Just came across a thought-provoking article in the Guardian about doctors foregoing treatment when diagnosed as terminally ill, largely because they have so often witnessed the poor quality of life of those undergoing treatment to extend their lives for a short period.
This issue came to public attention due to an essay by American doctor, Ken Murray, who made a strong case for terminally ill patients opting to eschew invasive life-prolonging treatment and choosing to die at home.
I have very little personal experience of these difficult issues, so I hesitate to comment, but it did make me think of three things.
1) The word 'hypocrisy' came to my mind, but at the same time I felt invaded by a cultural meme. You hear this word so much these days, and it spoken with such rhetorical force, but even a tiny bit of human insight tells you that we are all hypocrites to a greater or lesser degree. For all of us there is a gap between what we think and value, and what we do.
2) Relatedly, we often believe one thing in one context, that appears incompatible with what we believe in another context, without stopping to wonder whether it is(or indeed perhaps should be) the context, rather than our sense of agency that is the biggest determinant of what we believe and do. This pervasive feature of human experience is sometimes called cognitive polyphasia.
We might think we would not want to prolong our lives with invasive treatment in abstract, or even as professionals, but it doesn't follow that we would think the same thing if our own life was at stake. There is a famous quotation( I forget the source) that says something to the effect that life and consciousness are so valuable that even if our lives involved being alone and holding tenaciously to a rock in the middle of the ocean, this would be preferable to death. I don't know about that...but it's not really for me, now, to say.
3) The best book I read on related issues was Grace and Grit by Ken Wilber, about the five years just after his marriage in which his wife had breast cancer and eventually died. It was a poignant and absorbing read, peppered with spiritual and philosophical insight. For instance:
And that is exactly what Treya was doing. If and when death came, she would deal with it then, not now.
There's a great Zen koan on this. A student comes to a Zen Master and asks, 'What happens to us after death?' And the Zen Master says, 'I don't know.'
The student is aghast. 'You don't know?! You're a Zen Master!'
'Yes, but not a dead one."
Related articles
-
Imagining a better future through foresight – why the metaphors we use matter
Adanna Shallowe
As we begin to imagine the post-pandemic world, we need to challenge our use of old metaphors to allow for new narratives and better futures to emerge.
-
Polarised: The RSA podcast exploring the politics of division
James Shield
Is it really true that we’ve never been more divided as a society? And if it is, how did it happen and what can be done?
-
How can we give up bad habits for good?
Ian Burbidge
With the post-Christmas resolutions looming, when we try to address the worst of our seasonal over-indulgences, the question remains: how can we give up bad habits for good?
Join the discussion
Comments
Please login to post a comment or reply
Don't have an account? Click here to register.
Hi, yes I have...an amazing book. It was actually a core text in a course I took on 'Neuroeducation' during my masters degree. Amazing what an eye lid can do!
There was a good example of this sort of thing on a documentary I saw about a guy with locked in syndrome. His family really believed he'd rather be dead than live in those circumstances. But doctors were steadfast, and it turned out his will to live was stronger than his kids expected it would be. His quality of life was actually quite good. Did you read the Diving Bell and the Butterfly? Don't bother with the film - it tells a differently story all together.