Friday, June 29, 2018

Doctors with disabilities

https://www.healthcareers.nhs.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Real-life%20story%20%E2%80%93%20doctor%20with%20a%20disability.pdf




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmEJ-w2uOsE&feature=youtu.be


https://whyy.org/segments/those-with-disabilities-push-for-culture-change-in-medicine/



What does it mean to be a doctor with a disability?




Feranmi Okanlami is a doctor at Michigan Medicine and became partially paralyzed after an accident in 2013, during his medical residency. (Courtesy Feranmi Okanlami)
Feranmi Okanlami is a doctor at Michigan Medicine and became partially paralyzed after an accident in 2013, during his medical residency. (Courtesy Feranmi Okanlami)

When Stacy Jones arrived at medical school at Harvard University, she was prepared to struggle. She’d always been aware in the back of her mind that certain aspects of academics were tough for her. She figured she’d just have to work even harder. But that “work harder” strategy didn’t work out so well.
“I basically almost failed a lot of my classes,” Jones said. “During that time I felt very ashamed and I felt very lonely.”
She avoided her professors, terrified they were thinking she was lazy. Then the summer after her first year, in 2015, Jones went to get evaluated. She realized she had a learning disability and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder.
“It was very validating when my neuropsychologist sat down with me and said, ‘Stacy, you’re smart. Stacy, look at all of these things your brain does well. It must be so frustrating that when you read or listen to lectures your brain is not processing language in the same way,’” Jones said.
It was a relief to hear all that. But a concern, too.
“I think there is this perception in medical education, and in the culture in general, of not really admitting vulnerabilities,” Jones said. “’Disability’ isn’t a word that I often heard spoken.”
Disability hasn’t been talked about a lot within the profession. Doctors — the ones charged with treating everyone else — are often portrayed as pinnacles of health, super humans responding to emergencies around the clock. They’re the fixers, not the ones in need of care or accommodation.
Yet a growing movement of current and aspiring doctors says this narrative is a disservice. They’re trying to change the culture amid new research on disabilities in medicine.,.

‘Able-bodied in the extreme’

Lisa Iezzoni, a professor of medicine at Harvard and director of the Longan Institute Health Policy Center at Massachusetts General Hospital, is very familiar with the culture of medicine.
“This profession historically has viewed themselves as able-bodied in the extreme,” Iezzoni said.
Iezzoni uses an electric wheelchair or scooter to get around. In the early ’80s, when she was in medical school herself at Harvard, Iezzoni was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. She wasn’t in a wheelchair then, but she was experiencing some “shadowy” symptoms, like a loss of sensation in a limb. She wasn’t able to stay up late at night, due to fatigue.
She says her advisors knew this, and they treated her differently because of it. So did just about everyone else.
Iezzoni say one experience in particular stands out: She was scrubbing in on a surgery.
“The surgeon — at a slack time during the operation — turned to me and said, ‘Do you want my opinion about whether you should become a doctor?’ And what was I going to say? I’m a third-year medical student. I said, ‘Certainly, Dr. so and so. I would be happy to,’” she said. “And he then opined that I had no right to go into medicine because I lacked the most important quality in medicine. And that was 24/7 availability.”
Iezzoni says after that point, the residents overseeing her program ignored her.
“I was beneath their notice, because their attending [surgeon] told them I had no right to be in medicine,” she recalled.
Iezzoni didn’t become a doctor. She says she just didn’t have the support.
But she didn’t leave medicine.
“The work that I do is on disparities in health care for people with disabilities, and I think that part of the origins of disparities are stigmatizing attitudes,” she said.

Lisa Iezzoni is professor of medicine at Harvard and the director of the Longan Institute Health Policy Center at Massachusetts General Hospital. She has multiple sclerosis and researchers disparities in health care for people with disabilities. (Elana Gordon/WHYY)

Medicine’s slow to adapt

Iezzoni says her medical school experience happened six years before the Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA, passed in 1990. The landmark legislation created federal protections for people with disabilities.
In the decades since, amendments and court rulings have clarified those rights. But Iezzoni and others say those changes have been slow to take hold in medicine.
Research has found that, as future doctors advance through their training, they may become “more hardened,” says Iezzoni, and develop more negative views about people with disabilities. More recently, she has been interviewing doctors about their knowledge of disabilities for an upcoming report. She identified attitudes among some that gave her concern. Just about everyone said they’d never been trained about the ADA.
“They’d heard of it but had no formal training in what that meant about their responsibilities toward patients with a disability, what their responsibility is to care for people with a disability,” she said.

