The Academy Award-winning movie, Million Dollar Baby, strikes deep at the issues of self-worth and the value of life. Maggie Fitzgerald (Hilary Swank) is a tough-luck waitress, who persuades a grizzled old trainer named Frankie Dunn (Clint Eastwood) to help turn her into a world-class boxer. On the strength of believing in herself, Maggie reaches the pinnacle of success and is about to become world champion.
(Spoiler Alert: If you don't want to know the film's plot twist, stop reading now.)
Suddenly, an injury renders Maggie permanently paralyzed from the neck down, unable to move, and dependent on a respirator to keep her alive. She is mentally alert, but feels no reason to go on living.
We can all identify with Maggie's suffering: the glory that could have been and the horrible turn of events that has left her helpless. Without hope of recovery, she attempts suicide, before finally persuading Frankie to help her die.
Let us analyze the issues raised by the movie: Why would someone ask to die and should we be willing to oblige? We take for granted a world where patient autonomy is the overriding ethical principle to which all other considerations must bend. Common wisdom declares that the wishes of a patient, whether they be for more treatment, less treatment, or physician-assisted suicide, must be respected and carried out.
Yet let us consider: If a physically healthy person, with a stable family, wealth, and a successful career, would state that he wants to die, we would naturally find it hard to support such a decision. The stated reason, whether devastating or trite, would lead us to conclude that this person is depressed and needs emotional support and possibly psychiatric treatment. Stories of businessmen jumping off buildings after a stock market crash fill us with pity for the lost chance at intervention, not a feeling of satisfaction of them "having done the right thing."
So we need to ask: Is Maggie's decision to die reasonable? She describes her previous fame, the crowds chanting her name, and feels that having achieved that exulted status, there's no point in living as a quadriplegic. "I had it all," Maggie tells Frankie, "so don't take it away from me."
From a Jewish perspective, euthanasia is never permitted. Judaism recognizes that a person has the autonomy to make healthcare decisions, but insists that they must do so in a prudent manner (see "Doctor Knows Best?"). Jewish law does not require the preservation of life in all instances, and in fact, when someone is terminally ill and suffering, we do not necessarily require treatments to prolong life. (See: Should Terri Schiavo Live or Die?) Yet Judaism categorically states that one may never actively shorten the life of even a terminally ill patient. Jewish law approaches the preservation of life as a moral obligation, but recognizes that there are times, particularly when a patient is terminally ill, when intervention should not be performed. We are certainly never permitted to shorten the life of someone like Maggie who is in a very compromised state, but not dying.
But it does not require an edict from the Code of Jewish Law to recognize that Maggie is making the wrong choice. From a purely humanitarian approach, we may still question her autonomous decision.
Deeper Responsibility
Indeed, Maggie's severely disabled state is an enormous challenge to the human spirit. But in such a state of presumed depression, is it in her best interest for us to give her decision-making autonomy to end her life?
We typically grant decision-making autonomy only where someone has a legitimate right and ability to decide. For instance, we limit the decision-making autonomy of children and of those who are mentally impaired. We, as a society, do not feel they are in a position to make prudent decisions. What is prudent is subjective, but that does not stop us from establishing societal norms.
In Million Dollar Baby, what is presented as a question of the right to die is perhaps a distraction from the deeper question of responsibility to help our fellow human being.
Our society is so enamored with autonomy that we sometimes fail to consider other issues. In Million Dollar Baby, what is presented as a question of the right to die is perhaps a distraction from the deeper question of responsibility to help our fellow human being. When crisis hits, we must help our neighbor to dig deeper and solve the root of the problem even when they wish to die. As the Torah teaches, "Do not stand idly by as your neighbor's blood is shed" (Leviticus 19:16). No one would consider it moral to yell "jump" to a person standing on a high ledge. The bystander on the street would presume that the potential jumper is distraught and needs emotional support and help.
So perhaps the real ethical question is not "why does Maggie want to die?", but why there is not a greater offering of emotional support? As a society we would rather take a person's cry for help as a cry for death, rather than adequately fund the social services necessary to help people choose not to die. It has been repeatedly shown that for a terminally ill patient in a hospice, the desire to live or die is closely tied to the quality of pain relief and emotional support. Why isn't Maggie offered any psychiatric treatment for her depression?
The message is that disappointment over a shattered dream is a greater tragedy than death itself.
A study was done of those who survived attempted suicide by jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge. Almost uniformly, these people reported regretting their decision to jump. One man told New Yorker magazine that upon jumping, "I instantly realized that everything in my life that I'd thought was unfixable, was totally fixable -- except for having just jumped."
Often we fail to recognize that a cry for death is really a cry for help. E.S. Shneidman, founder of the American Association of Suicidology, explained: "The paradigm is the man who cuts his throat and cried for help in the same breath."
So perhaps the real question is not whether we should be assisting those who wish to die, but rather how we can help people like Maggie choose not to die.
Eye to the Future
Is it really possible for a person to want to live following an injury like Maggie's? We need not look to the world of fiction for an answer. Let's look at the real-life experience of someone who was at the height of fame and then suffered a devastating injury similar to Maggie's.
Christopher Reeve, better known as Superman, fractured his neck in an equestrian accident, leaving him quadriplegic and dependent on a respirator to breathe. Yet after a short period of despair, he chose to make life matter and become an advocate for the disabled. Specifically because of his fame, he was able to sensitize the world to the plight of the disabled and become an unrelenting crusader for stem cell research and spinal cord injury research.
As Rabbi Avi Shafran writes:
There was always a poignant irony in the fact that someone famed for portraying a man with superhuman strength became, in a tragic instant, utterly dependent on others for his every need. But it's even more strikingly ironic that Christopher Reeve's most formidable accomplishments, what he will undoubtedly be remembered for above all else, came after he became a quadriplegic.
