Watching my aging parents and others of similar age, it seems that the idea of irrelevance starts to set in well before people are close of dying. Not everyone is able to have a healthy self-esteem when it comes to their understanding of their relevance to the world and even immediate family. What are they contributing and why they would be missed when they are gone. Those who are able to add intrinsic value to the lives of the younger generations in their families and communities feel much better about their relevance.
They have something to contribute and are infact doing so. The "contribution" can take a myriad of forms - being a judgment-free sounding board, being a mentor, older and wiser friend, lending professional expertise in a pro bono capacity and so on. When a person is not able to see their contribution quite clearly, they need their loved ones to help shore up their flagging confidence - convince them that they are indeed wanted, loved and valued. I can see how this could dovetail into terminalism this article talks about.
If all humans have rights, the dying have rights, too. They are valuable in themselves, not for some abstract, unknown “contribution” they might make. As Reed puts it, “The reason that terminalism matters is that dying persons matter.”
I wonder if a person's lack of conviction about their value in the world promotes terminalism in some way.
Comments