In which I nag you to buy life insurance

Nag, nag!

No pressure!

I really hate it when people say, “You have no business having children if you don’t have life insurance!” or “How can you claim you love your family if you don’t have life insurance?” Hey, things happen. Life doesn’t always work out in a sensible order. Lots of non-horrible people don’t have life insurance. Just consider this your reminder, you loving parents, to take a look at your budget and see what you can do.

Read the rest at the Register.

And by the way, my agent is Daniel Finn with New York Life.  If you are looking for a friendly, Catholic guy who will patiently explain things over and over until you understand it, and who will work with you until you find a policy that fits where you are right now, I recommend getting in touch.  860-298-1060 or dtfinn@ft.newyorklife.com

***

Gee, your corpse smells terrific!

Bernadette

Not only does the Catholic Church “do science,” but she allows us a heck of a lot of latitude in our personal devotions. Myself, I have steered clear of incorruptibles as any proof of anything besides the fact that the world is weird, history is messy, and lots of people are different from me.

Read the rest at the Register. 

Happy New Year! You’re Going to Die.

Gedenck_O_Mensch_sich_wer_Du_bist

Anonymous painting courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

I’m telling my daughter the brightest version of something that is true, and something that we all need to remember: that the best way to deal with death and the afterlife is to remember, always, that it’s our behavior right now that decides which path we’re on. It’s a good thing to spend some time thinking about death, not to terrify ourselves or to revel in dark things, but to shed some light on our present choices.

Read the rest at the Register. 

What About Behavioral and Spiritual Arguments Against Vaccines?

PIC vaccine

As we can see from Tuesday’s post and the response to it, it’s not necessarily clear what we mean when we say “science” or “medicine.” So let’s put science and medicine aside entirely for a moment, and let’s focus on two arguments against vaccines that I keep hearing — arguments which don’t appeal to science at all, but which are spiritual and behavioral.

Read the rest at the Register.   Note: any snark, condescension, lack of charity, arrogance, self-pity, logical fallacies or otherwise insufferable behavior in this post is unintentional. If you think I’ve missed the mark, please pray for me and respond with as much kindness as you can, because I really am trying here.

We Should Be Afraid

“Be not afraid,” says the angel. Be not afraid, and entrust your life to Christ, who wants only good for you.

All right, but what about when someone else’s life is entrusted to us? What about when we have the power over someone else’s life — the power to alter it forever, even the power to end it?  Remember what happened to Uzzah, who saw the Ark of the Covenant wobbling, and without even thinking, he stepped forward and grabbed hold of the thing. “And The Lord’s anger burned against Uzzah because of his irreverent act; and he died there beside the ark of God.”

Fear of the Lord means that at very least we should hesitate. Sometimes we should not be comfortable and confident. I wrote the post below for Crisis magazine in December of 2008. It’s relevant again, and over and over again, when we bluster and grandstand about executing criminals, waterboarding terrorists, or any time we hold power over the life of another human being. Human life is where God resides in this world. When we stretch out our hands to take hold of it, we should be afraid.

