Tag: Conscious Living

Posted on

De-Medicalizing Death

By Jessica Nutik Zitter

[T]here’s been an unexpected, and excellent, consequence to California’s new medical aid-in-dying law. For many terminally ill patients, immersion in the process of securing lethal drugs ultimately renders them unnecessary. How did this come about?

Passed by the California legislature in late 2015, the End of Life Option Act allows physicians to prescribe a lethal concoction of drugs to some patients with terminal illnesses who meet certain criteria. The law, commonly described as providing “medical aid in dying,” took effect on June 9, 2016. It stipulates only that the requesting patient be considered terminal (less than six months away from death), possess full decision-making capacity, and be physically able to self-administer the life-limiting drugs. Although the physician is obligated by law to inform the patient of alternative care options, such as psychological counseling or symptom management with palliative care services, there is no direct requirement that the physician arrange or provide them. In its barest form, the option can serve as a dispensary for life-ending medications.

California’s medical community was taken by surprise by the rapid passing of the law in late 2015. It came on the heels of the dramatic case of Brittany Maynard, a young woman with terminal brain cancer who elected to move from California to Oregon to access medical aid in dying under that state’s Death with Dignity Act. Hospital systems and physicians in California suddenly found themselves with an urgent need to rapidly formulate policies around this new right of patients. Some, such as the Catholic Health Systems, opted out on religious grounds. Others scrambled to put basic policies in place for patients who met inclusion criteria. And some institutions decided to put significant time and resources into supporting this new legal reality in the most comprehensive way possible.

One standout example is the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Health Centers. After literally thousands of hours of discussion, the working group determined that the intake process for patients requesting medical aid in dying should be conducted by trained psychotherapists (psychologists and clinical social workers) instead of physicians. Dr. Neil Wenger, director of the UCLA Health Ethics Center, led the effort to create processes and infrastructure to respond to this law. “We wanted to be able to offer a service that doctors tend to gloss over,” he said, when asked why they chose to lead with talk therapy. The intake consisted of an extensive set of questionnaires designed to assess all possible sources of distress. Any patient with physical or psychiatric needs was referred on to the appropriate services. But as the UCLA committee expected, most of what patients needed was to discuss their feelings about their approaching death and process their grief and sense of loss. This mirrors data from the entire state of California as well as Oregon, which suggest that the distress prompting patients to request these lethal medications primarily stems from their fear over losing control at the end of life. It is not, as many may think, due primarily to physical suffering.

The intake questions explored goals of care, quality of life, and patients’ emotions around their impending deaths: Were they ready? What scared them? What made them anxious? Did they feel their lives were complete? What did they feel makes life meaningful? What decrements in quality of life are too great? What haven’t they said and to whom? Anne Coscarelli, psychologist and founding director of the Simms/Mann–UCLA Center for Integrative Oncology, described the conversations that came from this intake process as revelatory and comforting for the patients. Several patients ultimately completed legacy projects, such as video or written messages and stories, for their children and grandchildren. This invitation to talk, which opens up a discussion that most of us are taught to avoid, turned out to be a game-changer.

Only a quarter of the patients ultimately went on to ingest the lethal drugs they came requesting. The actual data is more complex: Some who requested this service did not meet the basic requirements to receive it. Others died before they had a chance to ingest the medications. But the staff from UCLA reported case after case in which patients’ goals shifted from wanting to hasten their deaths to deciding to live out the remainder of their lives.

Ours is a culture that does not talk about death, even when it should be impossible to ignore. Despite the fact that 89 percent of people think that it is a doctor’s responsibility to discuss end-of-life care with their patients, in reality, only 17 percent of patients report having had such a conversation, according to a 2015 survey from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. As a doctor who practices both critical care and palliative care medicine, I have presided over thousands of deaths. Most of my patients have suffered with chronic illnesses for years: metastatic cancers, failing lungs, and progressive debilitation from dementia. And yet almost none of them have discussed their own death with their doctors, or even their families. Most have no idea that they are actually dying. In this culture that operates on a fantasy of immortality, with unrealistic promises made by television shows and advertisements, doctors see themselves as failures if they are unable to cure their patients. We physicians are trained to lead patients into battle after battle, into the next procedure or intervention, banking always on that magic pill or miracle cure.

