Ship of Fools: Supporting a sick friend

Thread: Supporting a sick friend Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=025289

Posted by angelfish (# 8884) on :

We have a friend in Zimbabwe who we have supported financially for a number of years. During that time she has suffered from breast cancer, and we helped to cover the cost of her treatment and operation. The cancer has returned, and we have sent money to pay for further chemo. Now, she has been told that yet more cheno is required, and tired of the side effects she has sought alternative treatments.
She is now being "treated" by a doctor who believes in the power of the mind to heal, and that illnesses stem from sinful or negative thought patterns. A quick internet search turns up the book this doctor is peddalling and, even I with my rudimentary knowledge of neurophysiology and theology can see that it is one big pile of poop.

So the big moral dilemma in our household this evening, is do we continue to support our friend financially, even though we believe it to be a complete waste of money and potentially life threatening to her? Do we have a right to offer help only if she does what we think best? Is warning her that we are concerned for the efficacy of this doctor's treatment sufficient?

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

Notwithstanding that expectation of results is part of the effectiveness of all treatments whether based on evidence or not, my response is a pragmatic one. How much is requested? How long has she to live? Is she getting any pastoral care (or other acceptable to her)? Has she accepted she is terminal?

If you have it and mainly won't miss it, mostly consider sending it, or in some proportion. This is paying for a 'feel good'. Not anything of tangible value.

The only caveat is if you are being deceived, though it sounds as if you're not. I have myself spend some many thousands merely because it smoothed the end of life over the course of months until death. I don't regret it. Though time and funding limits were rather clear at the time.

Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :

I do think it would be legitimate to warn her of your concerns about the doctor. At this stage, it may be simply that he offers hope. I suppose it depends partly on what you can afford, but might it relieve you of some of the ethical issue going forward if you were to choose to pay into some kind of medical trust for her. Then trustees could then be a family member and a lawyer perhaps ?

Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on :

quote:
Originally posted by angelfish:
[QB]
She is now being "treated" by a doctor who believes in the power of the mind to heal, and that illnesses stem from sinful or negative thought patterns. A quick internet search turns up the book this doctor is peddalling and, even I with my rudimentary knowledge of neurophysiology and theology can see that it is one big pile of poop.

So the big moral dilemma in our household this evening, is do we continue to support our friend financially, even though we believe it to be a complete waste of money and potentially life threatening to her? Do we have a right to offer help only if she does what we think best? Is warning her that we are concerned for the efficacy of this doctor's treatment sufficient?

While helping her some financially, it seems more important that she not agree with the doctor and blame herself for being sick. Or maybe the doctor can share some insight as to what sinful or negative thought patterns were lurking in the mind of a one year old little girl of our congregation who had childhood leukemia.

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

Mere Nick:

quote:
Or maybe the doctor can share some insight as to what sinful or negative thought patterns were lurking in the mind of a one year old little girl of our congregation who had childhood leukemia.

It's the mother's fault. Always. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Jigsaw (# 11433) on :

It's significant that "more chemo is required" but that she is tired of the unpleasantness of this. Many people in her position feel the same way, and seek other - maybe more gentle? - maybe quackery? - therapies. That's a perfectly legitimate view; while there are many second or third-line chemo treatments for advanced breast cancer, they're not always helpful and the side-effects may outweigh the benefits. I just hope she's made an informed choice - but it's her choice.
I don't like the guilt trip approach of this doctor. I hope it won't damage her. I hope she's made an informed choice - but it's her choice.
I agree with others- gently warn her, but keep supporting her in any way you can, including financially.

Posted by angelfish (# 8884) on :

I agree with No Prophet that providing comfort, even if based on false hope, at the end of life is the humane thing to do. However, I am quite uncomfortable with the idea that any funds we send will go directly into the pocket of this quack who is blatantly preying on the vulnerable and desperate. It feels as though there is a wider responsibility, not only to love our friend but also to not assist the propagation of this damaging teaching.

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

Which doctor?

Some offer encouragement, ease of mind, and it's not unusual for people at some point to say "no" to more chemo.

After watching too many friends die of cancer I've reluctantly accepted that it's not my place to tell someone what treatment they should pursue.

Offer suggestions gently, but support them in whatever choices they make with never an "I told you so" if things get worse, because I am not the one who has to live it.

My job as a friend is to hold their hand, cry with them, reassure of my love, offer rides or phone calls or whatever support they want from me. Period.

Posted by angelfish (# 8884) on :

This is an extract from the book. It is difficult to read the opening "disclaimer" without shouting something rude.

Thankfully I have had very little contact with cancer in my life so I don't really know how it goes. From what is being posted above, it seems people are assuming my friend is basically going to die soon. She hasn't said as much, always speaks positively of God's goodness and her determination to get well.

Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on :

quote:
Originally posted by angelfish:
From what is being posted above, it seems people are assuming my friend is basically going to die soon.

I hope there was nothing I said that would sound that way because I certainly don't know.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by angelfish:

Thankfully I have had very little contact with cancer in my life so I don't really know how it goes. From what is being posted above, it seems people are assuming my friend is basically going to die soon. She hasn't said as much, always speaks positively of God's goodness and her determination to get well.

I had made that assumption, yes. The move to alternative treatments/forgoing chemo usually indicates that here in the West, although that may not be the case in Zimbabwe. A lot depends on what stage the cancer is in-- stage 1 for most cancers is very curable, by the time you get to stage 4 in many cases your odds are significantly reduced and alternative therapies seem like a better trade-off. (I have a close friend dealing w/ stage 4 colon cancer. She hasn't given up chemo yet-- it's been 2 years so far-- but I won't be surprised if that comes, sadly).

For me that changes the dynamic quite a bit. The advice that's been offered so far seems spot on to me if your friend is in stage 4. But for me it changes a lot if she's in stage 1 or 2, where chemo probably offers a significant chance of full recovery.

Either way,
[Votive]

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by angelfish:
This is an extract from the book. It is difficult to read the opening "disclaimer" without shouting something rude.

I was doing OK until I got to the part about "your healing doesn't depend on me or God-- it depends on you."

[brick wall]

(*I had to delete the rest of what I intended to post, because like you, I found it impossible to say anything that wasn't distinctly hellish).

Again, [Votive]

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
I was doing OK until I got to the part about "your healing doesn't depend on me or God-- it depends on you."

Well, depends on what is meant, but most MDs have told me that my health depends on me. Depends on my eating right and exercising and getting enough sleep. Depends on my taking the right medications at the right times - or putting up with the pain instead of medicating because the pain killers will make the overall situation worse.

Depends on my keeping up relationships with friends and helpers so they'll continue to help instead of leaving me.

Our health very much depends on us. That isn't necessarily blaming the victim, it's telling the facts and pointing to the road to health, giving useful advice. If the advice is correct it is far more helpful and encouraging than "stuff happens and there's nothing you can do about it."

A lot of Shipmates think any talk of God healing directly is obviously incorrect and therefor not helpful but closer to evil. Others think there's a lot to it.

Me, last time I had a cancer scare I rejected the drugs and cured it with aggressive nutrition. Some people still tell me I was wrong, I should have spend lotsa money on drugs instead of $10 on a book. (shrug)

I have not yet read that link. Just sayin' there are nut cases, but there are also people who have caught on to a broader reality than the doctors know and offer a cheaper and more complete cure than doctor believe possible. Hard to know the difference sometimes.

I do know from everyone I've heard that chemo is brutal, and it's not unusual to prefer letting nature do her thing than go through it again no matter what the doctors promise.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0