While the fictional Maggie is convinced that her life is over after her injury, the real Christopher Reeve chose to define himself not as the movie star he had been, but rather by his future potential -- limited in some respects, but boundless nonetheless.
The key is focusing on future potential and goals, not dwelling on the past and "what might have been, if only…" The approach of one police officer at the Golden Gate Bridge, who has convinced more than 200 potential jumpers not to jump, was described in New Yorker:
He starts talking to a potential jumper by asking, "How are you feeling today?" Then, "What's your plan for tomorrow?" If the person doesn't have a plan… "Well, let's make one. If it doesn't work out, you can always come back here later."
A fulfilling life requires hope for the future -- new vistas to reach, new goals to achieve. In the end, the real tragedy of Million Dollar Baby is not the heart-wrenching decision that Frankie has to make. His decision to kill Maggie is abhorrent from a Jewish perspective. The real tragedy is that a young woman, robbed of her dream, lacks the support she needs to recognize that life is still brimming with unfulfilled potential, and that life is still her most valuable possession.
It does not matter whether we discuss a despondent disabled, boxer, fully cognizant of her condition such as Maggie; a woman who has remained in a persistent vegetative state for 15 years, such as Terri Schiavo; or an old man lying unconscious on his deathbed, feeling (as far as we know) no pain and having no interaction with his environment. Jewish law would assert that all of the lives in question have intrinsic value.
(65) Anonymous, August 3, 2020 12:54 AM
I believe Dr. Eisenberg misunderstands the movie....
Maggie didn't ask her trainer to kill her; she asked him to terminate the intervention artificially keeping her alive. While I would hesitate to speak for the halachic status of switching off a respirator, it definitely seems more of a case of withholding intervention on humanitarian grounds than active killing.
Secondly, it may be cruel to force a person to live paralyzed from the neck down if a) they would die without medical support, and b) they find prolongation of such an existence constant torture. If the only thing required to give them the relief they seek is pulling the plug (as opposed to actively giving lethal drugs, I believe we shouldn't force them to stay on a respirator.
On the other hand, that person's life is just as valuable and sacred as another's and we should preserve that life if the person wants to live and (by their own view) can handle the suffering.
In the sad, tragic case of a person wanting to die because of unbearable physical and emotional torment, and "pulling the plug" is all it takes, and the person has reasonably concluded that the ultimate relief is worth it to them, it may be wrong to force them to stay on a respirator (Maggie's case), or use a psychiatrist to try to cajole or pressure them to stay alive.
I tihink Million Dollar Baby accurately honored the distinctions and rather than presenting a euthanasia case, really presented a "withholding extreme intervention on humanitarian grounds" case.
(64) Anonymous, June 1, 2020 6:04 AM
I agree with jewish l aw. It is the same as Catholic doctrine.
(63) Raymond, August 29, 2018 2:30 AM
I Feel Vindicated
I am only reading this article now, thirteen years after it was written, so probably nobody will read what I have to say here. But just in case anybody does, I feel so vindicated in reading this article, because his position is exactly what mine has been all this time. I was absolutely horrified by that movie, and to this day, regard it as having THE worst message I have ever seen in a movie, as it is basically sanctioning murder. But murdering one's fellow human being is wrong, even if that human being is not in perfect health. I suppose, though, I should not be surprised that Hollywood endorses it, as they seem to support anything that is the opposite of morality.
(62) Jewish Mom, August 26, 2018 5:30 PM
Dr. Rahamim Melamed-Cohen
I just came across this article, so I don't know if anyone will read this comment. But if anyone is surfing for articles on this topic, read about the life of Dr. Rahamim Melamed-Cohen and discover what a completely paralyzed person (except for eye movement) can accomplish: http://www.aish.com/sp/pg/48960166.html and http://www.melamed.org.il/about-en
(61) JoAnne stanley, August 20, 2018 1:05 AM
A more recent example of life in spite of tragedy
In the life and death of the Jewish man, Charles Krauthammer, there is another true life example of a youthful tragedy that still resulted in an exemplary life, even fame and eloquent defense of many important issues of today. His remarkable intelligence led to the highest in education and he used his voice in upholding ideals of high morality. His paralysis was not so total as to needing a ventilator, but his contribution to this discussion is profound as he indeed overcame rather than give up.
(60) Jesse Wade Malvaez, January 11, 2018 2:14 PM
Please Read
Just thank you. Thank you really. If my mother was still alive she would probably be in happy tears with me, about just how beautiful and real your article is. I mean that from the bottom of my heart. It's almost exactly word for word what's going on in my head literally 24/7, I can't handle one more person repeating the same ol " things will be or get better" or the classic "stay positive" "things could be worse" but the one that really gets me angry is "stop talking like that your just crying out for attention". I always knew my mother was and is a very intelligent and wise women, if she wasn't unfortunately deceased I know how the letter to you would go. To: Dr Eisenberg, Thank you for writing a very moving and informative article that me and my beautiful 29 year old daughter could read and share together. I am not going to go on to critique your article that's not why I wrote to you today, I am writing because I am feeling burned out and out of options about how to help my 29 year old daughter to guide her to discovering her way to working on what she's got going on. Myself as well countless others, her community in fact have all thrown in our thoughts and views ect** .. however the conclusion still comes back to the beginning everytime. If you could please email me back at hjsac@yahoo.com That would be so very much appreciated thank you. Sighed, A very caring and worried mother, Honora Wade
(59) pamza raihing, May 16, 2017 10:03 AM
what happened to billie the blue bear after the match
we know that the fight was not fair,we also know that the referee gave billie a warning that if she continue doing foul play that she will be disqualified,but in the story nothing happened to billie after what she has done....the title should have given to Maggie,even if the referee dint see what billie did, there are three judges sitting there who would have seen it....i could not believe it why the title was not given to Maggie...the real winner is Maggie and she definitely is the ''Million Dollar Baby'' not billie...shame on WBA and the referees and the judges who could not decide after what happened actually
(58) Natalie, January 2, 2016 11:55 AM
The ending was so sad I can't believe that Frankie enjected her with the lethal shot and disconnected her air way I could never do it even if they beg me
(57) Anonymous, February 17, 2013 8:46 PM
Heartbreaking
It was a verg heartbreaking story.it deeply saddens me..and Makes me realize the importance of having good health.maggie was in pain..there are times when you get soo depressed that you dont want to live anymore. Of course there are strong people out there who would brave all kind of circumstances but we should not forget that there are weak hearted people too.and its not their fault not everyone can be the same. This movie has taught me one really imp thing,something that ill remember all my life-ALWAYS PROTECT YOUSELF. they should be making more movies like this one :)
(56) dasha18, July 31, 2012 4:04 PM
Choosing life
Years ago, in GA, a young man paralyzed from the neck and a resident of a long term care facility, legally won the right to die through his extensive litigation. In reality, what he won was the necessary notoriety; those in the know and with money outfitted him with technology so that he could earn a living and communicate and he chose life.