This broad cultural unwillingness to acknowledge death results in a phenomenon I call the “End-of-Life Conveyor Belt,” where high-tech treatments are automatically attached to bodies as they progress through the stages of dying. As the baby boomers age and our treatment options blossom, more are being exposed to the suffering brought about by these protocols. The tremendous anxiety we see over loss of control is understandable. It is no wonder that people in many states have asked for, and finally won, the right to take back that control with a pill.

The effort by UCLA Health seems to be working. Placing highly trained psychologists and clinical social workers in the critical role of “first responder” to a patient’s request to hasten death has rendered many of these requests obsolete. In choosing this approach, UCLA is effectively “de-medicalizing” the experience of dying by prioritizing the need for deep reflection. In this way, the program provides patients with an option that doctors are not primarily trained for.

Patients requesting support to hasten their deaths are only a small subset of the population of the dying. They are in some ways canaries in a coal mine, their request for medical aid in dying is alerting us to the unmet needs of the wider population of dying patients. And what I am seeing is that our new legal responsibility to steward these patients responsibly through this rocky terrain will build practices and skills that will help all of those at the end of life.

Where goes California, thus goes the nation. California was the fourth state to legalize medical aid in dying and has since been followed by two more. And UCLA’s approach, with trained psychologists guiding patients through this tricky terrain, shows us the way. Let’s take advantage of this wave to take better care of all our seriously ill patients. And let’s make sure we give patients what they really need and hope that lethal drugs are always the last tool in the toolbox.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

When a ‘good death’ was often painful: euthanasia through the ages

By

[T]oday, a primary goal of both movements aimed at care of the dying – palliative care and euthanasia – is to eliminate suffering. These are underpinned by the idea that a good death is a painless death. But it wasn’t always so.

The term “euthanasia” is derived from the Greek for good death, but it only began to be used in a modern and familiar way in the late 19th century. For centuries in Western societies, “euthanasia” referred to a pious death blessed by God.

The means of achieving a good death was set out in the enormously popular ars moriendi (art of dying) guides that offered prayers, attitudes and actions intended to guide the dying towards salvation. This wasn’t necessarily a painless process. Far and away the most reproduced image of good dying was Christ’s crucifixion.

The pain that could accompany dying was seen as punishment for sin and ultimately redemptive: a chance to transcend the world and flesh through imitation of Christ’s suffering. It was also a test of the compassion and charity of friends, relatives and even strangers.

The Christian injunction to minister to suffering meant visiting and caring for the dying were seen as communal duties. Children as well as adults were expected to offer physical and moral support to those who were gravely ill.

Doctors did not typically attend the deathbed. They did not have an obvious role in the central spiritual business of dying, but nor were they particularly associated with the mitigation of suffering.

Indeed, in the pre-anaesthetic era, doctors were more likely to be associated with the infliction of pain. Surgery, of course, was excruciating, but other now infamous “heroic” remedies (such as blistering, excessive bleeding and the application of caustic chemicals to the skin) were based on the belief that pain had healing properties and involved doctors deliberately inducing it.

In the 19th century, pain began to be seen as a discrete and aberrant physiological phenomenon. Both dying and suffering were increasingly medicalised. Doctors gradually took over from the clergy and family as carers of the dying.

At the same time, the word “euthanasia” took on a new meaning. It began to refer to this new medical duty to assist the terminally ill – but not to hasten death.

In the wake of the mid-century revolution in anaesthetics and aided by innovations such as the hypodermic syringe, doctors began to “treat” the dying with painkillers as well as prayers.

In 1870, Samuel Williams, a Birmingham businessman and amateur philosopher, proposed a more definitive form of this new medical treatment for the terminally ill. In an essay called Euthanasia, published by the local Speculative Club, he wrote:

That in all cases of hopeless and painful illness, it should be the recognised duty of the medical attendant, whenever so desired by the patient, to administer chloroform or such other anaesthetic as may by-and-by supersede chloroform – so as to destroy the consciousness at once, and put the sufferer to a quick and painless death.

Williams sparked a debate that has waxed and waned but never gone away. But how had this come to look like a good way to die?