Changing practices

Another Lisa — Lisa Meeks — is on a mission to offer training and change attitudes.
“What we view as absolute is very different now than what it was 10 years ago, and owe a lot of that to assistive and adaptive technologies,” Meeks said. “But also medicine is an ever-evolving creature.”
Meeks is a psychologist at Michigan Medicine, specializing in disabilities in medical education and the profession at large. She co-founded the Coalition for Disability Access in Health Science and Medical Education and says, despite advances, navigating a disability in medicine can still be a really rocky road, starting from the very early stages of medical training.
Getting supports or accommodations, she says, is not about getting an easy pass to become a doctor. It’s the ramp, so to speak, that allows a person to enter the room.
“There is no waiver of any sort of skill or competency,” she said. “The physician has to know what they’re doing and has to understand the same clinical skills as their peers.”
Meeks holds trainings at medical institutions and has found that the way places understand and handle disabilities varies greatly. Someone with the same disability, like an autoimmune disease, for example, may have very different experiences depending on where they are studying or practicing.
“So everything from being told, ‘You really shouldn’t be a physician. I don’t know how you’re going to do this,’” said Meeks, “to on the opposite extreme hearing, ‘Hey, we should come up with something else. Let’s call Apple or Microsoft to see what technology is out to keep you from proactively going into the flare.’”
Meeks says some places may not know how to align what’s required to become a doctor with what’s reasonable support for aspiring doctors with disabilities, especially in the clinic.
“I think the saddest thing for me is when people don’t know what to do. They don’t know about the resources that are available,” Meeks said.
People with disabilities may be left to figure things out on their own, potentially getting lost in the system or falling through the cracks. Meeks recently co-authored a major disabilities in medicine report — a sort of blueprint for best practices — with the Association of American Medical Colleges, or AAMC.
“We have to do a better job of educating those in the field about what the potential is for those with disabilities, versus what is consumed or assumed to be an automatic inability,” said  Geoffrey Young, a director with the AAMC and former medical dean.
Medicine, says Young, is having a moment.
The report outlines recommendations, cites legal cases, and features first-hand interviews. In one instance, a medical student faced frustrations when arranging accommodations for taking tests. It seemed to the student that the medical school was “making up rules along the way.” Another resident with a physical disability was more than a year into training when the medical institution finally installed an automatic door he needed.
“I just think there is so much misinformation out there of what may be required to give someone accommodations,” Young said, adding that people with disabilities in medicine can help inform colleagues, too. “I think that educates our future physician population.”
Many aspiring doctors hide a disability, the report notes, out of a “fear of judgment, bias, and skewed perception of ability.” Less than 3 percent of students in medical school have disclosed a disability, and as a result get accommodations. That’s fewer than the estimated one-fifth of people with disabilities in the United States and those in other graduate programs.

Doctors (and nurses) with disabilities speak out

Earlier this year, Meeks had a thought: If doctors with disabilities saw more people like themselves, would they talk more openly about the challenges and opportunities? She started the hashtag #docswithdisabilities. The goal was to find 20 doctors willing to share their stories.
“There’s no end in sight,” Meeks said.
She has been flooded with interest from doctors with disabilities. (And now #nurseswithdisabilities have joined in, too).
That includes Nichole Taylor, an anesthesiologist at Wake Forest Medical School who has multiple sclerosis, and Erica Dwyer, an internal medicine resident at Cambridge Health in Boston.
“I was actually born deaf in one ear,” Dwyer said. “I was almost done with medical school, and then realized that I was also losing my hearing on the other side. And I started needing technology to sort of help amplify my hearing and to help manage in clinical settings and the like.”
Jason Brookman is an anesthesiologist in Baltimore who has attention deficit disorder. Brookman published a case study about himself about how he’s learned to managed his disability. It hasn’t always been easy, he says, and he only recently publicly identified himself as the person featured in the case report.
Another vocal participant is Feranmi Okanlami. He had a spinal cord injury and became partially paralyzed after a diving accident during his third year of medical residency in 2013. He returned to practicing and is at Michigan Medicine now.
He doesn’t want to be viewed as “an anomaly.”