(55) Amy LifeStar, June 3, 2012 11:14 AM
It is Maggie's Conscious Choice and Desire Given the Circumstances
It is Maggie's Conscious Choice and Desire Given the Circumstances. Maggie knows what she is up against given her tragic incident of spinal cord and body injuries from neck down. She also knows her own losses, destruction, and torments in life after the incident. It is her life, her body, and her vitality that have been invaded and mutilated by the tragic incident and she knows well-enough whether she would put up with the physical and mental tortures for the upcoming years. She made a conscious and voluntary choice in what would be best for her given the nature, severity, and effects of the circumstances. Therefore, we need to respect her choice and wish and respect the individuals who desired to die and have a right to die due to intolerable conditions in their lives, especially conditions deriving from tragic incidents of permanent injuries! By Amy LifeStar
(54) jessi, October 12, 2010 5:04 AM
with those arguements, then her coach could have just unplugged her respirator, as that was actually what was keeping her alive, if we're using the let them die if machines are what's keeping them alive. the difference in this case is that she was completely paralyzed, not at the waist, but to where all she could do for the rest of her life, was talk, but needing a respirator. and move her head. the examples people give about having some uplifting moment where she was a teacher, inspirational speaker, are just so farfetched. what inspiration would she be able to give? the only thing she could talk about was that she could still interact with people, which isn't inspiring. it would be completely different if she had been paralyzed in any other way, but at the neck....
(53) Jerry W., August 7, 2010 7:24 AM
How do you reconcile suicide and euthanasia with modern medicine? It is both a gift and a curse to keep a human alive as long as technologically possible. In the movie, Maggie's hopes of living a quality life were diminished. What does she have to live for now? Her only family was out for her money and her only friend will feel guilty the rest of his life for allowing her to fight and become injured. The two things she loved, boxing and Frankie, were now unattainable. She would be inactive and bed-ridden, and her only moments of happiness would come from reminiscing on her glory boxing days. The act of living was killing her spirit. She just wanted to die with a satisfied mind and Clint Eastwood's character gave that to her.
(52) Thomas, July 19, 2009 2:30 AM
While I agree with the traditional Jewish stance on physician-induced death ("euthanasia"), I do not agree that Maggie was terminally ill. Let's call it what it is, she was a quadriplegic/tetraplegic. She deserved better support than what she got. Had she had proper care, she would have not had developed bed sores, because someone would have kept her moving. And a person that cannot breathe on their own, are they not a person? Jewish Law holds that they are. I entreat people sympathising with Maggie to ask themselves: would we EVER endorse someone killing themselves? Why is it different for disabled people? Why don't we, the diplegics like myself, deserve quality health care, including psychiatric services? We are worthy in the eyes of G-d.
(51) Liora, December 16, 2007 10:44 PM
death of hope
this article was very meaningful to me because I had to witness my mother z"l who had been so full of life, destroyed by cancer. I sat by her deathbed holding her hand. My father and siblings were all there. She was unconsious at this point, and every breath she took was precious. I knew in my head that she couldnt survive this and couldnt bear to see her that way, but still wished and prayed in my heart for a miracle to come and restore her to us. I still had hope and watched, disbelieving as she took her last breath. Those last days when she couldnt speak, eat or even breath without an oxygen tank were so very painful but so precious and will stay with me for the rest of my life. As agonizing as those days were, faced with the knowledge that I now have that I will never see my beloved mother in this life again, I would give anything to have those few moments and hear my mothers breath and hold her warm hand. The doctors and nurses at the hospice, while kind, tried to encourage us to allow the administration of morphine which would have been for the sole purpose of shortening her life as she seemed to be in no pain at that stage. We refused it on her behalf, knowing that she had never given up hope and we would never give up either.
Who is to say what is a worthy life and what is unworthy? Who is to be the judge of that?
(50) Ava, June 19, 2006 12:00 AM
suicide?? I disagree
How can you possibly equate the situation of this character with someone depressed enough to commit suicide? The only thing keeping her alive are machines and constant outside care. Would you rather she allow machines to keep her breathing and lose her body piece by piece - as she lost her leg because of the bed sores?
I find it disgusting that you could so easily judge someone in a situation where were it left strictly up to God, she wouldn't be alive at all. God knows more about the human condition and the mere fact that He would make a body shut down its lungs when completely paralyzed might be indicative of the fact that even He can see a right to a "fulfilling" life.
