Ezekial J.
Emanuel has written a thought-provoking article for The Atlantic: Why I Hope to Die at 75. Emanuel is currently 18
years away from this target age, but from his current position, it appears that
by the age of 75, life is sufficiently degraded that it is not worth fighting
for. His title is a bit misleading; he
does not actually wish to die at 75; rather, he believes that at that age he
should not take measures to extend his life.
As one who is less than five years from Emanuel’s target age, I find
this topic rather interesting.
Emanuel cites
positive factors that have entered into his decision.
“By the time I reach 75, I will
have lived a complete life. I will have loved and been loved. My children will
be grown and in the midst of their own rich lives. I will have seen my
grandchildren born and beginning their lives. I will have pursued my life’s
projects and made whatever contributions, important or not, I am going to make.
And hopefully, I will not have too many mental and physical limitations. Dying
at 75 will not be a tragedy.”
He also cites negative factors that were determinative.
“Doubtless, death is a loss. It deprives us of experiences and milestones,
of time spent with our spouse and children. In short, it deprives us of all the
things we value.”
“But here is a simple truth that many of us seem to resist: living too long
is also a loss. It renders many of us, if not disabled, then faltering and
declining, a state that may not be worse than death but is nonetheless deprived.
It robs us of our creativity and ability to contribute to work, society, the
world. It transforms how people experience us, relate to us, and, most
important, remember us. We are no longer remembered as vibrant and engaged but
as feeble, ineffectual, even pathetic.”
He plans, when
he reaches 75, to stop taking measures intended merely to extend his life. There would be no more screenings or
preventive tests looking for problems to fix.
Life prolonging measures that will no longer be allowed include things
like getting a flu shot or taking an antibiotic to fight an infection. The only care he would allow is palliative
care to treat pain and discomfort, not curative treatments.
One might
counter Emanuel by claiming that 18 years is a long time and medical
advancements are likely to greatly alter what life might be like when he
reaches 75. However, Emanuel has an
excellent counter for that logic. He
points to a study by Eileen Cummins
and Hiram Beltran-Sanchez that spanned the years between 1996 and 2008
and concluded that we are not living longer and healthier lives. In fact, we are acquiring chronic, debilitating
diseases at an earlier age and suffering decreased physical mobility at an
earlier age as well. Our longer lives
are due to medical interventions that keep our bodies running a bit
longer. Emanuel summarizes this
observation with some apt words from Crimmins:
“As Crimmins puts it, over the
past 50 years, health care hasn’t slowed the aging process so much as it has
slowed the dying process.”
The life
expectancy of a male at 75 is about 86 years.
Emanuel seems to believe that those extra ten or eleven years would
likely not be worth living through. He
implies that those are years of debilitation and lessening ability to pursue
positive experiences. Perhaps it would
have been wise to query those who are actually living through those years in
order to discover how they view their life.
An interesting
article appeared in The Economist a
few years back titled The U-Bend of Life. It begins with this lede:
“Why, beyond middle age, people
get happier as they get older”
The article
reported on a number of studies of how people viewed their lives at various
ages in life. What persists as a
universal phenomenon is a “u-bend” in the curve of personal satisfaction versus
age as illustrated in the following chart.
“….interest in the U-bend has
been growing. Its effect on happiness is significant….It appears all over the
world. David Blanchflower, professor of economics at Dartmouth College, and Mr
Oswald looked at the figures for 72 countries. The nadir varies among
countries—Ukrainians, at the top of the range, are at their most miserable at
62, and Swiss, at the bottom, at 35—but in the great majority of countries
people are at their unhappiest in their 40s and early 50s. The global average
is 46.”
There does not appear to be a single compelling
explanation for why people are, on average, happier and more satisfied with
their lives as they become elderly. This
article suggests physical and mental changes that occur as part of the aging
process and are not related to economic or other circumstances.
“….control for cash, employment status and children, and the U-bend is
still there. So the growing happiness that follows middle-aged misery must be
the result not of external circumstances but of internal changes.”
“People, studies show, behave differently at different ages. Older people
have fewer rows and come up with better solutions to conflict. They are better
at controlling their emotions, better at accepting misfortune and less prone to
anger.”
It seems clear
that, one way or another, the elderly come to terms with increasing sickness
and debility and continue to find ways to derive satisfaction from life. The elderly themselves have proclaimed this
to be true.
It is also
informative to assess the feelings of those who have already lived longer than
any of us have any right to expect. A
couple of nonagenarians have recently looked back at their lives, expressed
feelings about their current precarious state of health, and discussed how they
deal with the nearness of death. Roger
Angell produced This Old Man
for The New Yorker. Doris Grumbach provides The View from 90 in The
American Scholar. Both authors
continue to work and have produced fascinating and exquisitely constructed
essays. The word “fortunate” appears
often—and no one would consider them “feeble, ineffectual, even pathetic.”
Emanuel, while
dwelling in the darkest part of man’s life-experience, looks to the future and
despairs. He has formed and expressed
his opinion while residing in a relative chasm of human discontent. There are conditions that could lead one to
decide that life is not worth living, but would appear wise to wait until they
actually occur before one makes life-termination decisions. Perhaps he would be better served, now and in
the future, by accepting the “u-bend of life” and looking forward to an
interesting and satisfying old age.
Emanuel
worries that he will no longer be “creative” at age 75. If one were to grade the essays produced by
Angell and Grumbach with that of his on content and style (creativity if you
wish), the nonagenarians would win hands down.
If Emanuel feels he is not creative and cannot enjoy life when he reaches
75, he should examine his own character to discover the problem.
I especially
enjoyed Doris Grumbach’s final thought on her 90-plus years.
“However death arrives, in installments or in one
instant stroke, I regard myself as fortunate. I will be able to echo the last
words of Lady Mary Wortley Montague (who died in 1762):
‘It has all been very interesting’.”
Nicely written.
ReplyDeleteDewayne
Age 57