Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN’s medical correspondent, on the lessons he learned while writing his latest book:

At the same time, I came to learn how much we do know about ways we can chase life every day to live longer, healthier lives. I learned that most people don’t necessarily want to live longer, unless they are of sound mind and body, without terrible illness late in life, not confined to beds or wheelchairs. They want to live their lives like an
incandescent light bulb, burning brightly, until they suddenly go out. No flickering at the end.

The only thing in the above paragraph that offends me is the amateurish metaphor–it’s like something you would find in an Expos Writing 101 paper. Gupta’s lack of imagination when it comes to quality of life isn’t surprising; it probably typifies the attitudes of much of the medical community. And he fits right in at CNN, where this sort of facile, vapid commentary is de rigeur. If Gupta wants to believe that life in a wheelchair is too terrible to contemplate, he can go right ahead. I have the same reaction when I imagine being forced to read his book.

I often forget that the mundane little details of my like must seem incredibly foreign to most people. One of my nurses just asked me if suctioning is uncomfortable me. Suctioning is the process by which a catheter attached to a vacuum pump is slid down my trach tube to remove excess mucous. It’s something that I usually do one to four times a day; sometimes less and more if I have a cold. It certainly doesn’t hurt, and it can actually feel good if I’m congested or if I’ve put off doing it for a long time. I still prefer to cough things up on my own if I can, but suctioning is so routine that I rarely give it much thought.

But don’t try sliding a suction catheter down your nose. I’ve had that done to me as well and I can’t say that it’s a sensation I would recommend to others.

Judging from an article in today’s New York Times, the blogosphere is devolving into a forum for the rude, the hateful, and the obnoxious; so much so that some bloggers feel compelled to put forth a set of guidelines for proper behavior. This issue has never been much of an issue for me. Every once in a great while, a troll will leave a comment that is supposed to be insulting, but it usually just elicits my pity. The tranquillity in my little corner of the blogosphere leads me to think that I must be doing something wrong. Either that, or I have exceedingly well-behaved readers.

I have tickets to see Neko Case at First Ave tonight, which means I’ll get to venture out into subfreezing temperatures. In April. But sometimes, one must make sacrifices for the sake of art.

I’ll post a short recap of the concert tomorrow.

I was presented with an interesting question today. An attorney friend called me with the following fact pattern:

A private attorney represents a landlord who owns an apartment building where many of the tenants have disabilities. Some of the tenants have live-in attendants and the landlord has no problem with this. One tenant in particular has a live-in PCA who recently married. The spouse of the live-in PCA moves into the tenant’s apartment and also gets certified as a PCA. The tenant with a disability now shares his apartment with a husband and wife, both of whom are PCAs. The landlord is not pleased with this situation and is considering bringing eviction proceedings against the tenant. The landlord’s attorney is seeking policy arguments that could bolster her client’s case in front of a judge.

I understand the landlord’s frustration at having another person sharing this apartment without being on the lease. And living with a husband-wife team of caregivers could create some awkward issues of dependency for the tenant. But from a policy perspective, there don’t seem to be many compelling arguments that could help the landlord. It’s one thing if the tenant is violating the letter of the lease. But the state doesn’t really care whether an individual lives with one PCA or four, as long as services are properly billed. It really isn’t within the jurisdiction of a court to determine whether this living situation is unhealthy or creating a bad precedent. To do so would smack of paternalism and there’s no shortage of that in the lives of most people with disabilities. While a policy argument might assuage this landlord’s feelings of discomfort about possibly evicting a tenant, I don’t think one is readily available.