(49) Sarah Led, December 4, 2005 12:00 AM
We need to know what drives us in order to curtail our evil inclination, which we all have.
Frankie was a good trainer, maybe even a great one, but he was NOT a good/responsible manager. He had caused another boxer to lose his eye by not stopping the game when it needed to be stopped. He took risks on the cheshbon of the boxers he trained. He could not stop himself from doing so unless he gave up managing. If a boxer won, he too won, but if they lost, it was their life and limb on the line. He crossed the line once and needed to remain a trainer but give up managing because he was unable to control his evil inclination to sacrifice his boxers in the hope of a win. He knew this. Indeed even when a boxer he had trained was ready to go to a champion fight, he was rightfully reluctant to allow him to go for a championship under his management (this was in the film) and the boxer would then leave him for a different manager. Again, he could not be a manager. His insticts told him that. But he did not follow the rules he set for himself when it came to Maggie. Perhaps he believed he would not be so driven with a woman. No game is more important than the player that plays it. No "win" is more valuable than a life. Frankie instinctively knew his limitations but disregarded them and was indeed responsible for the dire consequences. However, Maggie was also obviously responsible. She trusted the wrong manager. She wanted to believe he cared about her more than the game. Again, he simply could not control himself and pushed beyond the limits.
Many of us are in a position of managing others' lives. As parents we make decisions for our children. As Doctors we do so for our patients, and as lawyers we do so for clients. Even teachers do so for their students.
We need to be cognizant of our natures and our needs and use our powers for the good of those who we are "managing." We must use power wisely and well.
(48) Jonathan Clark, August 25, 2005 12:00 AM
correcting our judgments
Dr. Eisenberg:
I found your comparison of our responses to the physically intact person contemplating suicide and our responses to the disabled person desireing death compelling. There is something dangerous for the weak among us that they receive less support/compasion than the businessman on the roof.
(47) Raj, May 10, 2005 12:00 AM
The question of ethics !
The question of Maggie's decision to finish off her (injured) life is not that much important whereas the main point is whether we opt for the ethics of living as it comes or for taking the individual case. Maggie's fatal injury compelled her to take that decision; but there are millions who are mentally retarded, suffering from awesome diseases like cancer and AIDS. Are we prepared to let them decide whether they too want to die peacefully at their own will rather than suffering day by day ?
(46) fran, April 26, 2005 12:00 AM
deaad alive or dead dead ?
acording to her victory in boxing , maggie considered her self dead drom the fact tha she couldnt move from bed. she couldnt fight any more . if it's not fight with life. somehow i unnderstand her envy of dying nd think she's been so strong to try to kill her self but on the other hand as the priest said. i believe that we should always let God end the life he 's started. and always have hope no matter what..
Ps:1/ for the first time i came out of cinema with red eyes full of tears( yet i knew it's just a movie!! )
2/ could you remind me how dann used to call maggy ( meanning trésor)
thanks , françoise
(45) Anonymous, March 23, 2005 12:00 AM
this movie is amazing
i thought that this movie was incredable and even though it had the twist where Maggie is paralized, it was still written beautifuly. No matter what anyone says, Hilary Swank is a wonderaful actress. I Luv U Swank!!!!
(44) avigayil pechter, March 13, 2005 12:00 AM
required reading for Florida judges
I wish this article was required reading for Florida judges.
You bring up a very good point.
Are we as a society 'championing' the 'right-to-die' cause because we do not want to aid the weak and disabled amongst us?
Time will tell how far this issue will go in our courts and therefore, into our own lives.
I also thought of something while listening to the Oscars. Jamie Foxx won for his role as Ray Charles in 'Ray'.
In the early part of the 20'th century, would popular opinion have been that a young African American boy, blinded by age of 7 in the rural South and later orphaned have been better off succumbing to his disease ? After all, what kind of 'quality of life' could he have had ?
Life situations can seem very cruel, but we have to remember there is a higher purpose to the things that happen to us and to others.
A very good article.
(43) Anonymous, March 12, 2005 12:00 AM
Who's the patient, who's the one standing by?
Wait till YOU are unable to control even one body function, feeling pain you can't express, slowly rotting in bed, hearing people talk of their fear of breaking a THIRD big bone or your NECK if they dare turn you or lift your head, even to comb your hair. That's not living; it's not depression! It's a longing to be released from agony, to a Great Beyond or even to nothingness.
(42) Robert Sabo, March 10, 2005 12:00 AM
Join the real world
From recent expieriance I have learned that Hospitals, especially Teaching Hospitals, love to have patients such as these. They are money in the bank to them.
Quality of life is of no interest to these institutions.
Not everyone is a multi millionaire such as was Mister Reeves.
I strongly disagree with your position.
(41) Kathlyn G. Thayne, March 8, 2005 12:00 AM
Thought Provoking
In no way do I advocate euthanasia but I find the question thought provoking. If nothing better can be said for this movie it has caused us to evaluate our morals. I can understand the grief and desperation of Maggie. I can imagine the terror of having to depend on someone else for your very existence. Imagine not only could one not feed oneself but to “enjoy” the very fundamental bodily functions such as elimination had been withdrawn.
Maggie had no familial support and her only close friend was Frankie who can only be supposed to have limited ability in helping her deal with life as a quadriplegic. Her educational background had not been sufficient to prepare her to excel in any area other than a fight. She was a fighter but evidently he fighting ability was limited to the physical aspect and not the emotional at least to the extent that was necessary for her to go on as she was, completely helpless.
Who then could help Maggie want to live? Where were the medical people who could have provided guidance? Where was the priest who advised Frankie to think of himself and the grief that assisting the suicide would cause him.
