the pelican

once more with feeling

free will

perhaps one of the hardest things to do was to “pull the plug” on my mother-in-law a few years ago.

well, maybe it wasn't so hard.

it some ways it was quite easy.

it was easy because there just wasn't much doubt that it was the right thing to do. it felt right and none of us have doubted it since. she was gone and we had to let her go. we wanted her to be free of suffering, to be at peace.

but it was hard because we wanted to be sure she had every chance. and also because, selfishly, when you get right down to it, we didn't really want to let her go. didn't want to decide when the end was. and we didn't want to be responsible for that decision. that horrible decision.

it felt violent to make the decision, as though it wasn't ours to make.

it was very scary. it was impossible.

but then once all the panic washed over and the fatigue hit and finally acceptance started to come in, it just became very clear.

at the time, my husband and his father were in so much shock and couldn't let go because they felt they were giving up on her, or letting her down in some way. the doctors had said we would need to think about what we wanted to do about the situation pretty soon. it was me who finally made the decision in some sense, and maybe they let me because it relieved them of the burden, the guilt, the fear, the uncertainty, the responsibility. i said, look, she's gone. we need to let her go. and they were so relieved once it was honestly stated. the idea started to settle in with them. they had to be reassured that they weren't somehow killing her, but allowing her to continue on her journey, her transformation, her exit stage left.

and in the scientific world it seems that death is considered a failure. something that should be avoided and put off and maybe even miraculously be cured of.

funny failure that. seeing as how death is sort of a central part of life. the end result of it and all. inevitable. for death will come to us all. we are born to die.

and she'd done her fair share of struggling. fought the good fight. didn't give up. and her body took her as far as it could.

so we made the decision. the doctors hinted at it. gave us the options. we watched the entire team of nurses maintain her and her machines around the clock for so many days. i suggested it and they came round to it. it took lots of discussion, and thought, and a several long semi-sleepless nights in hospital waiting room chairs and daily trips to and from denver. but what it came down to, was that we all realized that it was our desire to hang on to her, and that our fear of letting her go and not her own will to live kept the machines going. once we realized that, it became very clear.

the doctors couldn't really look us in the face when we told them our ultimate decision. before, when they were telling us how we'd have to make a decision soon, they gazed into our faces with a pleading, apologetic look. but when we told them, they just looked at the floor. as though they had failed. they nodded and stared at the floor and told us our decision was appropriate, rational, reasonable and realistic. they said they were sorry. and they explained the process of how they would turn off each machine, the dialysis, the respirator, and then the drips, and the fluids and the monitors. it upset them almost as much as it did us to make the decision.

and it took quite a while. after they turned everything off, the room became very quiet and her body continued to breathe, very faintly on its own for about three to four hours while the last drip that kept her blood pressure from falling through the floor tapered off drip by drip and then finally everything stopped and it was over.

and so we sat with her and held her limp hand and talked to her for a while and waited.

she had become very ill very suddenly with an acute form of leukemia and in the early stages, as her blood thickened with a lot of white blood cells, she had suffered a series of strokes, or clogs where the blood couldn't pass through to parts of her brain. before all the extraordinary measures, before she was on machines, before she lost consciousness and could still speak and argue somewhat, she tried to say a lot of strange things and didn't make a lot of sense.

but one thing she said did make sense. the night before she ended up on full life support for the weeks ahead, she kept  saying over and over, “i have to go. i have to go.”

and so i guess she did.

and we had to let her.

we all have to go at some point.

in this Schiavo family scene, it sounds really harsh to starve someone. to us it sounds very painful and slow. and the bonds of a parent for her child are so great, the attachment so strong, it seems unfathomable that they should not want to feed their baby. perhaps the love of her husband is the sort that loves her enough to be able to let go of her, but her parents can not help but be parents, trained to put her life before their own. everyone says the death of a child is the most severe and difficult form of grief. it would be the hardest to face.

