Goodbye to an Old Friend

Just recently, a friend of mine, Randy Gulledge, told me about another friend who had recently passed away.  I say passed away, but in truth he faced a difficult quality of life decision and opted out.  It’s a difficult subject, and usually leaves more questions than answers, and for me, it poses a moral question.  This column is focused on that question.

Dr. Jack Kevorkian was an active advocate for assisted suicide who spent some time in prison because of it.  What we miss about his case isn’t that he ended up in prison, but the question about whether a human being has the right to determine when “to shuffle off this mortal coil.”  Especially today, that is a huge question.  There are really only two schools for it:  hang in there and suffer or take the early exit.

There’s a lot to be said for both points of view.  How I feel about it personally is my own opinion and I can see myself in either camp depending on the situation.  Still, it’s not my right to instill my opinion, good or bad, on anyone.

Several years ago, my wife and I had a friend who opted for the alternative route.  She decided to fight her cancer-death-sentence, and while she still lost in the long run, it was a long run.  It’s a matter of the tradeoffs, the quality of life, and what things are undone that you hope to see done, before the ravages of years and the hundreds of chemo bouts gets the best of you.

From my own life, I have seen people who suffered beyond comparison.  A very old friend who was diagnosed with stage four stomach cancer, who was here one day and gone six months later.  And who had been in horrible pain for the last six months of his life.

What quality is there in a life like that?

Spare me the whole thing about it not being personal.  There is nothing more personal and no time when a person shouldn’t be thinking about “me first.”  Sure, there are times when the ones left behind are left wondering about what happened, but that is just selfishness.

Does the person do such things to hurt the family, or their loved ones?  I argue by that time they are way beyond the idea of affecting anyone else. 

No question, it’s a matter of personal choice.  Take a look at how the medical profession reacts to such diagnoses.  Many doctors don’t bother trying to get “healed.”  No, they face the reality of the dilemma and make the choice of not fighting it back with pills or shots or radiation.

Don’t take my word for it.  Stephanie O'Neill, on Southern California Public Radio, presented an article entitled “How Doctors Want to Die is Different than Most People.” In it, she sites two points:

• A Stanford University study shows almost 90 percent of doctors would forgo resuscitation if facing a terminal illness.
• Doctors are more likely to die at home with less aggressive care than most people get at the end of their lives.

If that’s so, then why is it that we have these huge cancer clinics?  Why do we put ourselves through months and months or worse yet, years of less than what one might consider a high, or even just a moderate, quality of life?  Why not do what the doctors do?  If the medicine was good, why wouldn’t the doctors follow the same course of treatment?

It is the ages old argument about quality of life verses length of life.  Everyday people are faced with having to make this decision.  It’s a difficult thing to decide, or maybe not.  But there are tradeoffs.  In some circumstances I can see myself battling through, providing the value is worth the price.  But just as easily, I can see myself deciding that no value is worth the price.

Goodbye Ricky Gray-the world's a better place without you in it

Sorry Mr. Gray, but sometimes you need to reap what you sow.

If you were living, and in the Richmond area back in Jan. 1, 2006, I’m sure you remember the story about the Harvey family and how they were murdered.  It wasn’t just a run of the mill home break in, it was the deliberate and horrific murder of Bryan Harvey, Kathryn Harvey, and their two daughters, Stella 9 and Ruby 4.

It’s not just that they killed this family, it’s as much the manner in which they went about their evil work:  they were tied up, they were beaten, they were hit on the head with a hammer.  Gray and his accomplice Ray Dandridge then went on a romp and killed another accomplice, Ashley Baskerville, and her mother Mary Tucker, 47; and stepfather, Percyell Tucker, 55.

And so, now, a week away from his date with some lethal injection drugs, we are asked not to impose that punishment.  Really? 

Some crimes by their very nature merit the ultimate punishment.  I suppose, for some people, the 11 years that have passed since that horrid act will have softened them to the execution of this monster.  But, some say, he is now remorseful.  He had a tough child hood.  There are probably a hundred dozen reasons why someone might think Mr. Gray deserves a break.

But he never gave the Harvey family a break.  He never gave the Baskerville’s a break.  How would you feel if that happened to someone in your family?

There are few cases that merit the death penalty more than this case.  The brutal murder of two very small children.  It’s hard for me to think that anyone could forgive someone of those kinds of actions.

As a reporter back in the day, I sat through two capital murder trials while covering Chesterfield County.  Both cases came back as death sentence cases.  One was similar to the Harvey Murder in terms of depravity.