Feranmi Okanlami is a doctor at Michigan Medicine and became partially paralyzed after an accident in 2013, during his medical residency. (Courtesy of Feranmi Okanlami)

“Once people see how many people are out there practicing with disabilities, I think that will normalize this more,” Okanlami said. “Disability does not mean inability.”
Okanlami might not be the guy on the ground doing the chest compressions during a code, when someone has stopped breathing, but he says a doctor is more than that.
“You have to be the person deciding what medication to give. You have to make sure that the people doing chest compressions are doing it adequately. You have to think about why the person stopped breathing, or their heart stopped,” he said. “The tasks required to run a code aren’t just physical tasks.”

Aspiring doctors with disabilities

Stacy Jones, who has completed three years of medical school at Harvard, says getting diagnosed with a learning disability after her first year and then later figuring out what she needed has made all the difference. One “gamechanger” has been using text-to-speech technology on her computer.
“It’s not just, you know, OK, I can read faster now,” she said. “It’s actually allowing me to take that burden off to actually learn.”
Jones says she struggled sorting out what to do after she was first diagnosed and figuring how and where to get support. Last year, she started connecting with other medical students and doctors with disabilities from around the country.
“We formed this national group — the national medical accessibility group called NMAC — out of this idea of de-stigmatizing disability in medicine, bringing peers from across the country, and Canada, too, for peer support,” Jones said.
So far that has included some 50 people — mostly medical students, but some nursing, pharmacy and occupational therapy, and others as well — from about 40 different schools. They’re advocating for better systems for people with disabilities in medicine, for more awareness across the field, and for support, especially for “some people whose voices have felt silence because of the structures and the systems as they are right now.”
These kinds of connections have made all the difference for those starting out, like Jessica Laird. She’s wrapping up year one of med school back at Harvard.
“To have that be the beginning of medical school and see students who were succeeding in older years who had disabilities was a really amazing way to start medical school, to know I wasn’t alone in this process,” said Laird, who was diagnosed with a rare connective-tissue disorder called Ehlers-Danlos syndrome in high school, and who recently got involved with disability awareness activities on campus. “The experience of being ill is so central to why I wanted to become a doctor.”

These Harvard medical students (from left) Jessica Laird, Jennifer Cloutier and Stacy Jones are raising awareness about disabilities in medicine. Baird was diagnosed with a rare connective tissue disorder and also has Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome; Cloutier is paralyzed from the lumbar spine down; Jones was diagnosed with a learning disability and ADHD.

Meanwhile, since Jones began raising awareness about disabilities following her diagnosis, the medical school has been reviewing its policies. It’s now actively looking to hire a full-time disabilities-service provider, something that is identified as a best practice in the new AAMC report.
In an emailed statement, Harvard Medical School said:
“Fully addressing the needs of our students, faculty and staff with disabilities is central to our mission as an educational institution. The individual experiences of members of our community are important and illuminating — and they spark ongoing assessment. They also improve how we are able to address these matters. Establishing the position of a full-time disabilities service provider is part of this ongoing evolution.”
Cooper Medical School at Rowan University in Camden, New Jersey, has also started training staff and students in disabilities.
Stacy and others say these efforts are important not just for them, but for patients, too.
As it stands, research has found that people with disabilities are less likely to get recommended treatments and screenings, like pap tests. One reason may be that doctors carry biases or don’t always understand the nuances of these experiences. So to this new wave of doctors, the most  “able” physician of the 21st century is one who is equipped with the skills to connect with patients and what they’re facing, and who can think creatively about how to come up with the best care.
As Jones looks ahead, she hopes that plays out in her future practice. She’s leaning toward working in pediatrics.
“I think that when I see patients and families of kids who just received this diagnosis, and they’re sort of receiving this narrative of ‘Your kid needs help; your kid needs special education; you know, your kid isn’t perfect,’ I think I have the viewpoint where I could say, ‘No, your child is perfect. Your kid is smart. Your kid is capable.’ This is not a tragedy. Disability is not a tragedy,” Jones said. “I think that’s something t

Thursday, June 28, 2018

Article on the dark history of treatment of the disabled in the past history - Germany and America