and i know someone now through work, whose daughter was killed last summer. in a bike accident. hit some gravel, off a cliff and into a river. but her body was just found a few days ago. and see her husband, the son-in-law, well, he's been driving up here from out of state – about 400 miles almost every weekend. and he has walked and walked the banks of that river up and down. and nobody knew of course, after she fell, there had been a lot of rain, and she could be anywhere in the canyon or all the way to nebraska. well anyway, her husband who has been walking those banks, and walking those banks, he kept going to one spot. one particular spot and standing on a rock and just knowing she was nearby. he just knew it. well, last weekend was one of the first weekends since last summer that he didn't make it up. but they found her. right where he'd been looking all along. right under the rock that he had always found himself standing on, after hours and hours of driving and hiking and walking up and down that canyon.

that's that sort of love, that sort of responsibility he felt to take care of her, to see it through, to keep coming back and coming back all these months to find her and make it all right and put it all to rest.

of course he didn't have any decisions to make.

and i don't know i don't know and i don't want to say. had to deal with it my own family and that was a different matter unto itself. my mom has made it quite clear that she does not want extraordinary measures and the thought of hanging on and on with tubes stuck in her and stuff does not appeal to her in the slightest. can't say i blame her. she says when
the time comes, let me go let me go. and it will break my heart and i hope that time doesn't come. i hope she goes a natural on her own some night in bed. a long long time from now. but if it does come, i do know what she wants.

as a paralegal, i used to work at a firm that did a lot of estate planning. at that place, i ended up witnessing and  notarizing a lot of wills.

and, along with their last will and testament, our clients would sign medical durable powers of attorney which give the healthcare decision making process over to another person should they become incapacitated or incapable of doing so themselves. additionally, as part of the full meal deal, then they would also sign a living will, which spelled out precisely, specified the option, that if they were in a vegetative state and/or unable to speak, with limited or no brain activity, and little to no chance of improvement, how long would they want to remain receiving nutrition and hydration? they had a choice of none, three to ten days, blank of time to be specified, or indefinitely.

not a single living will signing not a one not a single one that i witnessed in five years at that firm ever chose the “indefinite” option. not a one. 90 percent or so chose none or some three days. occasionally, about one in ten or so, chose ten days. sometimes they would say they chose the extended time because they wanted to give their family members time to get there and say goodbye if they wanted to.

but not a single one chose life at any cost, or even a prolonged period of time. not a one.

think about it. would you?

because i think most of us, in our current state, can't imagine that sort of life. can't dream of it. can't desire it. view it as the veritable fate worse than death. the living death. a horror movie kind of panic washes over us to imagine what that would be like, compared to the perception we gaze through currently in focus. typical to fear what we don't know, yet we all seem to have some sort of innate sense of knowing what our life means to us. it's very personal. maybe as personal as it gets.

interesting to consider the term “will.” last will and testament. living will. a person's will beyond themselves. after death. the will of the living projected into an uncertain future that gives them a sense of well being to know that the decisions regarding their personal property, their pets, their final statements, their final healthcare, their gifts to charities and the disposition of their remains have all been decided in the here and now. a preparation. a final say. it is their will. and
the living must honor it.

now i don't know what the actual numbers are, if there is anybody out there now of sound mind and body who would actually choose to be kept alive indefinitely. there may well be many. perhaps those are the ones who don't sign a living will or make their intentions and preferences known to their family. but i think in our hearts, we all know what we, ourselves, would want, should we be in the position ourselves.

we just don't want to be responsible for making that decision for someone else.

nor, when it comes down to it, would we want anyone else to make that decision for us.

 

posted by: limine at 08:58 | link | comments (10) |

dead body issues

ok so currently there is much talk in the office amongst those of us who are concerned with such things as all this about the movie. which, if you haven't seen it and plan to, then this will either ruin it for you, or it just won't make any sense.

you know, THE movie, Million Dollar Baby.

ok. so. here's the deal.

sweet young M, strong rock climber and jock, daughter of bluegrass musician hippies who is concerned about her career, money, and retirement plans at the age of 25, fresh out of university with degree in environmental something and subsequent paralegal certificate, believes Hilary Swank is amazing and the coolest but the film itself was an utter disappointment.

in fact, the people i went to see it with both said tsk tsk what a shame what a shame how sad, what a downer and not a fun or easy film to watch.