I can certainly understand Maggie’s situation and yes I cried during the movie. I was moved not so much by the decision to end Maggie’s life but for the desperation of her situation. Unfortunately she had no priest or rabbi to help or guide her. Let us not make the same mistake when we are faced with an opportunity to help. Perhaps that is the real sin, not helping someone in such great need. The movie was great in that it causes us to evaluate who we are and what responsibilities we have.
Kathlyn G. Thayne
(40) Helaine Berman, March 7, 2005 12:00 AM
Million Dollar Baby
I totally disagree with your opinion of the right to die issue. Maggie would be paralyzed for the rest of her life and on a breathing system. Without feeling useful, nobody wants to live so why prolong the agony.
(39) Shaun Keane, March 7, 2005 12:00 AM
After thought from: Not every human believes...
Maybe someday "Mankind" will actually apply it's much boasted about intelligent, seemingly rational, ever deducing and highly evolved brain... and upon its newly enlightened awakening, have its global epiphany. A moment of clarity in which all religous leaders and all the worlds tribal elders as well as the average person, will look deep and finally see that the actual goal,... the message of all religous writings handed down through the ages were trying to convey something slightly more profound. Maybe what God meant to teach us was, in order to save our individual souls we'd have to learn how to save the collective souls of a blessed creation, a gift bestowed to the human race. And then maybe, maybe someday when we simplify it just that much, we'll all turn our abilities and highly advanced skills towards saving all of our souls with a basic, simple acceptence and understanding. Isn't it at least slightly possible that a technologically advanced brain could turn towards survival... towards saving humanity, towards preserving whats not ours to elect wether or not to pull the plug on.
We spend so much time preparing for our individual eternity, maybe we missed something, perhaps we spend too much time not considering a very simple and clear objective... one that demands the human race stop making selfish decisions and excuses to keep destroying each other and try to gear towards a positive energy, away from how to build a bigger bomb with which to wipe-out countless more millions of our species, of ourselves. If we can pull that off, then we could quite possibly begin to put the same effort into technology that would "save" millions.
It can't be that far fetched, if we can all believe in writings handed down through thousands of years, and that our lives were given to us by an Omnipitant force that actually spoke to a selective few, chosen, or enlightend ones so many years ago. Is it really that immpossible then... that mabye God gave us a puzzle, and our unwillingness to tend to it is the reason we're in the global state we're in. Hmmmm... "imagine that", the highest form of life on Terra Firma making an all out effrot to sustain the glorious garden given to us. But hey, I could be entirely wrong. Perhaps the human race killing one another was just what he had mind, I don't know? I can definately say that in my opinion, save is the much better plan... much better than the man-hours we spend developing and devising plans and schemes to kill and wipe-out those who choose to read from a different book than ourselves, yet still a book conveying a similar message. A message of survival as a whole rather than as individuals. Just another hopeful opinion. Thanks
(38) Anonymous, March 6, 2005 12:00 AM
Not every human believes in a deity.
Faith. A very strong and defining word to some, to others, a fairy-tale or phantom-like falsehood. I,(for my own very specific reasons)have it. I also know some people who don't. This presents me with a decision. I can either, decide that my belief is trump and force my completely unprovable, and seemingly(to someone void of faith)insane opinions unto said other human being, or I can accept and respect that another well functioning and individually complex human brain views things an entirely different way. Therefore yes, I can impose a societal law placed there to prevent loss, harm, or harassment to or of another human being. But do I have the right to enforce my moral self-righteousness on those who lack faith? I could easily argue both sides of this question, but "I" the older and more respectfully openminded I become, would certainly lean towards a "no", I cannot force another person to tote my personal morals or individual faith. On the contrary, I quite possibly would consider such an act, a breach of my own morality in doing so. At this point in my life, being where I've been, seeing what I've seen, and learning what I've learned, have developed an extremely tolerant and respectful position on another human beings right of autonomy. I actually find it rather hypocritical to inflict ones personal morality unto another in the name of societal morality. In my (VERY)personal opinion, this topic has in no small way, a great deal to do with the fact that people all over this world kill each other everyday in the name of personal beliefs or faith, and whats more... why we humans as a whole, continue to lay to waste this beautiful planet, and in turn annihilate our own species.
Just thinking out-loud, I apologize if I've offended or upset anyone. Live as best you can and love the folks you do, with every ouce of your heart. Protect and heal as many fellow humans as possible. And lastly, please try to let all "non-violent", "non-raping", otherwise generally peaceful people live their lives with their beliefs, while expeditiously dealing with and ridding this world of indisputable,undeniable pure evil.
(37) Peter Henderson, March 6, 2005 12:00 AM
Million Dollar Baby
I went to the film Million Dollar Baby as an opponent of euthanasia but now I am not so sure. You might be right that support and therapy could have made a significant difference to Maggie's "quality of life", but in my mind that is uncertain. And I wonder where the necessarily lavish support would come from in our imperfect world. I also worry about a world where euthanasia is accepted, for it would likely lead to killing people who are merely inconvenient to keep alive. In the movie, Maggie had largely achieved her dream and wanted to die while her triumph still resonated within her. Incidentally, Christopher Reeves regained a measure of movement or so I am told. Maggie in the movie has been reduced to a lifeless body attached to a head. So I agree with those who say it was a tough decision. I am glad though that as a physician you take a pro-life view.