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/opinion/nazis-holocaust-disabled.html?rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fdisability&action=click&contentCollection=opinion&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=7&pgtype=collection

The Nazis’ First Victims Were the Disabled

By Kenny Fries
I sit facing the young German neurologist, across a small table in a theater in Hamburg, Germany. I’m here giving one-on-one talks called “The Unenhanced: What Has Happened to Those Deemed ‘Unfit’,” about my research on Aktion T4, the Nazi “euthanasia” program to exterminate the disabled.
“I’m afraid of what you’re going to tell me,” the neurologist says.
I’m not surprised. I’ve heard similar things before. But this time is different — the young man sitting across from me is a doctor. Aktion T4 could not have happened without the willing participation of German doctors.
I have a personal stake in making sure this history is remembered. In 1960, I was born missing bones in both legs. At the time, some thought I should not be allowed to live. Thankfully, my parents were not among them.
I first discovered that people with disabilities were sterilized and killed by the Nazis when I was a teenager, watching the TV mini-series “Holocaust” in 1978. But it would be years before I understood the connections between the killing of the disabled and the killing of Jews and other “undesirables,” all of whom were, in one way or another, deemed “unfit.”

The neurologist does not know much about what I’m telling him. While he does know that approximately 300,000 disabled people were killed in T4 and its aftermath, he doesn’t know about the direct connection between T4 and the Holocaust. He doesn’t know that it was at Brandenburg, the first T4 site, where methods of mass killing were tested, that the first victims of Nazi mass killings were the disabled, and that its personnel went on to establish and run the extermination camps at Treblinka, Belzec and Sobibor.

Three years earlier, when I first arrived in Germany, I was consistently confronted with the treatment of those with disabilities under the Third Reich. But I soon realized I had to go back even farther. In the 1920s, the disabled were mistreated, sterilized, experimented on and killed in some German psychiatric institutions. In 1920, the psychiatrist Alfred Hoche and the jurist Karl Binding published their treatise, “Permitting the Destruction of Unworthy Life,” which became the blueprint for the exterminations of the disabled carried out by the Third Reich.

In Dr. Ewald Melzer’s 1923 survey of the parents of the disabled children in his care, they were asked: “Would you agree definitely to a painless shortcut of your child’s life, after it is determined by experts that it is incurably stupid?” The results, which surprised Melzer, were published in 1925: 73 percent responded they were willing to have their children killed if they weren’t told about it.
I am also Jewish. At the Karl Bonhoeffer psychiatric hospital in the Berlin suburb of Wittenau, where the exhibition “A Double Stigma: The Fate of Jewish Psychiatric Patients” was held, I learned about, as the exhibition title suggests, how Jewish patients were doubly stigmatized by being separated from other patients, denied pastoral care, and were cared for not at the expense of the Reich but by Jewish organizations. Jewish patients were singled out for early extermination; by December 1942, the destruction of the Jewish patient population at Wittenau was complete.

The young neurologist in Hamburg did not know this history.
It is only at the end of my talk with the neurologist that I notice he wears a hearing aid. I want to ask if he knows about “100 Percent,” the film produced by deaf Germans to show they could assimilate and be productive citizens who worked. Did he know the hereditary deaf were singled out not only by the German authorities but also by those with acquired deafness who tried to save themselves? Too often, even those of us with disabilities do not know our own history.
Not many people know about disability history in the United States. They do not know that in the United States in 1927, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote that “three generations of imbeciles are enough” as part of his opinion in Buck v. Bell, in which the Supreme Court ruled that compulsory sterilization of the “unfit” was constitutional. This decision has never been expressly overturned.
Many Americans still do not know about the so-called “ugly laws,” which in many states, beginning in the late 1860s, deemed it illegal for persons who were “unsightly or unseemly” to appear in public. The last of these laws was not repealed until 1974.
Why is it important to know this history? We often say what happened in Nazi Germany couldn’t happen here. But some of it, like the mistreatment and sterilization of the disabled, did happen here.
A reading of Hoche and Binding’s “Permitting the Destruction of Unworthy Life” shows the similarity between what they said and what exponents of practical ethics, such as Peter Singer, say about the disabled today. As recently as 2015, Singer, talking with the radio host Aaron Klein on his show, said, “I don’t want my health insurance premiums to be higher so that infants who can experience zero quality of life can have expensive treatments.”
These philosophers talk about the drain on “resources” caused by lives lived with a disability, which eerily echoes what Hoche and Binding wrote about the “financial and moral burden” on “a person’s family, hospital, and state” caused by what they deem lives “unworthy of living.”
Experts point out the recent Republican health care proposals would strip Medicaid funding that helps the elderly, the poor and the disabled live healthier and more dignified lives. A recent New York Times article quoted the Rev. Susan Flanders, a retired Episcopal priest, as saying: “What we’re paying for is something that many people wouldn’t want if they had a choice. It’s hundreds of dollars each day that could go towards their grandchildren’s education or care for the people who could get well.”

