|
|
|
|
|
by ekanes
977 days ago
|
|
I'm sorry you had to go through that. Do you have any ideas on a better framework for society to approach this? As you allude, people intend the best for the patient, and this seems to be what we've come up with. "You are a fighter, you can do this." It seems like the two possible frameworks are fighting vs enduring? (Others?) If I had to guess, we might choose to position the patient as a fighter because to fight against harsh odds requires courage, so what we're giving is the compliment that you are courageous. I think that's the intent at least. |
|
I think a reasonable middle ground starts with acknowledging that being seriously ill is just a shitty situation, that over a long enough time frame death is inevitable, and that outcomes are often determined mostly by dumb luck. Not being in control can be very distressing, but the struggle to try and retain control often just compounds that distress. Willing someone to "fight" a cellular process within their body probably isn't going to help them in any meaningful way, but there are lots of things that can be done to make them more comfortable. Hope is valuable, but false hope is a kind of cruelty; we all need to be better at accepting the limits of medicine and recognising the threshold of futility.