Changing meanings of pain

In 1901 psychologist and philosopher William James wrote of the “strange moral transformation” that had taken place regarding attitudes to pain:

It is not expected of a man that he should either endure it or inflict much of it, and to listen to the recital of cases of it makes our flesh creep morally as well as physically. The way in which our ancestors looked upon pain as an eternal ingredient of the world’s order, and both caused and suffered it as a matter-of-course proportion of their day’s work, fills us with amazement.

Historian Stephanie Snow observes that as anaesthetics and other methods of pain relief became available in the 19th century, people began to see pain – the experience but also the sight of it – as more damaging and demoralising.

A new generation of comfortably off Victorians who considered anaesthesia commonplace could no longer stomach physical suffering. Now pain was something that could not just be eliminated but struck as cruel, unusual and degrading: “an alien force which undermined man’s very humanity”.

Dying and suffering became things from which people, particularly children, should be shielded.

A modern paradox

Medical methods aimed at eliminating the pain of the dying process developed as the fear of death – a fear that for centuries dwelt on the post-mortem horrors of hell – began to centre on the horror that could precede it.

Paradoxically, this fear arose and gained momentum as most people in Western cultures became increasingly insulated from such suffering. As mortality declined, more people died in hospital under the care of specialists, and doctors’ ability to control pain advanced in ways previously unimaginable.

This very modern anxiety can be historically tracked from Williams’s 1870 proposal to the assisted dying bill soon to be debated in the Victorian parliament.

Our ancestors would be amazed.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

When life is coming to a close: three common myths about dying

By

[O]n average 435 Australians die each day. Most will know they are at the end of their lives. Hopefully they had time to contemplate and achieve the “good death” we all seek. It’s possible to get a good death in Australia thanks to our excellent healthcare system – in 2015, our death-care was ranked second in the world.

We have an excellent but chaotic system. Knowing where to find help, what questions to ask, and deciding what you want to happen at the end of your life is important. But there are some myths about dying that perhaps unexpectedly harm the dying person and deserve scrutiny.

Myth 1: positive thinking can delay death

The first myth is that positive thinking cures or delays death. It doesn’t. The cultivation of specific emotions does not change the fact that death is a biological process, brought about by an accident, or disease processes that have reached a point of no return.

Fighting the good fight, remaining positive by not talking about end of life, or avoiding palliative care, have not been shown to extend life. Instead, positive thinking may silence those who wish to talk about their death in a realistic way, to express negative emotions, realise their time is limited and plan effectively for a good death or access palliative care early, which has actually been shown to extend life.

For those living closer to the prospect of death, being forced to manage their emotions is not just difficult but also unnecessary, and counterproductive to getting the help we know is important at the end of life.

Myth 2: dying at home means a good death

The second myth is dying at home always means a good death. While Australians prefer to die at home, most die in hospital. Managing a death at home requires substantial resources and coordination. Usually at least one resident carer is needed. This presents a problem. Currently 24% of Australians live alone and that’s predicted to grow to 27% by 2031. We also know many Australian families are geographically dispersed and cannot relocate to provide the intensive assistance required.

The role of the carer may be rewarding but it’s often hard work. We know timing of death is unpredictable, depending on the disease processes. Nurses, doctors and allied health professionals visit, problem solve and teach the carer to perform end-of-life care. They don’t move in, unless they’re hired in a private capacity; a possible but pricey alternative. Finally, specialist equipment is required. While this is usually possible, problems can arise if equipment is hired out for a specific time and the patient doesn’t die within that allotted time.

It’s not a failure to die in a hospital, and may be the best option for many Australians. While it would appear that large public or private hospitals may not be the best places to die, in many areas they provide excellent palliative care services. Appropriate end-of-life planning needs to take this into account.

Myth 3: pushing on with futile treatment can’t hurt

A window of opportunity exists to have a good death. Pushing on with treatment that has no benefit or is “futile” can be distressing for the patient, family and the doctors. Doctors are not obliged to offer futile treatment, but unfortunately patients or family may demand them because they don’t understand the impact.

There are cases where people have been resuscitated against better medical judgement because family members have become angry and insisted. The outcome is usually poor, with admission to the intensive care unit, and life support withdrawn at a later date. In these cases, we have merely intervened in the dying process, making it longer and more unpleasant than it needs to be. The window for a good death has passed. We are prolonging, not curing death and it can be unkind – not just for those sitting at the bedside.