In the article, Flanders, whose father had Alzheimer’s, is described as “utterly unafraid to mix money into the conversation about the meaning of life when the mind deteriorates.” Practical ethicists are similarly unafraid to do this. As were the Nazis. Third Reich school textbooks included arithmetic problems on how much it would cost to care for a person with a disability for a lifetime.

Three years ago, I was the only visitor at a museum dedicated to the history of the Reinickendorf area of Berlin. The museum building was once part of Wiesengrund, which, in 1941, housed the “wards for expert care” of the Municipal Hospital for Children.
Down a hall with fluorescent lighting, in a white-walled room, were 30 wooden cribs. On each of the cribs was a history of a child, some as young as a few months old. This was the room in which these infants and children were experimented on and killed: the 30-bed Ward 3, the “ward for expert care” at Wiesengrund.
My heart raced; my breath shortened. I couldn’t stay in that room for long. The room evoked the first four weeks of my own life spent in an incubator. Nobody knew if I would live or die.
What kind of society do we want to be? Those of us who live with disabilities are at the forefront of the larger discussion of what constitutes a valued life. What is a life worth living? Too often, the lives of those of us who live with disabilities are not valued, and feared. At the root of this fear is misunderstanding, misrepresentation, and a lack of knowledge of disability history and, thus, disabled lives.

Correction: 
An earlier version of this article misquoted a phrase from Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’s opinion in the Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell. It is “Three generations of imbeciles are enough,” not “one generation of imbeciles is enough.”

Kenny Fries is the author of, most recently, “In the Province of the Gods.”

A person's reflections on living with chronic illness


https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/10/opinion/in-my-chronic-illness-i-found-a-deeper-meaning.html?smid=fb-share&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fm.facebook.com

In My Chronic Illness, I Found a Deeper Meaning

By Elliot Kukla


I became disabled overnight in a car accident. The car accident was a dream, but the disability was real.
I dreamed I was driving through the ravaged streets of Oakland, Calif., at the end of the world. I turned the corner and careened inescapably into a white chemical blaze. I woke with a start, the white flash still burning behind my eyes, the worst headache of my life piercing my left temporal lobe. I remembered my mother having a brain aneurysm years before and knew the “worst headache of my life” was not to be ignored. My wife and I hurried to the hospital, expecting life to change forever. Once at the emergency room, things moved quickly: CT scans were ordered, crystal clear spinal fluid was drawn from my back. Eight hours later, I was told I was perfectly healthy.
What they meant, but wouldn’t say, was that they didn’t know what was wrong. Over the next weeks and months, it became obvious that I was far from well. The terrible headaches continued, I developed burning nerve pain all over my torso, I was wrapped in a thick brain fog, I sprouted mouth ulcers, I was crushed with exhaustion. I would open my mouth and be unable to speak. I could get lost in my own house between bedroom and bathroom, and forget my wife’s name. I started having seizures.
By then, I had discovered that I was no longer trusted by my doctors about my own body or experiences. I reported odd, terrifying and sudden physical changes; they recommended cognitive behavioral therapy and Weight Watchers. I felt exiled from the world of the well, isolated by thick walls of suspicion. I’m used to feeling like an outsider; I’m the first openly transgender rabbi ordained by a mainstream movement (Reform Judaism). I am used to being rejected and told I should not exist. But nothing prepared me for the outsider status of being chronically ill.

