I heard a conversation on the radio. I often listen to the radio when I'm doing something I'd like to escape from; like exercise or house work. The conversation involved a man with ALS, a disease that slowly deprives one of their body, bit by bit, and eventually ones life entirely. To be diagnosed with ALS is to get a death sentence.
I felt like I received a death sentence once. When I first learned I had cancer it was like that for me. I went straight to the thought that I would die of this thing and soon. With a young daughter and a loving husband I naturally assumed it would all end far too soon and I would be responsible for great sadness and despair. Well, I did move past that. I didn't die soon and I probably won't die of that cancer. However, the awareness of being faced with it does continue to inform some of the things I do today. Life is, really, too short to worry about some things and that is a wonderful lesson.
The conversation I listened to with this man who had ALS touched on something though that I had not figured out for myself before I was allowed let it go as a concern. How does one die of a disease when you have young children? How does one do this artfully and gracefully, dare I say meaningfully? This man's children were very close in age to my own daughter; young teens. At this age kids will remember dad (or mom) but not necessarily well or with any complexity. How does one cope with your own declining health and still participate in their life? ALS presents some different problems than cancer. It can be slower, it is certainly more debilitating, you lose mobility with it while still being able to think clearly. Pain is not necessarily part of the mix. Whereas dying from cancer can be quite painful and the last days are that: days. Still, how does one do it so that what you leave behind for your children is the very best possible thing you can do?
This fellow had it nailed. I was so impressed. Wheelchair bound and with breathing apparatus in place he insisted on being square in the middle of the family. He would not hide himself away in his own room where he might be able to work quietly (he was an historian). Rather he insisted on as much participation as he could manage. He heard about their days, helped them solve problems, and, I'm sure of this, he issued parental corrections as though he were in a position to reinforce them. Of course this took energy, even more so as he had less and less ability of his own. Was he in denial? Was he egotistical enough to think his input, no matter how impaired he was, essential to their upbringing? Was he a bully? Was he nosy? Was he a control freak?
When asked by the interviewer why he went to the trouble to do that his answer was quite simple. He knew that at his childrens' ages they would not carry forward very detailed memories of him. Those memories would be from his last months and days with them. So he wanted those memories to consist, not of him quietly sequestered in his room, but of an active and involved parent. He was, in fact, trying to give them memories of him that they could keep for the rest of their lives long after he was gone. Memories of a dad who gave himself to them not just received love and support from them.
I thought the man was brilliant. What a wonderful approach to an awful situation. And it showed courage and a kind of wisdom about the impact death has on those who survive and how to ease that transition no matter how long it might take.
For me, it was a lesson on how I could live today because, as we all know, we all live with a death sentence. We just don't know when it will happen. And remembering that what you do today will be part of your family's memory of you does give one the opportunity to create memories that sustain them long after you are gone.
Recent Comments