When we let subscribers to our weekday texts know that we were about to begin a yearlong series on end-of-life decisions, and issues, more than 160 responded, most with heartfelt accounts of their own experiences.
The related stories of anguish, gratitude, faith and anger, and they said they are glad we are tackling this set of topics.
Related story: ‘I just wanted them not to suffer’: Should terminally ill Ohioans be able to decide when it’s time to die?
Here’s what I sent:
Anyone who has been through end-of-life decision-making involving family members knows the agony of it. As a society, we are more humane with our pets than we are with people. Other countries and some states have grappled with this, working to institute laws that give more authority to people over the decisions. Not Ohio, though. This weekend or next, we launch a yearlong series examining the weighty issues involved, the options as they stand today, the ethical challenges society faces here and the philosophies of advocacy groups working to help find the right path. Maybe we can all help Ohio find a better way.
The responses that followed made clear just how personal — and polarizing — the topic is. Here’s how they broke down.
“We are kinder to our pets”
The most frequent reaction echoed the premise of the text itself: that society often offers animals a more peaceful end than people.
One reader wrote:
I was able to humanely send my dog off after he was no longer able to walk or eat and was suffering tremendous pain. Then I had to literally sit by and watch my sister wither away to nothing being ravaged by cancer with absolutely no recourse. The trauma that experience caused my family will never go away… I believe in God but I also believe it’s not God’s will to make us suffer like that. Only people do that.
Another described two recent losses:
Watching a family member’s inhumane last hours was brutal… And just a couple of weeks ago I was able to have a vet come to my house and help my beloved cancer ridden old cat get a peaceful release. There has to be a better way.
A veterinarian who performs in-home euthanasia said:
My goal is to make an incredibly difficult moment as peaceful and loving as possible for the family. I don’t understand why we are able to offer this kind of compassion to animals, but not to humans.
Not everyone agreed, though:
I don’t necessarily agree with your premise about being more humane with our pets. We recently chose not to put our cat down at end of life and there was much to be learned by not terminating life when suffering occurred. Something beautiful about accompanying a loved one at end of life. Removing the judgment that life ceases to be worth living with suffering.
The crushing burden on families
Many readers focused less on law and more on the weight carried by loved ones. One woman navigating dementia and hospice care with her husband wrote:
I had to make the heartbreaking decision to place my husband in hospice care… I regret deeply that my husband declined to discuss anything as pertained to death and dying. Therefore, I am left to shoulder the responsibility for hoping that the decisions I’ve made were the right ones… each person [should] put in writing what their wishes are… so the burden does not fall on their loved ones.
Another reader recalled removing life support from his mother decades ago:
At 41… it was the proverbial ‘No Brainer’ to remove it… At now 75… I believe that decision would be infinitely more difficult, if not impossible today.
A retired nurse described the impossible tension:
It is heartbreaking if you choose to remove the support, and heartbreaking if you don’t… even well informed and prepared, yet it’s an impossible choice.
For many, the lingering doubt is part of the trauma.
Hospice: grace — and limits
Hospice prompted some of the most passionate responses. One mother wrote about bringing hospice care into her home when her 4-year-old son’s cancer returned:
Hospice… was the only group that had a pediatric program… our hospice nurse explained everything to us and we kept him home… He died Monday morning… We have since used H of the W R for my sister, mom, and mother in law… we definitely see the need.
Many praised hospice as compassionate and dignified. But some described painful experiences constrained by regulations or protocol. One wrote:
He actually starved to death over 7 days… they are not to give water or food unless the patient asks for it, but he was so drugged up that he couldn’t have asked… It seemed unnecessarily cruel.
Said another:
All they could do was hop her up on high doses of morphine as she slowly drowned to death from the ‘death rattle’ coming from her lungs.
Legal change — and firm opposition
Many readers explicitly supported medical aid in dying and pointed to states such as Oregon and New Mexico as models. A health care professional facing a fatal illness wrote:
I must agree with the assessment that we are kinder to our pets than to each other… The law and care requirements leave me with few options unless I am willing to leave Ohio… I hope that by the time my children reach this point… Ohio will have become more humane.
But opposition was just as clear.
God has his own time for a person to pass… I am against assisted suicide and that is exactly what it is if you die before your time.
Another added:
Enabling suicide is not compassionate.
Fear of prolonged suffering
The most striking element in the responses involved fear — of being kept alive against one’s wishes, of losing cognitive ability and control, of draining savings in long-term care.
I have a degenerative neurological condition… For the first time in my life I have been considering if, when and how to end my life on my own terms… ‘not your body, not your business’.
Said another:
