God, but compassion for the sick seems God-like to me. Besides, isn’t it "playing God" when we elect to treat people for diseases that would otherwise kill them or when we pull the plug, or even if we decide not to pull it? After all, we are still making life and death decisions. And aren’t we playing God when we administer medicine or create a baby or water a garden? Furthermore, if God is actually deciding when everybody should die, then God uses the hand of man to help in many cases. Are people who cause life-ending car wrecks, murders, wars and other situations helping God to accomplish His will? If so, isn’t it possible that God would also use loved ones to carry out His will with the terminally ill?
In a different religious twist, others site the 6th commandment (Ex. 20:13) and say we are not supposed to kill, and that includes the taking of our own lives; but, I have read several versions of the 6th commandment and none of them said that or even implied it. The underlying message has to do with hatred and murder, not suicide.
I have indeed heard religious experts, such as Bethel Church of God, make the case against suicide, but they post no scripture to support "their own" position. Another blog tries to make the case, but I think they are stretching the actual words in I Cor 6:19 to meet their own belief. It seems to me that if an earthly father would not want to see his children suffer, the Heavenly Father would also want to help his children avoid unnecessary suffering.
As my mind works through the possibilities, I just cannot come up with a good reason to force dehydration on our loved ones. We would consider that cruel and unusual punishment if we did that to a prisoner. The lethal injection is instantaneous and painless for them. It seems our loved ones deserve at least the same consideration.
Another detail gives me pause. I wonder how such a decision would be made. It is easy to see how somebody would want grandpa to "go away" if a big inheritance was on the table. There would have to be good checks and balances to prevent abuse, but our law makers ought to be able to figure out the details. It would certainly open up new chapters of the pro-life vs. pro-choice debate.
In the final analysis, assisted suicide should not be adopted in haste, but the more I consider it the more I support Dr Kevorkian, who went to jail for 8 years for assisting the terminally ill to end their lives without unnecessary suffering.
Our society handles the final moments of pets and prisoners with appropriate compassion and swiftness (Even so, I am opposed to the death penalty) and I am quickly coming to the conclusion that the same compassion ought to be afforded our human loved-ones.
Somebody tell me what I am missing.
Comments welcomed
3 comments:
My friend John's entire family is susceptible to cancer. His father wasted away, his 15 year-old nephew died two years ago after his 4th or 5th round of chemo and radiation. His mother was diagnosed with terminal, inoperable stomach cancer last week. I don't know his thoughts on assisted suicide for others, but after seeing all the suffering, when he develops cancer he is 99% sure he will not accept treatment. I'm a little young to make this statement, but I don't believe I will either. I saw Dave's friend Ed puking in his last week, feigning a smile to resemble his normal personality.
I think the reason we avoid suicide in general and assisted suicide for the sick is FEAR. We fear death, what may or may not lie in wait for us afterwards. TRUE believers in the Christian faith wouldn't have fear, because they KNOW what is in store for them. Take my sister Sharon for example. She is definitely on the list for world's best Catholic. She goes to church regularly, attended the sister school to Notre Dame, and even married a Notre Dame man. Yet when faced with a possible cancer diagnosis, she was petrified. Is that true belief?
Look at what Dave has written here. We FEAR God's wrath for killing one of his children. We FEAR that we won't be accepted into heaven if we break a commandment or church doctrine.
DEATH isn't the problem here. Everyone knows it's coming, it's a part of life. FEAR is the problem. We must conquer our fear and then decisions such as life ending suicide would be simple.
I believe that RELIGION is a means to conquering our FEAR. That's why I think anti-religious zealot idiots like Bill Maher aren't looking at the entire picture. Religion can be abused and misunderstood, and that's why it gets terrible press these days. But it can also be salvation (and no, not just the myopic view of salvation the Christians hold). Religion can help you destroy fear, sleep better at night, and face death with confidence.
I only know one or two TRUE believers (both Christian), and they are at relative peace. While I'm not sure what their opinion would be on assisted suicide, I know they would take their own lives to prevent suffering.
I continue to try to develop my spiritual side, and would encourage others to do so PROVIDED THEIR RELIGIOUS JOURNEY DOESN'T INFRINGE ON THE PATH OF OTHERS. I hope to be able to face death with dignity, calm, and peace.
PS: I'm probably in good shape anyway, my heart is going to blow up one day and it'll be over. I wish the same for us all (what the hell?).
Fear of a terminal illness doesn't just mean fear of death or fear of the afterlife. Despite how it looks from the outside, people who are afraid of being sick are not always afraid they'll die.
I have never truly been sick in my life, but for a month I was unsure whether or not the tumor I had on my side was cancerous or not. When faced with the possibility of being sick, in fact, very sick, I wasn't worried so much about dying. I was scared that I had spent most of my life worrying about stupid crap. The only thing that mattered to me when I thought I could be sick was enjoying every moment I had, not because I was terrified that I wouldn't have more, but because if something did happen to me, I wanted to know that the moments I had, had actually counted.
I oppose assisted suicide, not because the church opposes it (even though some people would probably guess that's my reason why) but rather because none of us are able to know what moments in our lives will turn out to be the best ones. Ending a life prematurely may seem more humane and will undoubtedly end some terrible pain, but I believe that even in the midst of our worst pain we are given opportunities for better understanding and love. Cutting off the avenues to those opportunities might rob someone of the most meaningful parts of their life.
I think the error in the comments of Dave and Matt is the attempts to reconcile emotions with logic. Sympathy for a dying person is an emotion. Fear of dying is also an emotion. Religion and spirituality, in general, are emotionally based. Looking at two options (living in pain or dying now) and deciding which is best is an attempt at logic. So to take a subject that is paramountly emotional in nature, such as death and suffering, and try to view it through a spectacle of logic will usually leave a person confused and indecisive.
We can all make claims as to how we think we will act in situations in the future. However, that speculation is of little value. Until you are actually in that moment and enveloped by the emotions you will never know how you will actually act. Sharon's reaction to having a tumor is a perfect example. What she might have thought prior to finding a tumor was trumped by the real emotions she had when she was faced with actually having a tumor. Before having a tumor, she 'spent most of her life worrying about stupid crap'. Afterward, 'the only thing that mattered... was enjoying every moment'.
The reason we execute prisoners humanely, or put our pets to sleep is not because of compassion. It is because we have decided, beyond emotional reasons, that it makes the most sense. For pets I think it usually comes down to money issues. What if we had pet health insurance that paid for medical procedures to the extent that human health insurance does? I am sure more pet owners would be willing to try that one extra thing, just in case. But when faced with having to pay out of pocket, most swallow their emotions, and make a decision based on practicality. The decision wasn't compassionate, it was rational.
So, I think the reason we don't allow assisted suicide is because we are seeing those situations through a fog of emotions. When it comes to prisoners and pets we allow for a greater clarity of thought and contemplation. Why is it illegal? Because it is political suicide to advocate for the death of someone who can't be labeled an enemy.
Post a Comment