Reverend Old

Why do we keep hearing news reports around war rubbles, 
    - "x number of children died";
    - "y number of women died";

but we don't hear,
    - "x number of elderly died"; or 
    - "y number of the infirm died"?

Have we missed that perfect symmetry between our younger kids needing care and our elder parents needing care? Symmetry-meaning one is a reflection of the other, and the two snap snugly into each other face to face.

Can we feed, wash and change adults as joyfully as we do for toddlers? In fact, can we feed adults as lovingly as we feed pets? And can we care for adults as happily as we care for plants?

By the same logic and by the same objectivity if we can willingly change, feed and wash babies, adults or pets it would only makes sense if we can be changed, be fed and be washed just as willingly. There’s nothing wrong with receiving care as much as there’s nothing wrong with giving care. There’s nothing wrong being dependent.

I defy and cancel all my visits to nursing homes and hospice cares if I pray not to be like them. If I dread aging and ailing, I’ve got some homework to do. I would have to confront my biases and resolve some issues.

If by applauded physiology toddlers drool, what is so wrong when an older person or even myself start drooling?

Maybe that has something to do with how we over-rate strength, resilience and perseverance. I must be strong and resilient only as far as holding steadfast to my values. Beyond that, I think our veneration of strength mostly comes from self-help books. We can hold on to our values, without discount, even if we are physiologically weak. Being physiologically weak sometimes also means being emotionally vulnerable. It’s ok to be physiologically weak as much as it is alright to be emotionally vulnerable.

So it is not the end of the world to be bedridden, to be on drips and feeding tubes, to be fed and changed, to be drooling, leaking and soiling. It is alright to be dependent. It is alright to be vulnerable. We are no less honorable.