Charity Powers was 10 years old when Everett Lee Mueller abducted, raped and murdered her.  Mueller’s actions were in a class about equal to Gray’s, except that it was only one little girl.  At that point, Gray’s case diverges from horror into something far worse.

When we swirl around the kinds of human beings there are in this world, we know about good and bad and the many varieties in between. We have friends, we have acquaintances, and we have enemies—point blank everyone does.

But people like Gray and Dandridge fall into a different group totally.  Like the old “world” maps show as they reach the borders of known areas, “here there be monsters.”  In Chester, where Charity Powers was so brutally slain, the Chesterfield Police Department said there were about 20 people in the area who they felt could have been responsible for such a reprehensible crime.  Does that scare anyone?  It ought to.  CCPD already were pretty sure who it was, but it took them four or five months to finally get enough proof to arrest him.

Gray and Dandridge are living proof that monsters exist.  Yes, it’s been a long time for Gray to work his way through all of the legal niceties involved in a capital murder case.  And, I am sure, that he is sorry for his actions now.  But has that length of time dulled our senses to what really took place 11 years ago?

Not mine.

I can only imagine the horror and fear they instilled in the Harvey family.  The courts acted properly, the jury did their work properly, and the result will take place next week properly.  It sorrows me that a man is being put to his death, but in the scheme of murders few reach the level of depravity that the Harvey family’s murder did.

Goodbye, Ricky Gray, you have reaped what you have sown.

Peaceful transition - NUKED!

I can’t speak for you, but for me the current state of the Presidential transition is a bit frightening.  I’m not so worried about Trump starting to straighten out the economy and bringing back jobs while he is only the President-elect. I mean, that’s what he said he wanted to do, right?

He has also caused some terrific changes to the economy in terms of consumer confidence, what is happening on Wall Street, and how he has stepped in to work with companies that were going to leave the US behind.  Despite what all the pundits, provocateurs, politicians, and media pranksters have said about him, he apparently is the kind of guy who can get things done.

All of those positive things seem to flash in the face of the out-going party and President Obama.  But what was supposed to be a calm transition is turning out to be anything but.

While Trump may be acting like a president and not just the president elect, it seems as if the current president is doing whatever he can to make the world situation difficult, to say the least.  Why on earth would someone want to kick all the sleeping dogs before leaving office?

The only reason, and I have tried to think this through, the only reason for mucking up the works on a world-wide basis is to create havoc for the incoming president.  For my entire life, our country has been a friend to Israel.  And yet, now we are taking the side of those who wish to see Israel wiped from the map.  What’s to understand here?

Tying up drilling rights is another step in getting in the way of the new president.  It won’t stop oil exploration, but it will be another extra step that has to be cleared along the way.

Where was this president eight years ago?  You know, back in the days before he told Russian President Medvedev that he would have more room to operate after the 2012 election.

Where was this president when he drew a line in the sand in Syria concerning the use of chemical war fare?  Where was this president when four people were murdered in Benghazi?  Sure, we the people like to hold Hillary up for ridicule about that, but the president is just as responsible.

Why can’t the politicians just put things on hold until January 20^th?  Doesn’t it seem a bit unfair to start all these problems and then simply walk away, leaving the incoming president to handle the fall out?

And now we are talking about dealing with Russia over the so-called election and DNC hacking incidents.  So far, no one has shown any proof that Russia is behind those hacks.  Certainly, they are capable of doing it, but so are many other governments and organizations.

Looking back at Israel, it seems to me that Israel has not provoked the problems in the mid-East.  They have had to scrap to keep their citizens safe for ever.  Last night on TV they showed a comparison picture of the Mideast and barely noticeable was the small crescent that is Israel. They have endured great hardships over the years, including bombing, missile attacks, the 1967 war, and the constant grinding of the neighbor states.  And now, the current administration decides to blame Israel for all the violence and for not cooperating.  It seems to me I remember Israel ready to cooperate but the PLO bowed out.  At some point, one is forced to believe that the Palestinians, or at least the leadership, isn’t really wanting peace.

I guess this is just how the current administration treats its allies.  The Israelis have every right to feel as if they have been stabbed in the back.  But the even more interesting thing is the timing.  Secretary of State John Kerry said he has wanted to make that speech for some time.  I’m just wondering why now, with one foot out the door and the other on a banana peel, it seems like the right time?

Never mind, we do know why.