The story of a good death is perhaps not as interesting as a terrible one. Yet there are many “good death” stories in Australia. There are likely to be many more if some of the myths that surround dying are better understood.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

When to Consider Hospice Care

According to a new study, many people wait too long to get special end-of-life care

By Lauren F. Friedman

[M]any patients near the end of their lives wait too long to enter hospice care, reports a new study published in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

People who put off hospice care—in which attempts to cure a disease are usually stopped and replaced with treatments just for pain and suffering—might spend months in and out of hospitals, with their families struggling to take care of them. Hospice is specifically designed to address such issues with drugs and other interventions, which can increase patients’ quality of life toward the end of life.

“At some point, patients and their families and doctors realize that hospice is appropriate, but that happens perhaps later than it should,” says study author Thomas Michael Gill, M.D., a professor of medicine, epidemiology, and investigative medicine, and the Humana Foundation professor of geriatric medicine, at Yale University. “When folks are referred to hospice only in the last days of their life, it’s difficult to have a meaningful benefit.”

For nearly 16 years, Gill and a team of researchers from the School of Medicine at Yale University followed 754 people who were all over 70 years old when the study began. Even though more than 40 percent of the 562 patients who died during the study entered hospice care during the last year of their lives, the median time spent in hospice was less than two weeks.

Many of their most debilitating symptoms—including pain, nausea, depression, and shortness of breath—decreased substantially only after hospice began. That means many patients might have been suffering needlessly for months, says Diane Meier, M.D., the director of the Center to Advance Palliative Care and a professor of geriatrics and palliative medicine at The Mount Sinai Hospital.

Health crises, emergency-room visits, and hospitalizations can become routine toward the end of life, and “that is a very distressing and stressful experience for patients and family members,” says Meier. “Remaining in your own home [something hospice makes possible], a familiar place with familiar people, is safer and offers better quality of life.”

Here’s what you need to know about hospice care, and how to know when it’s time to begin considering it, for yourself or a loved one. 

What Is Hospice Care?

Hospice is a type of end-of-life care where the focus shifts from medical interventions aimed at a cure to palliative care, in which comfort and support for patients and their families are the main goals. It generally includes medical and nursing care as well as counseling and social services. 

According to the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, a specialized team—working in a patient’s home, a nursing home, or a hospice facility—has been trained to treat “all types of physical and emotional symptoms that cause pain, discomfort and distress.”

Hospice has been covered by Medicare since 1982 (though it has become more widely used only recently).

To initiate the hospice benefit, two physicians (or other healthcare providers) have to certify that a patient is terminally ill with less than six months to live—something that can be difficult to predict in many cases, say Meier and Gill. Patients can and do leave hospice at any time, because their condition stabilizes, for example, or because they want to pursue curative treatments again. Hospice care can also be extended beyond six months.

“Many people are fearful that if they choose hospice, they won’t be able to return to mainstream medicine should they improve or new treatments become available—that’s not true,” says Meier. “Hospice is not a one-way street.”

And some evidence suggests that hospice patients actually live just as long or even longer than similarly ill patients who are not in hospice.

Yet the persistent misconceptions about hospice, says Gill, may be part of what keep people from seeking it out sooner.

When Is It the Right Time for Hospice?

For people with terminal conditions (which includes not only some cancers but also dementia, terminal heart disease, lung disease, frailty, and more), there should be an ongoing discussion taking place with their doctor about their goals and priorities, says Gill—ideally long before hospice is being broached.

“Often patients will say ‘I’m more interested in the quality rather than the quantity of my remaining life,’” he says, and that can help inform future discussions about end-of-life care.

But if you have not already discussed the possibility of hospice with a doctor, either for yourself or a loved one, there are two key signs that suggest it might be time to broach the topic for someone nearing the end of life, Meier says.

First, if a patient is having increasing difficulty taking care of themselves and struggling with basic tasks such as walking, getting out of a chair, bathing, dressing, and using the toilet, hospice care is designed to help with all of those things.

Second, symptoms such as severe pain, shortness of breath, hopelessness, depression, and profound fatigue are all treatable in hospice, says Meier. In fact, “most of them can be improved or eliminated,” she says.

In the end, “a patient’s trajectory is most important,” says Gill. “In terms of daily functioning, are they heading downhill as opposed to being relatively stable?”

