A close friend of mine was admitted for surgery the other day to address an acute and potentially life-threatening morbidity. He's suffered for years from a complex set of illnesses that have only recently begun to be well treated. Despite that recent success, his general condition made surgery risky and doctors were upfront about weighing the risk of anesthesia and the stress surgery on his systems versus not having surgery at all. There really wasn't a choice, he had to do it, but it would not have been surprising had he died on the table.
Fortunately, he did not die. He came through fine and is in recovery. The night before surgery, however, we talked about his concerns and they were not about dying but about not being allowed to die. He had neglected to have an Advance Directive notarized and it was too late in the day when he realized what he'd done. I suggested the hospital may provide a notary and he said he would look into that (I don't know the answer yet, he's still unavailable for comment) but concerned that his father, who promised to abide his wishes to end life support should that come to pass, may not follow through. I told him in no uncertain terms that should he end up on life support with poor prognosis for recovery I would, without hesitation, find a way to pull the plug.
Now, I have no illusions about the potential complications of that promise. You can't just turn off the ventilator or literally unplug things. I mean, one could do that and be immediately discovered by alerts and alarms. Since I'm not trying for prison, had that happened it would have come down to a personal appeal to his family, on his behalf, to allow him to die. Or find a way to end life support without discovery.
And while there was written but not legal directive (notarized) and other corroborating evidence to back up his wishes, the whole thing had me wondering if I could have prevailed in delivering what I promised. I took (and take) that promise very seriously where others in his life may not. I understand the depth of conviction he has on this, down to fully supporting his right to suicide, which has been a constant conversation for some time. I am among his few supporters on that score, most dismiss it or outright object.
I've never had to deal with this question before now. I've always supported the right to die and the right to suicide, though having been affected by an unusual number of suicides in my life I certainly don't enjoy them. But until now I've never been directly involved in that process.
Which leaves me wondering what others think. I haven't discussed this circumstance with anyone outside of that small circle. Working to change a father's mind to carry out a son's wish to freely die is a complicated notion. Some might see it as manipulative or out of bounds. An attempt to physically intervene is a whole other question. It's illegal, it could end in prison. It could also be the right thing to do. Or is it?
Those are the questions in my head right now. It's a lonely kind of feeling, and none of the answers I've come up with seem to offer any real comfort at all.
As I said, he's fine. But this won't likely be the end, so to speak. More like rehersal for a main event.
Thanks for indulging these questions. Welcome to another heavy Wednesday of KTK with bastrop. Any thoughts feelings etc are, as always, welcome.
Kitchen Table Kibitzing is a community series for those who wish to share part of the evening around a virtual kitchen table with kossacks who are caring and supportive of one another. So bring your stories, jokes, photos, funny pics, music, and interesting videos, as well as links—including quotations—to diaries, news stories, and books that you think this community would appreciate. Readers may notice that most who post diaries and comments in this series already know one another to some degree, but newcomers should not feel excluded. We welcome guests at our kitchen table, and hope to make some new friends as well.