|
|
|
|
|
by jdietrich
977 days ago
|
|
I think the "fighter" rhetoric is specific to individualistic cultures that place a high premium on personal agency. Westerners in general and (liberal, college-educated) Americans in particular have a really hard time dealing with the idea that something might be largely or wholly out of their control. The opposite extreme would be fatalistic cultures, where one's death or survival is in the hands of god - deo volente, besiyata dishmaya, inshallah. 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. |
|