These conversations can be difficult for patients, their families, and their doctors—which is why people often put them off until the last moment, sometimes sacrificing quality time at the end of life for dubious interventions or unnecessary hospitalization.

But the benefits to considering hospice care sooner are clear. A patient with terminal cancer, featured in a 2014 Consumer Reports article, called entering a hospice program—nearly nine months before he died—“one of the best things that’s happened to me in the last I don’t know how many years.”

“It’s challenging to have honest discussions with patients and families about death and the dying process,” says Gill. “But leaving the conversation until the very end makes it more difficult.” 

For more information, see Consumer Reports’ guide to caregiving and end-of-life care.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Walking hand in hand: Hospice workers accompany dying people

Lisa Sartin

By Jerrilyn Zavada

[A]s a nurse, Lisa Sartin has been interested in end-of-life care.

Sartin began her nursing career 25 years ago and has worked in oncology, critical care and as a nursing supervisor.

But in the last year, working as a hospice nurse for OSF Home Health in Ottawa, she found her niche.

“When I was working with oncology patients, I was just out of nursing school and loved it, but it was a little stressful,” Sartin said. “I was 22 years old and thought I could fix everything. Hospice was something I was just always interested in. This opportunity was available and I tried it and loved it.”

Sartin and the rest of the hospice care team, which includes skilled nursing, a social worker, certified nursing assistants and the chaplain/bereavement coordinator, work closely with one another to provide mental, physical and spiritual support for dying people and their families.

“From the minute they are admitted, each patient is always treated individually,” Sartin said. “Each patient has individual needs, each family has individual needs. We assess where they’re at in the grieving process, acceptance process and develop a plan of care from there.”

Sartin said the frequency with which the team visits the patient and family depends on the illness. A key responsibility of the nursing staff is education, especially on pain management and medicine administration.

“We see them a couple times a week,” she said. “If they are more critical, we see them more often. We go out and we’re there for the whole family. We’re caring not just for patients but for the whole family. You develop very close friendships and relationships with them.”

At a time when emotions can be all over the map for everyone involved, Sartin takes special care to be honest with the patient and their family about what they can expect.

“I tell them I will always be honest with them and that I can’t promise them any time, but what time there is I will make comfortable for them,” she said. “Everyone is different. Not everyone can handle the same conversations at the same time. By the time of the transition, families and patients are very educated and ready. Some patients want to be educated right up front and others want to be educated as they’re going through the process. All are educated the same, just at different rates.”

When death is imminent, Sartin says most people are prepared, but she’s not sure anyone is ever ready.

“Every family is different,” she said. “They’re prepared to see the family member not suffer anymore. I’ve been present for many passings. As a nurse our job is to be a support system. There are many times when we get in the car and we cry, but our priority is to be a support and be with them at the time of death.”

Although hospice care isn’t for everyone, those who do work with dying people and their families find a great personal reward from the task. Sartin says hospice workers have to be caring and compassionate, not only for people, but also for the line of work they are doing.

“Hospice is very rewarding. In nursing you want to fix everybody,” she said. “Sometimes helping means not fixing. It is rewarding knowing you have helped a patient and family through what is the most difficult time in their life. You’ve given comfort and know you’ve made the passing as peaceful as it can be. I’m rewarded every day by the friendships I make with the families and the patients.”

Each member of the hospice team brings a great deal of professional work ethic. Still, the nature of the job is they are losing someone with whom they have formed a relationship.

“You become very close to them,” Sartin said. “With each patient you lose, you are losing a friend. That part is difficult. But the benefits and rewards you get in the job very much outweigh that part of it.”

Throughout the process, Bill Clark, bereavement coordinator, is present for the dying patient and the family to help with the grieving process.

“I visit the patient or family as often as they request me,” Clark said. “Providing active listening is primary. By listening, I am able to discern their needs and concerns about dying. The bereavement coordinator’s presence, spiritual support and prayers are what they most request.”

After the patient’s death, the bereavement coordinator continues care for the family for 12 to 13 months in various ways. Once a year, a memorial event takes place for families who have lost a loved one in the previous year.

Clark, also an ordained minister, provides a calm, pastoral presence “by representing the love of God and the hope of heaven and eternal life He has promised through His Son Jesus.” He also offers prayers, which he says hardly anyone declines.