Think about that for a moment: Approximately 0.6 percent of American adults identify as transgender, just under 0.2 percent of the world population is Jewish, and 100 percent of us will get sick, yet it is being chronically sick that makes me feel like an outsider. That’s how much our society fears and rejects the core human experience of being ill, of having a body that gets sick, that ages, that is not controllable.
I went from doctor to doctor looking for answers, but overnight I had gone from being a trusted rabbi and chaplain (who works with seriously ill and dying people on hospital medical teams) to a “hysterical” chronically ill person. Though I had seen it happen to my clients, I now understood firsthand that being disbelieved is nearly universal for people with chronic illnesses, especially those that are largely invisible or hard to diagnose or both. I had believed that as a health care professional, equipped with skills and advocates to navigate the system, I would be treated differently. I soon learned how hubristic that was.
Eventually, because of the tireless advocacy of my wife, I was diagnosed with central nervous system lupus (an autoimmune disease that attacks the brain and central nervous system), as well as fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome and complex migraines. My lupus diagnosis would later be taken away and then given back countless times as suited the needs of health insurance and disability insurance companies to sort and manage me and decide how much care I was entitled to. The needs of my body were virtually irrelevant in this process as my diagnosis become a monetized affair where I had to jump through increasingly difficult hoops to “prove” it.
Like most of us, I had been raised to see illness as something temporary: a stopover on the way to recovery or to death, not a place to live. But weeks, months and then years passed, and I did not get better. My doctors, and even some friends and family members, suggested that I could get better if only I tried harder, relaxed more deeply, thought more positively. I became a lightning rod for others’ fears of disability, dependence and fragility. In a political moment where health care is treated as a luxury and hurricane victims are blamed for their own disasters, an ethic of personal responsibility reigns. But sometimes, sick people just stay sick. And there’s no meditation, medication, positive outlook, exercise or smoothie that can fix it.

Eventually, I stopped hoping to be well, or even pretending that I lived in that future-heavy land of hope anymore. I stopped trying to “overcome” my body and started living a present-tense life in chronic illness. As the pace of my life slowed, I could appreciate sensual pleasures in a new and heightened way: sunlight outside my bedroom window, my dog’s velvety fur, a cool breeze in my garden, richly colored flowers. On days when my brain was too fogged to do anything, I let myself float in and out of a rich, infinitely layered dream world.
With great difficulty, I learned how to accept care. A child of neglectful and absent parents, I had been fiercely independent for most of my life; now, as fatigue gripped my body, I needed help preparing food, showering, doing laundry, managing my medications. This demanded a difficult, profoundly spiritual vulnerability. I realized that if I were truly to see myself as equal to my seriously ill clients, and not performing a kind of “charity” in my work, I had to come to terms with the necessity of interdependence.
We are born needing care and die needing care, and I am no exception. At brief moments in the middle of life, we hold the illusion of independence, but we are always driving on roads we did not build, eating foods we did not pick or raise. Allowing the illusion of my own independence to drop away unmasked a fundamental truth of being human.
Like many people, I had once measured my worth by my capacity to produce things and experiences: to be productive at work, share responsibilities at home, “show up” equally in my friendships and rack up achievements. Being sick has been a long, slow detox from capitalist culture and its mandate that we never rest. Slowly, I found a deeper value in relationship beyond reciprocity: an unconditional love and care based in justice, and a belief that all humans deserve relationship, regardless of whether we can offer anything measurable back. In these discoveries, I’ve been led by other sick and disabled people, whose value had always been apparent to me. Amid the brilliant diversity of power wheelchairs, service dogs, canes and ice packs, it’s easy to see that we matter just as we are.
Eventually, my body did change. I am now able to stay awake longer, and my pain has receded to a dull throb. I can leave the house more; I can visit my clients and mentor my hospice volunteers, for which I am grateful. But I don’t see myself as cured, nor do I imagine a cure will come. This is merely another chapter in the life of my body. If I’m lucky enough to get old, my body will change again. Because of my illnesses and family history, I’m more likely to develop dementia. As I age, my body and mind will surely become more disabled. I will lose cognitive and sensory capacities. My skin and muscles will sag and disintegrate. I will depend more and more on other people. I will not be able to control my bowels or my surroundings as tightly. I will lose teeth, hair and precious memories. This is not a tragedy. This is what it means to be human.

Elliot Kukla is a rabbi at the Bay Area Jewish Healing Center in San Francisco and a co-director at the Kol Haneshama: Jewish End of Life Care volunteer hospice program.