The feathers of those big, raucous birds are as black as carbon. The sheen of their plumage reflects light like mirrors. The creatures’ morning routines consist of boisterous interchanges—perhaps conversations or arguments or mocking laughter. The trees surrounding the driveway in front of the house are laden with all sorts of birds, but the most visible and most audible are those huge black ones that look too large, too heavy, and too cumbersome to fly. Watching them fly, though, erases judgment about their clumsiness; their stunning twists and sharp turns and death-defying dives in flight are the province of expert high-wire acrobats. Mi novia just bought a little black display dish, modeled after those intriguing critters, in which she keeps an assortment of decorative quartz crystals. Crows—real and abstract, straightforward and abstract—are everywhere I turn lately. Crows; they did not choose that name for themselves. Humans, English-speakers with scant knowledge of how the birds live their lives, selected that word. I prefer the word used by Spanish-speakers: cuervo. Perhaps if I had experience listening to French conversations about them I would have developed an affinity for corbeau. What do the caws of crows symbolize? Are they mocking humans for our bureaucratic minds? Or do those vehement shouts say something unflattering about our lack of feathers? Perhaps they will warm up to me if I deliver daily treats to them—mi novia bought a big bag of unshelled peanuts that I suspect are intended for los cuervos. As for the image above: I do not know the source, I did not create it, but I admire the artist who did.
+++
Tomorrow marks a week since my most recent chemotherapy session. My patient portal shows that tomorrow’s scheduled visit includes two hours for treatment and two hours for labs, injection(s), and a visit with the oncologist. I cannot rely on the appointment times to reflect the actual visit, due to the impossibility of predicting how much time each patient’s condition will require of the oncology team. Last week’s treatment went by incredibly fast; faster, I think, than any I have experienced before. Regardless of how much time my appointment requires, though, days involving more than collecting blood for labs seem to require me to spend a full day, including going to and from the cancer center and the time I spend there. Tomorrow, I will ask my oncologist whether I can get all the vaccines I need at any time or, if not, when I can get the injects. COVID, flu, pneumonia, etc., etc. I’m tempted to request vaccines for measles, tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis, rubella, and any others that may be available…if for no other reason that to express my utter disdain for the “other Kennedy” who is trying to convince us that vaccines are poisons. Asshole! I have developed a moderately productive (and mildly irritating) cough. If I had a legitimate means of laying blame on him for whatever ails me, I would do it. And I would call his actions deliberate attempts to kill me. Unfortunately, felony convictions have been proven NOT to disqualify people for Federal “service” to the public.
+++
Preemptive euthanasia (PE). I first used that phrase a number of years ago. At the time, I was unable to find any reference to it on Google or other search engines like Dogpile and Bing. Today, though, a search yields quite a few hits; all of them, though, are post-2017. My use, though, refers to the termination of a person’s life to eliminate the high risk that the subject person will make others’ lives miserable. I do not recall ever finding that definition applied to the phrase. I also used the phrase “euthanasia once-removed” to describe the same thing. Unlike the first term, though, the latter one does not yield results in a Google search. I am confident many people would find both terms repugnant, despite the purity of the underlying motive; that is, to eliminate or prevent suffering to others by terminating the cause of suffering. I am not in favor of the death penalty, though, nor do I think the “state” should take individuals’ lives for any other reason. “The State” has been shown to be utterly untrustworthy in the death penalty’s application. So, to overcome my objections to a concept I find both appealing and appalling, I propose the death penalty be eliminated and that “preemptive euthanasia/euthanasia once-removed” be overseen by a Citizens’ Council on Death at a Distance. The Council would have several representatives from every country who would be charged with making a determination (Yes or No) to invoke PE involving candidates from other countries to which the representatives have no connections. For example, a panel of PE representatives from Sudan might be enlisted to determine whether an insufferable individual from Japan should be administered PE. A panel from Guatemala could be chosen to provide the same service for Iceland. If I ever had to make a decision about whether to move forward with implementation of PE, I think I would have to withdraw from the process. It’s easier to adopt hard and fast rules for hypothetical situations than for the real world.