“One of my important assignments is to ascertain their religious background and even offer to contact their own pastor, priest, rabbi or any other religious clergy,” Clark said. “I never attempt to replace someone’s church or clergy, but simply come alongside for additional spiritual support.”

During his years as a hospice chaplain, Clark, says he is surprised at how most people are able to work through a lot of their own issues within themselves.

“Their own faith background helps them,” he said. “They often need a sounding board for their thoughts and feelings, which the chaplain can provide. I have discovered that people with faith have more peace in the midst of the dying process than those who do not … Many questions are resolved in a surrendered life and future to God through prayer.”

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

Don’t Neglect the Softer Side of Your Estate Plan

Document and share your wishes for end-of-life care, the care of your pets, the disposition of your tangible assets, and more.

By Christine Benz

[A]s my family’s “first responder” and resident financial person, I served as power of attorney for my parents, as well as executor and trustee for both.

Their estate-planning documents attended to a lot of crucial issues: the distribution of their assets, the trusts that were to be set up upon each of their deaths, and their attitudes toward life-sustaining care.

Yet having gone through the process of seeing my parents through their last years and settling their estates, I’m struck by the number of “softer” decisions these documents didn’t cover–important topics like their attitudes toward receiving care in their home or in a facility, or whether they’d prefer to die at home or if a hospital was OK. Did I need to split up all of the physical assets equally among the children, or were they OK with me letting more stuff go to family members with a greater need for them?

Implicit in making someone an executor, trustee, or guardian, or delegating powers of attorney, is a statement that that you trust that person’s judgment to do what is best in various situations, including some of those outlined above. But I think it’s worthwhile to think through some of the softer, nonfinancial issues that could arise in your later years. Some of these issues, such as providing for the care of pets or getting specific about the disposition of your physical property, can be addressed with legally binding estate-planning documents. Other issues, such as how you’d like your loved ones to balance your care with their own quality of life, are best discussed with your loved ones and/or documented in writing on your own. (If you decide to leave physical or electronic documents that spell out your wishes on some of these matters, be sure to let your loved ones know how gain access to them.)

Attitudes Toward Guardianship
If you have minor children and have designated guardians to care for them if something should happen to you, you of course need to inform the guardians and make sure they’re OK with the responsibility. In addition, take the next step and communicate to your designated guardians about your priorities and values as a parent–your attitudes toward their education, spirituality, and financial matters, for example. And even if your children are grown–or getting there–it’s worthwhile to talk to close friends or family members about how you hope they’ll interact with your kids if you’re no longer around. After my sister lost a dear friend to cancer, for example, she and a group of other close friends serve as surrogate “moms” to their late friend’s daughter, now in her mid-20s. There’s no substitute for an actual mom, of course but it’s a relationship they all cherish, and they’re happy they discussed it with their friend before she passed away.

Attitudes Toward Life During Dementia
Given the increased incidence of dementia in the developed world, an outgrowth of longer life expectancies, it’s worth thinking through and communicating to your loved ones your attitudes toward your care and quality of life if you develop dementia. Would you prioritize in-home care above all else, or would care delivered in a facility be agreeable if it improved your spouse’s quality of life? Would you want your spouse or other loved ones to try to care for you themselves for as long as possible, or would you rather they delegated those responsibilities to paid caregivers, assuming the family finances could support it? How would you like your loved ones to balance your quality of life with their own? How would you like them to balance your health and safety with your own quality of life? How important would it be to you to receive daily visits from your spouse and other loved ones, even it meant that those obligations would detract from their ability to travel or pursue other activities? Would you prefer to keep your decline as private as possible, or would you rather be out in public interacting with people no matter what? There’s no “right” answer to any of these questions, but talking through them can help your loved ones be at peace with the decisions they could eventually make.

Attitudes Toward End-of-Life Care
I first became aware of The Conversation Project, designed by to help people discuss their own thoughts on end-of-life care, on NPR. In the segment, two adult daughters used “The Conversation” template to interview their elderly dad about the decisions they might eventually make on his behalf. Their father had drafted an advance directive that specified, rather strictly, that he didn’t want any life-sustaining care if he had no chance for a good quality of life. But one of the daughters asked whether it would be OK if they took a bit more time with the decision to let him go if it provided them with a sense of peace. Without skipping a beat, the dad said, “Oh, of course. Absolutely.” That conversation drove home the importance of adding nuance to the end-of-life discussion, above and beyond what could be provided by living wills or advance directives. You can read more about The Conversation Project and download a conversation starter kit here, but don’t feel bound by it. If there are important end-of-life issues that it doesn’t address, feel free to expand the discussion with your loved ones and/or commit them to writing.

