Funding for the digitization of this title was provided by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta.
About The Georgia bulletin (Atlanta) 1963-current | View Entire Issue (Sept. 1, 1983)
PAGE 5—The Georgia Bulletin, September 1,1983 Sheila Mallon Choose Life The phone rang at home one day last week. When I answered, the voice at the other end was as whispery and tentative as dry leaves on a windy day. The man, an elderly man, he confided, was calling because he had been upset by a front page article in the Atlanta papers. The article was about a patient who was slowly dying of Lou Gherig’s disease, also known as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The illness causes deterioration of the nerve cells in the spinal cord and brain stem and usually leads to total paralysis and death. My elderly caller was upset because in an editorial the newspaper called for the passage of “living will” legislation. The article claimed that had our state joined 13 others in the passage of such legislation, Mr. Young, the patient, and his family would not have had to go through a court hearing for him to be removed from life support systems. The editorial in the Atlanta Constitution regarding living wills was grossly in error. A living will is only of use when the patient is no longer conscious or is unable because of the progress of the disease to communicate his desires to his family and doctor. In no way would a living will have been of the slightest use to Mr. Young. In fact, it seems that the insistence of the hospital on legal intervention was directly related to the fact that the patient was still conscious. Possibly the hospital feared that there might be repercussions later if it was felt that the patient was not competent enough to make this decision. Patients who are no longer conscious and who are Father John Catoir Labor Day Labor Day has lost much of its significance in recent years. For some, for instance, it’s just a three-day weekend, the last chance for some R and R before school begins. But Labor Day celebrates the historic importance of the labor movement. Unfortunately, when the word “union” is mentioned today, many people think of leaders such as Jimmy Hoffa, union goons, crippling strikes against the public, greedy demands and declining industries. This is a sad development because the principles behind the great union movement are unimpeachable: the dignity of work, the right to organize and the right to bargain to improve one’s lot. One look at Poland today gives us a good idea of what happens in a nation when these rights are suppressed. I had lunch a few weeks ago with Theodore Kheel, the labor mediator. He was speaking in glowing terms about Pope John Paul’s speeches during his most recent visit to Poland. Kheel asked for copies of every speech because he saw each one as a classic restatement of the principles of unionism. He had been discussing the Pope’s trip with some Catholic labor leaders the night before and they were critical of Pope John Paul II for “immersing himself in politics.” Kheel, who is not a Catholic, disagreed. “What’s political about enunciating principles of justice or proclaiming the right of people to assemble and organize for their own betterment?” He applauded what the Pope was trying to do. Unions have been a great force for good in this country. An argument can be made that they saved America from a legacy of human exploitation and from Marxist takeover during the early days of the industrial expansion. Unions are largely responsible for the high standard of living of workers in America, and while it’s true that they have had their scandals (murder, embezzlement, etc.), nevertheless, it’s unfair to judge an institution by the mischief of the thieves and hoodlums who infiltrate it. It is right and just for men and women to join together to improve their own lot and achieve justice. Labor Day is our way of celebrating the best that Unionism represents. Core, free copy of the Christopher News Notes, “Ten Tips for Strengthening Your Organization, ’’ send a stamped, self-addressed envelope to The Christophers. 12 East 48th St., New York NY 10017. terminally ill are removed from extraordinary life support systems every day without the necessity of having the courts intervene. According to the news article, this was the first hearing of its kind in Georgia. Obviously the need for court intervention has not been necessary. Why then, I asked my caller, should we sign a “living will” giving doctors carte blanche far in advance of whatever illness or accident may befall us? We would be literally assigning the right to dispose of our life to a doctor who at the time of our illness or accident might be unknown to us. Many people are concerned about the “right to die.” This term can mean very different things. Death itself is not a right but a fate we are all heir to. When we hear the phrase “right to die,” it usually refers to the fact that we want more control over the circumstances under which we or loved ones die. This can lead to more honest discussion with doctors about one’s condition and more say on the part of the patient about whether he will accept a given treatment. The problems arise because in some cases, people want legislation to allow doctors to stop