atty P at work whose fave films are Election, (one of my all-time faves as well), About Schmidt and Sideways, and who announces to everyone he introduces me to as someone who went to see Return of the King eleven times in the theatre, thinks the film was brilliant until the last half hour which completely disappointed him. he thought it was just cheap hollywood crap and a worthless bad incomprehensible and immoral ending. then we have new receptionist, who nobody is quite sure what to make of yet although atty P doesn't like her because she's not some hot young sweet looking thang, loved it. thinks everything clint does is superb, but also believes he is a product of too many westerns, particularly the late 60's and 70's westerns in which everything became “real” by being sad and violent with lots of strong language and non-ending endings.

hmmm. you might emote.

well. i liked it.

see what bothers them, is that she decides she wants to die, and he helps her.

a good ethical dilemma, with moral knee-jerk responses and judgments from all who view it.

sweet M, rock climber, believes this sends the wrong message. she says she knows lots of injured athletes as well as very sick, cancer diagnosed youngsters or what have you, who have chosen to live on and make the most of the situation and have accomplished great things, overcome tremendous obstacles, or at least lived life to the fullest before departing. she feels, that because our heroine decides to end her paraplegic life of infected bed sores and ventilator tubes with no family to speak of to live for, that this sends the wrong message to all the sick and/or seriously injured people who might just decide to end it all, rather than enduring the indignities and suffering of long slow illness and pain. she believes the triumph of the human spirit lies in the desire to continue to live, despite the overwhelming desire to end it. that life is always preferable to death. that this could influence people to go ahead and do themselves in, rather than fight the good fight.

atty P on the other hand, dislikes the film because he believes it is simply unthinkable to assist suicide, that it should never be condoned, no forgiveness to her or her manager for helping her, and it's just plain wrong. end of story.

well, have to admit, the flick is entirely politically incorrect, no question. and it's a heart-breaker. ah heck and it has the irish thing going too, and you know the irish always break your heart. just the way of it. it's the bittersweet thing don't you know. the awareness of the futility and the tears for the precious and the fragile and the ephemeral beauty of it all mixed up with a warrior toughness that never gives up in spite of having the bloody pulp beat out of it. that's a bit of the irish thing maybe, which atty P ought to understand, as he makes a great deal out of his genetic celtic heritage in an identity sense. but no, maybe it's the catholic thing, not sure, but he's an absolute no about the assisted suicide deal, cut and dried with no wavering whatsoever.

sweet M is mostly concerned about the message. she is concerned about how influential movies are or can be, and that this will hurt people whose will to live may be in some injured or fragile state and that this might allow them to give up without trying. that she's known seriously injured or terminally ill people who have all gone through bouts of suicidal depressions but who have worked through them and come round to live full meaningful lives despite their brevity or diminished capacity or amount of suffering.

ah sweet M. have to love her. of course she's right, of course she's right.

but.

but there it is you see, the big question. who gets to say what's right and wrong for you and your life. who gets to determine whether or not you stay or go. me, i like the idea that i can check out any time i like because then, i know i stay out of choice. as a conscious choice. perhaps that's a bit desperate, a bit melodramatic but it's the life of someone who is probably critically manically depressed on a regular basis with significant schizophrenic tendencies (if you want to get all clinically labeled about it all) who regularly consciously daily chooses to see the beauty and offer up the suffering and be grateful for the experience and continue. of course, ask me again tomorrow and i may be off the cliff again. who knows.

the thing is, to be free is to see it for what it is. and love it all anyway. all of it. embrace the horror and pain and suffering of life and take some great leap of faith that allows a life to have meaning in spite of zero scientific evidence to back it up. in other words, to believe that somehow all this is worth it. because that can only be a matter of belief. it's clearly not empirical. no proof. no promised rewards. no instructions. no odds even really. it's completely up in the air, out there and beyond. nobody can really give you that answer. only you. and you get to create it. and it's all about a leap of faith. a faith that you get to make your own choice.

well anyway, off i go on a tangent. back to the movie.

because i think, that flick was all about heart.

to love someone enough to let them go. to allow them the right to make decisions for themselves. even life or death ones.

see today is the anniversary of the death of a very close and very special friend of mine. someone who had MS, who struggled with a lot of serious and regularly debilitating issues and who controlled it as best as he could with diet, exercise, and a strong will. who hadn't seen a medical professional in the last 35 years of his 50 year old life. who died a natural, on his own terms, in his own time.