_____

A New Hampshire jury must decide
 whether to sentence Michael Addison, a convicted cop killer, to execution.
He is a terrible man who bragged about his plans to shoot a cop, if he needed to, while committing his many crimes. His defense team is concentrating on his unhappy childhood. The picture that emerges is of a self-serving jerk who grew up to be cold and evil, and he isn’t sorry now.
My husband argues that the Church’s teaching on the death penalty — that it must be reserved for cases in which it is necessary to protect the community — can apply in cases like this: If people who shoot policemen are not executed, then we are tolerating the murder of policemen, an intolerable crime. The safety of the community depends on criminals’ knowing that they will not get away with killing a cop.
I don’t know if he’s right or not. It may be so. Either way, the problem terrifies me.
Many years ago — when I was a new mother, the world was black and white, and the subtleties of Dr. Laura Schlessinger guided my thinking more than any other intellect — we had an upstairs neighbor who was a drug addict.
She was a mess. She was clearly high most of the time. Her hair was chopped and frazzled, her skin and mouth were a wasteland, and she could hardly string two sentences together. She stumbled up and down the stairs past my door, not knowing if it were day, night, or the end of the world.
The only thing she could communicate clearly was that she had just had a baby girl, and she was always looking for a ride to go visit her tiny little one at the hospital. The baby was, of course, sick. She was very premature, probably suffering from withdrawal from the moment of birth.
Miraculously, the child survived, and her terrible mother became almost radiant as she reported the baby’s progress to me. Soon the baby would be able to leave the hospital, she told me — but I didn’t believe her.
Then the day came. The baby was strong enough to be discharged. My neighbor fell into my apartment, half-undressed, sobbing with a terrible sound. “They’re going to take my baby away from me!” she cried. “They’re taking her away!”
Well, of course they were. I couldn’t believe that she didn’t know it would happen. This woman didn’t even know whether she was wearing clothes or not, and she expected the nurses to release a fragile, sick preemie into her care.
It was terrifying. It was absolutely necessary that this thing be done — that the baby be taken away from her mother. The mother clearly deserved it, and the poor baby deserved it, too. But it was the worst thing in the world. You should have heard that mother cry.
Here is another short story: My grandmother died last month. She was 89 years old, and she had been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease 19 years ago. It was like watching a sand house torn away by the tide. She just dissolved.
She had been a rock-hard, funny, sarcastic, boundlessly generous visiting nurse, and now she was a quivering collection of wasted limbs and a ghastly vacancy where her mind used to be. Everyone suffered. She did; her husband did, before he died; and my mother, who cared for her for years, suffered very much in many different ways, and it went on and on and on.
When my grandmother died, it was a relief for everyone. We were so glad for her release from the dark and fearful cell her mind had become. My sister said that she felt that Nana had been out of touch with us for so many years, but now that she was dead, she had been given back to us. We could talk to her again.
At the funeral Mass, it wasn’t hard to stand there and remember these things — her baptism, the Last Rites, the tender mercy of God. The Resurrection.
It was only at the end, when the undertakers braced their hands against the smudgy shroud that covered her coffin and began to heave this burden down the aisle of the church, that it became a terrible thing. She was leaving.
As a Catholic, I know what happens after death. And yet I do not know. They began to sing that drippy hymn “Be Not Afraid,” and suddenly I was afraid. It was right that I should be.
All we really know is separation. We try and hope, but what do we know? We do the best we can to deal with the enormous, shattering burdens of life. But we should be afraid. There is much to hope for, and we trust God. But in the moment, unless we are already dead ourselves, there is much to fear.
So now the jury must decide if this terrible man, this unrepentant murderer Michael Addison, should be killed. Maybe it’s the right thing to do. Maybe no one will even miss him. He deserves it. It’s the way life goes, and sometimes these terrible things need to be done.
But I hope that, when we do it, we are afraid.

Good reminder about the Jahi McMath case

No one will argue that what happened to Jahi McMath isn’t a tragedy. But, John Di Camillo of the National Catholic Bioethics Center reminds us, it may not be the cut-and-dry case of a hard-hearted hospital wedded to the culture of death that some reports are making it out to be.

Jahi McMath went in for tonsil surgery and ended up being declared brain dead three days later, and there has been a legal struggle ever since, to determine whether or not she can be moved to another facility which will agree to continue keeping her on life support.  The whole story is horrible and heart-wrenching, and I can’t even begin to imagine what I would do if I were the parents of this girl.

But we, as readers, don’t know all the details of it.  In an interview with the Catholic News Agency, Di Camillo says:

“It’s not something that’s simply a clear-cut, back-and-white case that we can, from the outside, say we know what’s going on. Because we don’t,” he added.

So even though this is a highly emotional case, it’s important for Catholics not to make rash statements about the decisions of the people involved.  The other day, I almost commented somewhere that that the hospital probably wanted Jahi to die to cover up any evidence of malpractice during the surgery.  But that would have been a serious sin of detraction.  Not only do I not know the motives of the doctors involved, I do not have any specific medical information about the case.

Di Camillo stressed the need to know the facts of Jahi McMath’s case before making a moral judgment.

“Before even getting to the ethical considerations, the medical facts are an absolute priority,” he said. “If we have a medically clear and confirmed determination of death by these neurological criteria, then we’re dealing with a situation where the body is actually the corpse of the deceased of this young girl.”

“If we’re dealing with a case where the person is in fact brain damaged but still alive, then we have a whole different set of ethical criteria because we’re talking about a living human being who is worthy of  full respect and full treatment.”

Di Camillo reminds us that end-of-life decisions must be made on a case by case basis, and that “[l]ife support systems are sometimes ordinary means of treatment and sometimes disproportionate.”  He reminds us that the case is not truly similar to Terry Schiavo, because Schiavo was clearly not brain dead; her husband simply didn’t want her to be alive anymore.

I wrote an article for Catholic Digest exploring some of the dilemmas caregivers face when they have to make life or death choices about the people they love.  (The article includes some links for further reading on Catholic medical ethics, and a site that provides samples of an advance directive with durable power of attorney or healthcare proxy.)

The Church does not, as many people imagine, insist that we squeeze the last possibility out of every beating heart.  I do not mean to imply that that’s what Jahi McMath’s parents are doing! The point is, we simply do not know.  It is appropriate to pray for the family, and it is appropriate to have public and private conversations about what the Church teaches about end of life medical decisions.  But it is wrong to assume we know what is going on in this particular case.

The only thing I’m not clear about is whether it ought ever to be up to hospitals to make the decision about whether to remove life support, assuming that the patient truly is past saving. I know that there are cases in which a person really is truly dead, and is being kept artificially “alive” because the family can’t bear to say goodbye.  In those cases, should the hospital be able to make the decision for them?  I don’t know.