caring for people who are viewed as not having a “meaningful life.” This legislation is dangerous and we could be the victims. We need to be aware of our rights as they exist presently under the law. We have a constitutional right to refuse medical treatment for ourselves. The doctor must have our consent to institute treatment. Calls for a “new” law in such matters overlook the fact that the law already gives the competent patient the responsibility to consent thence the right to refuse. For the incompetent patient the situation is a little more difficult. The law is clear enough but there is the need to make sure that appointed or self-appointed guardians are acting in the patient’s best interests. Needless to say, this is an area where the law must be very careful so as to prevent injustices to the helpless. I suggested to my caller that he talk openly with his loved ones and doctors about his fears. If he finds that he cannot accept his physician’s approach, now would be the time to change doctors. Many anxieties are lessened when people know where you stand. The one sure thing that we can all agree on is that without the right to life there can be no dignity in death. Dolores Curran Parents As Students School is upon us and we are about to turn our children over to a system that has been tried and found wanting by a high government commission, the media and college admissions directors who decry the lack of writing and spelling skills evident among today’s students. I confess this brings to the surface some conflicting emotions within me. On one hand, the old English teacher in me says, “Right on. I don’t care if your teacher isn’t grading on spelling or penmanship, you need to write properly.” My children probably suffer more from literary nagging than anyone else’s. I’ve even been known to correct and grade the notes they leave on the kitchen table. On the other hand, I look at the kind of assignments and papers they’re doing and realize they are light years ahead of what I did at their age or even of what I taught twenty years ago. My eighth grader did a term paper on Pickett’s Charge at the Battle of Gettysburg last spring that put to shame the most ambitious paper I wrote in high school. My senior did a comparison of George Orwell’s “Animal Farm” and Charles Dickens’ “Tale of Two Cities contrasting the authors’ outlook on p olitical revolution with insights that I as a college English major never had to tackle. In both instances, the research and critical thinking skills demanded were far more mature than those required ten or twenty years ago — a result of improved educational methods and goals. My experience is by no means rare. I constantly hear parents say, “I couldn’t do that when I was his age,” or “I’m glad I don’t have to go to college today.” Yet, we tend to judge our kids’ school success by their spelling, penmanship and math basic skills. It’s almost as if we’re saying we don’t care if they can think as long as they can spell and add. In all the talk of poor education and functional illiteracy, I wonder how many parents would pass the basic literacy tests their children take today. Or how well we would do on the SAT and ACT tests which are used for college entrance. These tests are tough, a lot tougher than the ones we had to take to get out of college. I wonder if we aren't being hypocritical in expecting ever higher achievement scores and placement by our children. Are we asking our schools to teach our children more than we were willing or able to learn? When we hear of dwindling SAT scores, do we read on to discover that more youngsters are taking it now than did a decade ago and that we’re dipping beyond the group of elite scholars to the average? Finally, are we focusing on our children’s voids such as poorer spelling and math rather than on their more advanced understanding of physics, literature and computer than we faced at their age? To cite a personal example, I am in the midst of studying word processors with an eye toward moving from a typewriter to computeriz ed writing. Even the simplest brochures confuse me. Yet, my 14 year-old asks me questions like, “How many K’s of storage will it hold?” and throws around words like disk drives and megabytes. Maybe he doesn’t know Latin but this is every bit as foreign a language to me. I get so frustrated that I want to tell him to go study his spelling because I understand that. (He also points out that spelling will soon be obsolete because for $300 you can buy a spelling program for any word processor. How do I respond to that?) Highly publicized studies lamenting the state of education have been around forever and they are valuable in that they keep us from becoming complacent. But they don’t serve us if we focus only on what our children aren’t learning that we did rather than what they are learning that we didn’t. 23rd SUNDAY OF THE YEAR SEPTEMBER 4, 1983 The blessedness of seeing God is justly promised to the pure of heart. For the eye that is unclean would not be ableto see the brightness of the true light, and what would be happiness to clear minds would be a torment to those that are defiled . . . . May your soul gaze serenely upon the great vision of God. St. Leo the Great. Pope AUi soul longs for God like a doer for running streams