lots of people close to me who did not know him have expressed their ignorant judgments about his behavior. his mistrust of medical science and if only he'd been to this doctor or that specialist or had these drugs, he might have lived another 5 or 10 years or who knows and on and on.

but he was into quality, not quantity. and he didn't believe that death was a failure, but a natural part of every single life. and he wanted to experience all of it. even the suffering. and that it comes when it comes and while it was always his option, he chose to see it through until it took him and he died in his wife's arms at his own home in the afternoon on her day off.

so, could that be considered a suicide because he refused medical treatment? was he negligent? or stupid? should he have prolonged his life with an infinite series of medical tests and procedures and drugs with side effects? and what about another friend of mine, who tries every single possible scientific procedure to prolong, extend and possibly cure her illness? should i judge her for deciding she wants to try everything while i watch her suffering increase exponentially with so much attachment to the outcome of each new doctor appointment and each failure she sets herself up, looking for a cure that may or may not come but even if it does, she's still going to die one day anyway?

what about people who smoke or drink or eat rich fatty foods? what about people who bleach and color their hair, filling their bodies with toxins and poisons and dies for the sake of vanity? what about people who ride motorcycles or climb rock walls or jay walk or take any other number of risks which may or may not cut their lives shorter if they had not done so?

isn't all that really up to each of us, how we live, and ultimately, how we die? don't we spend our lives preparing for death? and if we become conscious of our own fear of death and understand what will one day be, doesn't that help us to live a life in perhaps a far greater awareness than mere survival?

well again, so back to the film.

see, that's why i liked it, because it was all about heart. and choice. and life and death. and knee jerk reactions. dead body issues. and it opens the discussions.

see i don't think it necessarily has to take responsibility for the sort of message it portrays because it's clear that it's art. it's fiction. it just tells a story. one story. it presents a situation and how these two very specific characters in the story dealt with that predicament.

and the majority of people who see it, at least those in the office and the people i went to see it with, certainly did not come away with the conclusion that the people who dislike the film feel certain everyone will come away with. interesting, that.

that is, if sweet M is afraid it could send the wrong message and send a precarious life over the edge, or atty P believes it is flat out immoral, illegal and wrong, then, clearly, the film merely reinforced their own personal beliefs and maybe challenged them a bit, but didn't really force them to its conclusion or way of thinking, if there is such a thing. in fact, it might have clarified for each of them, just how strongly they personally felt about that particular issue.

so what's the big threat about it then, really?

well you can see that it gets in under the skin.

and it's a heart-breaker.

it's all about heart. the whole thing.

and sweet M is worried about the message. the conclusion. well to that i say, i say sweet M, i do see your point. i mean i do know appreciate that sentiment. heck at my more judgmental moments i'm quick to hold nietzche responsible for the nazis and their little plan for world domination. oh yes there is little responsibility taken when it comes to things, the sway and the influence, but then don't works of art have a life of their own really and isn't it up to the person to choose for herself? where do we draw the line between freedom of expression and censorship? if she's going to get upset about clint's movie, how about all the shameless advertising that destroys and degrades our culture with the conscious intent to sell us crap we don't need or want? to turn us into mindless consumers of useless and wasteful items? fashion shifts every day. destroying the environment is so often good for the economy. profit is made from waste and need is something that can be created, manipulated, manufactured and sold. we allow for that sort of expression, so what's wrong with a politically incorrect view of an assisted suicide of a severely disabled female?

well that might be tangent number five or so, but the point is, the point is, well i don't know i don't know i'm not sure there really is a point.

i just know that movie made me feel a lot of things. and it caused me to examine those feelings, and from whence they came, arose and fell, to look at my attachments and beliefs. and in my book, that's a good thing. and while i prefer not to pass judgment on the situation, i do like the ethical dilemma involved, the human spirit, and the passion.

the hurt and the sorrow and the pain and the choices.

heart. suffering. volition.

so, i say it's a mind-opener. i say it's worth seeing.

and i say it's worth continuing the discussion.

posted by: limine at 23:16 | link | comments (9) |

Template by motime.com  |  header image credit: Markus Gann © www.begann.de