How our mortality can define the meaning of our lives

The New York Times concluded (for now) its blog series, Happy Times, about "the pursuit of what matters in troubled times recently. The final entry reflects on the meaning of one's life, especially when facing or reflecting upon one inevitable death. The writer observes two lessons in our mortality: First, that death is terrifying because we are essentially future-focused beings, and we do not know when death will occur for us.

The second, less obvious lesson is that death gives our life purpose by defining our lives in time, with finite boundaries. Developing that thought:

And when there is always time for everything, there is no urgency for anything. It may well be that life is not long enough. But it is equally true that a life without limits would lose the beauty of its moments. It would become boring, but more deeply it would become shapeless. Just one damn thing after another.

This is the paradox death imposes upon us: it grants us the possibility of a meaningful life even as it takes it away.

New cemetery marker--thanks but no thanks

A former student and admirer of Frank Lloyd Wright placed a marker on the grave of Wright's famous love interest, without approval of the cemetery board. Ultimately the board decided to return the unauthorized marker. The news story from the Wisconsin State Journal begins this way:

A gravestone for Frank Lloyd Wright’s professional inspiration and personal sorrow, murder victim Mamah Borthwick, placed without permission in a family cemetery at Taliesin outside of Spring Green one late night in May, will be returned to a well-intentioned admirer.

Religious sisters show dignified and peaceful way to aging and dying

A recent New York Times story describes the peaceful, spiritual nature of an aging community of nuns. Specifically, the story relays the care and introspection that accompanies the ill and infirm sisters who face nearing death.

Here's an excerpt:

Few sisters opt for major surgery, high-tech diagnostic tests or life-sustaining machinery. And nobody can remember the last time anyone died in a hospital . . . .

“There is a time to die and a way to do that with reverence,” said Sister Mary Lou, 56, a former nurse. “ Hospitals should not be meccas for dying. Dying belongs at home, in the community."
. . .

[The primary physician for the sisters,] Dr. McCann said that the sisters’ religious faith insulated them from existential suffering — the “Why me?” refrain commonly heard among those without a belief in an afterlife. Absent that anxiety and fear, Dr. McCann said, there is less pain, less depression, and thus the sisters require only one-third the amount of narcotics he uses to manage end-of-life symptoms among hospitalized patients.

Keep talking about advance directives until everyone has them

Facing a loved one's serious medical condition or end of life is always agonizing. But it approaches being unbearable when there is no way of knowing what the person would want for treatment or care.

Advance health care directives are SO IMPORTANT and can spare families a world of grief. Advance directives and why people tend to avoid them is the topic of a recent post on the New York Times' blog, "The New Old Age."

In light of the recent National Healthcare Decisions Day (April 16), consider this excerpt:

One reason is that advance directives may be misperceived, theorized Nathan Kottkamp, a health care attorney in Richmond, Va., and organizer of this month’s National Healthcare Decisions Day. People may equate such documents with limiting care, with “pulling the plug.” In fact, Mr. Kottkamp said, “Your living will can say you want every medical treatment known to science applied to you at the end of life. Or no treatment. Or anywhere on that spectrum.”

Alternative, low-cost funeral options

With the recession hitting everyone in the pocketbook, many families want to find lower cost options for the essentials--including funerals. Newsweek recently reported on simple funeral services that reduce the expense and overhead of traditional "casketed" funerals. The low-cost options usually involve cremation so that there are no embalming, casket, vault, or cemetery plot expenses. Also, even with a traditional funeral, families may reduce costs by trimming back, such as forgoing limosine services and buying a cheaper casket.

In a similar story, the Smithsonian magazine told the story of one family where a traditional funeral on one side of the family contrasted with the "do-it-yourself" funeral on the other side. For the DIY funeral, the family attended to the body of the deceased at home (with no embalming), built the casket, and delivered the body for cremation.

Although cost wasn't driving the decisions for the family members involved (the two funerals were different largely because of wishes of the deceased and the family), the cost difference was $7000 between the at-home preparation and funeral and the traditional embalming and funeral.

Photo by clearly ambiguous; used by permission.)

How easy is it to die green?

A recent column on Slate.com examined the various environmental aspects of the funeral industry and burials. Options, like traditional embalming and burial, cremation, and donation of one's body to science, are discussed in environmental and "carbon footprint" terms. For example,

A private 2007 study commissioned by an Australian cemetery found that the average cremation at that facility produced roughly four times as much CO2 equivalent as a burial. However, when the long-term fossil fuel costs of lawn-mowing and general grounds upkeep were factored in, burials had a 10 percent greater environmental footprint.

In case you are curious (I knew you were), Wisconsin statutes include an entire chapter on disposition of human remains.

If all the environmental burial discussion seems like old news, the concept has indeed been around for a few years. Without endorsing a particular approach, I offer this example--a link to the Green Burial Council, which describes itself as follows:

Since 2005, the Green Burial Council has been working to make burial sustainable for the planet, meaningful for the families, and economically viable for the provider. And in that short period of time, we've emerged as the "gold standard" among consumers, land trusts, park service agencies as well the cemetery/funeral profession.

(Photo by lincoln_loggers; used by permission.)

Home plate as my head stone

Apparently many baseballs fans want to stay close to their favorite sport, even after they are gone to the great beyond. This New York Times article considers the motivations and methods behind people having their ashes scattered at one of the city's ball parks, not to mention the ambivalence when a stadium is demolished.

"No one can say how many people’s ashes were sneaked in, often in film canisters or plastic baggies, and scattered at the two ballparks [Memorial Park and Shea Stadium]. Some relatives had access the teams say they do not allow. Ms. Hasson said her father had known someone on the grounds crew who let her in before a game, let her husband run the bases and let two of her father’s friends sit in the Mets’ dugout. . . . [Then,] 'the guys who worked on the grounds crew raked the ashes into the mound so it wasn’t obvious.'”

Just a few months ago, the state of Wisconsin began offering a form (known as "authorization for final disposition"), which allows a person to designate someone (as a "representative") to make decisions regarding the disposition of the person's body after death. Typically, the range of decisions encompass arrangements for funeral services, cremation, burial, etc. By designating someone, a person can avoid potential disputes among loved ones. The representative named has first priority in making such arrangements. (The statute also names the priority of family members who can make decisions, even if the form is not used.)

Also, the state form allows the person to give directions for any of the arrangement. According to the statute, the representative is required to follow the directions of the deceased, "unless the directions, instructions, and suggestions exceed available resources from the decedent’s estate or are unlawful or unless there is no realistic possibility of compliance."

(Photo by Mayr; used by permission.)