Attitudes Toward Funerals, Burials, Etc.
Many people make plans for any funerals/memorials and the disposition of their bodies well in advance; the right approach to these issues may be predetermined by culture or religion. But for other people, attitudes toward these matters aren’t obvious at all, so it’s useful to spell out your wishes in advance, either verbally, in writing, or both. (My mother initially insisted that my dad would be buried rather than cremated, but even she was convinced that cremation was the right thing after we found three written statements from him about his desire to be cremated.) Maybe your wishes are simply to have your loved ones say goodbye in whatever way gives them the most peace at that time; in that case, tell them that or write that down.

Attitudes Toward Care of Pets
It’s a cliche to say that pets are like family members, but for many people, that’s absolutely the case. The good news is that you can actually lay the groundwork for continuing care for your pet as part of your estate plan. The gold standard, albeit one that entails costs to set up, is a pet trust; through such a trust, you detail which pets are covered, who you’d like to care for them and how, and leave an amount of money to cover the pet’s ongoing care. Alternatively, you can use a will to specify a caretaker for your pet and leave additional assets to that person to care for the pet; the downside of this arrangement is that the person who inherits those assets isn’t legally bound to use the money for the pet’s care. At a minimum, develop at least a verbally communicated plan for caretaking for your pet if you’re unable to do so–either on a short- or long-term basis. This fact sheet provides helpful tips to ensure for your pets’ continuous well-being.

Attitudes about Disposition of Personal Possessions
Are there specific physical assets you’d like to earmark for children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, or friends? If so, your estate-planning attorney can help you codify the disposition of those assets in your will so there’s no confusion. Also let your loved ones know if there are physical assets that you’d like to stay within the family (again, your will is the best way to do this). Importantly, you should also let them know what you don’t feel strongly about them selling or otherwise disposing of when you’re gone. Do you want your executor to take pains to divide the assets equally among your heirs so that everyone receives tangible property of similar value? The topic of dividing up tangible property among family members is a complicated one, to put it mildly; the more you say about your wishes in advance, the better off everyone will be in the end.

Complete Article HERE!

Posted on

The Brutal Truth Of Living With A Terminal Illness


Brought to you by Stop The Horror
Stop The Horror is a five-minute short film that confronts viewers with a harrowing retelling of the true events surrounding one man’s traumatic death.

by Sam Langford 

Kass Hall is a law student with a background in art and design; she lives with her husband and their pug called Elvis. She describes herself as a sister, a daughter, an aunty and a friend. 

She has been living with cancer for 27 years.

“I’m getting good at defying the odds, but I’ll never be in remission,” Kass says. “I’ll always be under my oncologist and surgeon’s eagle eyes, and I know that each hurdle, big or small, is a hurdle closer to the finish line.”

Impending death is not the kind of thing you adjust to. Despite the number of times she’s come close, Kass, now 39, is frank about being scared. She is under no illusions about what dying is like — she has seen “many, many friends, from children to older people, dying slowly and painfully.”

“I’ve been in the room in the final moments of life, and though we do our best to make people ‘comfortable’, it’s a situation I do not want to find myself in — for my own sake and that of those who love me,” she says.

She hopes that finish line isn’t soon. But in the event that it is, she wants a say in drawing that line.

This is how Kass has come to be an advocate for voluntary assisted dying legislation — her experience leaves her pretty uniquely placed to clap back at people opposed to it. With new assisted dying legislation proposed in Victoria at the moment, now is a particularly pressing time to persuade people of the bill’s importance.

“I have always liked the idea that, when I reach ‘my line’, I could choose to end my own pain. Watching someone you love die is one of the worst experiences a human can endure, and I imagine being the person dying is even worse.”

It’s an experience explored in the recently released film, Stop The Horror. A graphic five-minute short directed by Justin Kurzel, the film tells the true story of a man who dies over a period of three weeks, exploring what he and his family are forced to deal with.