(36) galia berry, March 4, 2005 12:00 AM
inhumane death
Removing a feeding tube - literally starving a person to death - is hardly a quick, painless way to go. And as another person commented, neither is "pulling the plug". A fellow student watched as they pulled the plug from her brother-in-law following a tragic car accident; they were convinced by his doctors that this would be the most humane thing to do. She said it took 15 minutes for him to die, but in that time he constantly thrashed, fought to breathe, and was obviously suffering in great distress, although he was "unconscious" and "brain dead." The family felt misled and were so traumatized by their final memories, caused by their own actions and ignorance. I am sorry to write something so unpleasant and graphic but people need to know that real life and death are rarely like a Hollywood script. The prevalence of a number of movies with an assisted suicide theme is a very disturbing trend. As people become more and more used to the idea, they become complacent and accepting of the idea that killing someone prematurely is "euthanasia" when in fact it is murder. There is no reason for someone to suffer in pain, there are effective pain management programs so people can pass with dignity when HaShem , NOT man, deems their time in this world is up.
(35) Linda Epstein, March 4, 2005 12:00 AM
I disagree with Dr. Eisenberg
I disagree with the end comments of Dr. Eisenberg. If a person is in a persistant vegetative state, such as Terri Shiavo, euthanasia is appropriate, as in withholding nutrition. In addition, for some, the pain of living is so bad, that death becomes a better alternative. These people have a choice to make, after support systems have been offered. Suicide and euthanasia is not always a bad choice. If a terminal patient has cancer, with pain that cannot be relieved, why should the person continue to suffer?
(34) noah, March 3, 2005 12:00 AM
wonderful article
thank you very much. What is also not followed in the movie is that any patient in the United States in similar straits, may legally request to be removed from their vent, and be given a sedative to administer their own death. There was, in other words, no need for the melodrama-drama of her father figure facilitating her death. It was a mere plot device - a sickening plot device at that. milliondollarbigot.org will offer other insightful takes.
(33) Anonymous, March 3, 2005 12:00 AM
Hit the nail on the head
Just finished reading Million Dollar Baby.Very good and it hit the nail right on the head.
(32) Lara, March 3, 2005 12:00 AM
The writer of this article, in my guess, totally missed the point watching this movie. A man should always be given a choice between life or death. Both of the characters had to make a choice. And they did. I think by leting her go Frankie gave her freedom back. A freedom of her spirit. Of her soul. Even though her body was still her soul wasn't. Frankie had the right choice. And so did she.
(31) frankie, March 2, 2005 12:00 AM
i was not able to see the movie so i could not make any concrete comment on this. as far as this article is concerned, it is really superb.
(30) Do Lern Hwei, March 2, 2005 12:00 AM
a life-affirming article!
Thank you for the life-affirming article.
I agree with you that life has to be preserved at all costs. Suffering is subjective. However, we need to consider the cost of preserving life. Can the person and his family afford the medical expense of keeping him alive? Once the issue of expense is solve, then the answer is clear cut that life is to be preserved. What do you think?
(29) Vlad Seder, March 2, 2005 12:00 AM
It all depends on what you value in life
Sure, if materialistic success and pleasures are all that counts, Maggie has a point. Ye, what if there is something else to life? Is this world an amuzement park where if one is not getting any fun, there is no point to stay in? One can achieve tremendous success even in a wheelchair - just look at Stephen Hawking, one of the most prominent physicists of our time, who has done most of his work from a
wheelchair (he has ALS): http://www.hawking.org.uk/disable/dindex.html
(28) Anonymous, March 2, 2005 12:00 AM
As a psychotherapist, I'm confronted with such existential issues on a daily basis. While I don't sanction expedient suicidality, I'm convinced there are absolutely worse things than death. What is tolerable for one person isn't for another; life is not a one-size-fits all endeavor. Rather than take a very black and white view of never right, always wrong, I prefer to inhabit the gray areas, making my decisions ethically and thoughtfully one individual at a time. Sometimes a terminally ill individual will find comfort in simply knowing a suicide option is available, though never choose to implement it. I subscribe to autonomy (within the parameters of stable mental health) and self-deliverance in situations of intractable suffering. I respect personal dignity and quality of life. We are all gifted with free choice and are equally entitled to respect for our views regardless of how they differ.
(27) ed menser, March 2, 2005 12:00 AM
There may some who will try to explain why there are exceptions
but to anyone familiar with this field, this is a brilliant and sensitive article. Kudos to Dr. Eisenberg for pointing out the real storyline and message that Hollywood would have us believe to be the gospel truth. I've spent years visiting nursing homes and there are so many people there who are living full lives. All it takes is to realize that the cheap adoration and materialism portrayed by the media and ad agencies as "life" is empty. Those are all external to life. "Real" life is possible as long as the soul still hasn't left the body.
(26) Jasmin Furman, March 2, 2005 12:00 AM
Million Dollar Life
Dear Dr. Eisenberg,
your comments completely mirror my thoughts on this matter, at least that's what I felt initially, just having spent a week in Florida , reading the papers, I agree that Terri Shiavo's parents should make decisions for their daughter, for all the reasons you gave in your comment. Also, after reading about the beautiful woman boxer not wanting to live , I don't even want to see the movie.On a personal note, I have a very handicapped young son, who taught me much about the worth of a life, and how beautiful of a soul a retarded little boy can have, and how much happiness he can bring .
On the other hand, how can we able bodied people really decide what it feels like to be in such a position, if we don't physically feel the pain in our own bones and flesh( such as Hillary Swank,the boxer/ Chris Reed). How can one human being ever make decisions for another who still has the mental capacity to make decisions?.
I recently was trying to make a living will, and when they talk about " pulling the plug", I still don't understand what that really means, and the lawyer couldn't really explain it fully.
Being a physician, I understand that there are many individual scenarios in this matter, and by being knowledgeable about religious principles and following your " gut feeling" what feels right and ethical,we will hopefully make the right decisions, if we ever have to be in that type of a situation. When I was a resident on call at Jacobi Hospital, they asked me to disconnect/ turn off the respirator on a one year old" brain dead " baby, following head trauma,one day after his father fell asleep behind the wheel and ran the family car with 4 family members into a tree on the highway in the middle of the night.Both parents were alive with multiple injuries.( and were asked to give permission for organ donations.!)