Getting Diagnosed

Kass’s first diagnosis was in 1990, when she was twelve. The kind of cancer she has is incredibly rare, and was hard to pin down for a long time — as she wryly puts it, “what they thought it was then is not what they think it is now”.

That first diagnosis led to surgery and chemotherapy. On five separate occasions, her parents were called to the hospital to say goodbye. And yet, against all odds, Kass survived, though not without complications. “At that time I lost part of my stomach and duodenum [the first section of the small intestine],” she says. “The chemo left me infertile and with a heart condition, though thankfully my heart has remained strong.”

These complications have been multiplying steadily ever since. In 2000, Kass lost a kidney. In 2008, her thyroid. In 2011, the cancer returned to her stomach and liver. It was only in 2012 that her doctors discovered she had a genetic defect that was causing the tumours to return.

That was the moment, Kass says, when realisation hit. “This disease was — barring the unforeseen — what would kill me”.

Here’s the cruel thing about this genetic defect: in addition to all but guaranteeing the cancer’s return, it makes Kass ineligible for an organ transplant. And while so far it’s been possible to combat the resurgence of tumours with surgery, she’s keenly aware that things can’t continue this way forever.

“There’s going to come a time where surgery is no longer an option, and that’s when I start the slow process of dying.”

“The idea of dying anytime soon is not one I am comfortable with,” she says, “but who is, though?” She’s coming up on her 40th birthday in January, a milestone her oncologist has been telling her for years would be a “great outcome”.

Why Voluntary Assisted Dying Legislation Matters

Assisted dying has always been controversial, often for reasons Kass is keen to see us move past. Concerns about younger people — not children, but adults in their late teens and early twenties — having access to the option of assisted dying are, to Kass’s mind, utterly dismissive of terminally ill young people’s experience.

“There is no difference in older people and younger people making this decision,” she says. “If anything, for younger people the decision is harder because we think about what we may miss out on — weddings, children, travel.”

Kass says arguments that say young people with terminal illness don’t have the necessary perspective or clarity to decide to end their lives “seek to debase a person’s autonomy and thought process.”

“It’s designed to second guess a person. No one has the right to do that. Anyone who said that to me would probably not like the response they get from me.”

As for those who argue that choosing to die is a selfish act, Kass says her response “probably isn’t fit to print”.

“What I can say is that what other people think is not my problem. They are not living my life, they’re not walking in my shoes. Everyone has an opinion, but my life deals in facts. What others think about my choices, especially if they’ve never experienced my situation, is of zero consequence to me”.

Some of the most legitimate and important critiques of voluntary assisted dying legislation, though, come from people who have experienced Kass’s situation, or situations like it. These campaigns are run by people with terminal illness or life-threatening disabilities who are concerned that assisted dying legislation will needlessly kill many people through a subtle combination of pressures. Things like, for example, the feeling of being a burden on close family or medical services.

These are arguments Kass is willing to engage on — she says she’s aware of and understands the campaign in question, but thinks the legislation proposed by the Victorian Government includes adequate safeguards, including a multi-step process she hopes will catch any instance of family or external pressure.

“To my mind,” she says, “that is why patient autonomy is the key. At the end of the day, what family members think and what their needs are is not what this is about — it is and should always be about the primary patient. If the primary patient has not requested and been through the voluntary assisted dying process, then it shouldn’t be available.”

“And any family member that puts any pressure on a person who is dealing with illness or disability should find the map to hell and go there. There are so many people in the disability community and those with long term illness who have so much to contribute and who are outstanding members of society. Having an illness or disability doesn’t diminish us as people.”

Reaching The Finish Line

In Kass’s case, she knows her husband will support her decision if she reaches her line. She hopes that won’t be soon — she wants to grow old with her husband, see her nieces and nephews grow up, have a full legal career. For the time being, she’s optimistic.

But even on good days, the line is there, and Kass says that when she hits it, she has “no hesitations” about what she’ll do.

“I have no interest in suffering unnecessarily,” she says. “It will be my decision.”

“I respect that this won’t be for everyone. I just feel that a choice for those of us who do seek to end our own suffering should be given to us. We all have our own paths in life, and should have as much choice made available to us as possible.”

Complete Article HERE!