I didn't feel it was appropriate to leave the final act to the most junior physician,and I refused , while much pressure was piled on me.It is a long time ago now,but I remember clearly that another doctor, who strongly believed in harvesting this baby's organs for a transplant to save someone's life, did the physical act of switching off the respirator.
Sorry about this long comment, but I really liked your article, and it got me thinking about a million things,which means it was a great article.
Jasmin.
(25) Anonymous, March 2, 2005 12:00 AM
"Crusader" should be derogatory term
Thank you for presenting an excellent article overall. I don't want to overstate my suggestion and thereby detract unneccesarily from a very moving and important article.
However, my only regret is that one person in the article is described in a positive light as being a "crusader" for research.
Let us not forget that the Crusaders (Yemach Shemam) murdered thousands of innocent Jews, among other atrocities. They are certainly not to be emulated, glorified, or compared to a modern-day advocate for the disabled.
An alternative description of Christopher Reeve would be a "champion" for research.
Dr. Eisenberg should be congratulated on a very inspirational article, and I look forward to reading his other works.
(24) scott sigman, March 1, 2005 12:00 AM
a million dollar article!
Thank you for your insight and perspective. We often struggle to find the right words and emotions to present a compelling case for the 'right to life' position. This article helps us all to remember there is always hope; choosing life over death is always the right choice.
Thank you.
Scott Sigman
(23) raisy, March 1, 2005 12:00 AM
creepy familly
I found the portrayal of Maggie's hillbilly, infantile, selfish family brilliant. Maggie is saintly in that she supports this ungrateful, sorry lot and to her credit, and her trainers, finally finds th courage to confront them regarding their total lack of character. I cried for Maggie. But I know that killing her is wrong. I also decry technology that permits preserving the twisted body, paining the soul. I have a son who is a quadriplegic, due to medical error. It is a nightmare. He is 12 now and usually content (he is brain damaged). His smile reveals the innocense of his soul. I know his life is holy. I know he wouldn't want to die, as sad as his life is now. As long as he is not in pain, it is bearable, and usually, thank G-d he isn't.
This is not an easy subject. I think much consideration needs to be made by patients (and currently healthy people) about the 'heroic measures' they would or would not want to be subjected to should such a situation, G-d forbid, arise. I think the solution lies in forethought. Once the respirator is on, it is halachically forbidden to remove it, I believe.
(22) robert stevens, March 1, 2005 12:00 AM
i have a totally different view from your sentiments.
i saw million dollar baby without knowing how it would end, and i was satisfied with the reality that one's own life should be viewed in terms of how that individual wants to handle it.
i agree with the general premise of "who's life is it anyway?"...a person has to make peace with god as opposed to any one of us to act upon what we might feel is on god's behalf!
it is important to consider all of the elements in a life and death situation and if i were the boxer in the film, i would have responded in exactly the same manner she did. i admired the treatment and actions of both people involved! if, as you say, all lives have value according to jewish law, than why not respect an individual's right to choose if and when to end one's own?
thank you for considering a different point of view!
best wishes,
-robert
(21) Anonymous, March 1, 2005 12:00 AM
Comment to your article.
Maggie's decision to end her life is not a decision resulting from depression but from realistic contemplation. Besides being paralyzed from the waist down with no hope of recovery, she then has one leg amputated. To be certain, other amputations would have resulted. Thank goodness she had someone who loved her enough to spare her the further torment that surely would have been hers.
(20) G. Leon chaim Ross, March 1, 2005 12:00 AM
Human life belong to G-d.
Thanks to Daniel Eisenberg for the words that all human lives have intrinsic value. This principle must be
the difference between people searching G-d all time and people without any faith.
(19) Anonymous, March 1, 2005 12:00 AM
Well said. Sadly it is often in the throes of a terrible tragedy or medical emergency that people "wake up" to their true spiritual condition. It often takes events like these for people to have a moment with which to reflect on life so that they could even "let go" and go
on to the eternal life that follows death should death be imminent. We live in a world that is filled with tragedies that are both physical and emotional and we do not know what may be a part of a person's life simply to help them work through and balance that which they have been subject to while existing in the world.
Diane
(18) Harlan Norem, February 28, 2005 12:00 AM
This needs wider press.
This wise and compassionate commentary ought to be on the pages of every (OK, most) newspapers across the nation. They can print drivel and trivia, why don't they make deliberate room for that which can enrich the life of their readers?
(17) Dr. Jose Nigrin, February 28, 2005 12:00 AM
Life is precious
There is a saying that, everything in life has a remedy, the only thing we cant restore is death.
(16) Anonymous, February 28, 2005 12:00 AM
a reply to the "humanitarian" commentators
For those of you who think that pulling the plug on people is the more "dignified", "decent", PAINLESS way to die...have you ever seen a person who has had the plug pulled out? For your information, these people die a very painFUL death...from the time the plug is pulled until they actually die, many minutes pass where the person, vegetable, or whatever else condition you want to say the person is in STRUGGLES to breathe. As a relative of someone who has had the plug pulled out from him, I can tell you that his death was anything BUT "clean, painless and quick."
(15) Anonymous, February 28, 2005 12:00 AM
PRESUMTIOUS
YOUR ARTICLE WAS CLEARLY WRITTEN BY A PERSON WHO DOES NOT STRUGGLE WITH DEPRESSION OR KNOW MUCH ABOUT DEPRESSION OTHER THAN WHAT YOU READ ABOUT IT IN A TEXTBOOK OR HAS THE OCCASIONAL BLUES. SOME OF US HAVE TO FIGHT AGAINST THESE FEELINGS, LIKE WALKING AGAINST A HEAVY GUST OF WIND. IT IS A FIGHT TO MOVE ON EVERY DAY. TRY AS WE MAY, THERAPY AND MEDICATION, ONLY HELP SO MUCH. FOR SOME OF US, DEPRESSION IS A DIALY NISSION (trial). NO ONE CAN JUDGE SOMEONE ELSES ABILITY TO MAINTAIN THE SAME STAMINA DAY AFTER DAY.
(14) Anonymous, February 28, 2005 12:00 AM
not a good comparison
While I understand the underlying Jewish philosophy that one should not speed the death of another, even at the other's request, I have to object to your use of Christopher Reeves as comparable situation to that of Maggie, in the movie. Maggie is a waitress, stuggling to get by. Not only does she not have the cadres of supporters to keep her morally uplifted, she does not have the physical comforts that Christopher Reeves had after his injury. She will have no source of income -- no way of preserving her lifestyle, no money or insurance for the best medical care, no drivers to take her around, no chefs to prepare her meals, noone to ghost- or co-write her book, no media beating down the door to her story. He friends are not in a situation where they can take off huge amounts of time to cater to her needs, as they have to continually work to support themselves.
While this movie may not show what we'd like to see as a Jewish view of the situation, it certainly does show a slice of life as it did and could easily happen anywhere in America.
Perhaps, rather than judging how someone else thought it best to be a loving support to a friend, a better subject for your article would be about how families and friends who meet with such situations can find support, both in and outside of the Jewish Community, to help such a friend.
(13) Penelope Stowe, February 28, 2005 12:00 AM
Christopher Reeve as a disability advocate
While I largely liked and agreed with this article, as a disabled activist I was troubled by your characterization of Christopher Reeve. Yes, he chose to live, a decision which he admitted in one of his books to be initially only because his wife wanted him to, but he did not do a great deal in working for what most disabled people want most: an equal access to all parts of society. Stem cell research is a fine idea, but to be a true hero to disabled people, he would have needed to also work for things such as more access to jobs, education, and other important aspects to our culture which are currently often limited by both cultural and physical barriers. As well this idea that everything must be cured which Christopher Reeve embodied through his fight only for cure or improvement, does not take in account that not everyone wishes a cure. I have a good friend who is a T6-7 parapelegic who truely has no wish for a cure. She also has no need for Christopher Reeve's ideas as he did not work towards changing the societal idea that to cure is the only solution.
(12) Joe King, February 27, 2005 12:00 AM
Judge not
I see no purpose in this judgmental moralistic review of a movie portrayal. The movie leaves the viewer to judge for him/herself, and I see no reason why aish.com should offer anything beyond a commentary from a Jewish perspective. With respect.
(11) Murray Gorelick, February 27, 2005 12:00 AM
Needs to be given to all persons in the medical profession
The need to regonize that there may be hope . The person who feels that he has gotten to the end of his rope may still find another avenue that may help him.
(10) Anonymous, February 27, 2005 12:00 AM
They should live out their days
One time I read a story in which the doctor wanted to put the patient out his misery and so he pulled the plug. Later, the person's soul came to the doctor in a dream and told him that he (patient)had a few more days to complete and because of the doctor's actions, his soul can't rest. And so the doctor made a deal with him. I forgot what. I think it was to do some kind of kind act for people. so the man's soul could finally rest
(9) Yitz Greenman, February 27, 2005 12:00 AM
Excellent article, very well written
Dr. Eisenberg did a fantastic job presenting these issues. May this article reach the hands of those that need it most. Yasher koach. YG
(8) Anonymous, February 27, 2005 12:00 AM
Glad I didn't go
I've heard weeks and weeks of hype about this movie and now that I know it is about something depressing, I won't go for sure so thanks for letting me know the plot.
I once had a professor in college push me to go a play he was putting on. It was depressing at the start, all the way through and ended with everyone dying. He asked me if I didn't think it was great and I replied that I had wasted my time seeing it, that going to the theatre was supposed to be entertaining and I could find an endless series of events that could be depressing without paying for it.
Thanks for the heads up, just because there are a million ads, it might not be worth two cents to someone who goes to a movie to be ENTERTAINED, not trained.
(7) Gwen Davis, February 27, 2005 12:00 AM
it was a very disturbing movie
I went to the movie because a friend wanted to see it and because it had been nominated for an academy award. I found the movie disturbing for several reasons. First, the idea of beating someone to a bloody pulp for sport is offensive to me, and was the reason why I had not wanted to see it in the first place. It was even more offensive that women--who are supposed to be higher spiritual beings--are now boxing. So the fights were repugnant and left me with nightmares. The Eastwood character goes against the advice of his priest and kills Maggie. I cheered the advice of the priest and when Eastwood was about to kill Maggie, I held out hope that he would stop at the end. I kept saying "Don't do it. Don't do it." The movie does not leave the viewer to decide for himself or herself. It is clear from the movie that this action is justified.
To kill someone is just wrong, and to not stand up and speak against it is also wrong. While this may "just" be a movie, it does present the act as OK or justifiable. I comment Aish.com for speaking out against it.
(6) arnie, February 27, 2005 12:00 AM
Suicide
As a Psychiatric Nurse (retired), I often had to battle with the ins and outs of suicide (not on a personal basis).
Some patients, after much psycho therapy did themselves in anyway which made me think "what's the use"? It's their life. Do not think that for one moment that I did not feel their pain. I cried at their funerals, and wrote poems about it.
Somewhere I read that the last survivors of Masada committed suicide rather than being captured, and I have read that this was condoned by Jewry.
(5) Anonymous, February 27, 2005 12:00 AM
Who decides what is quality of life?
My brother, of blessed memory, passed away 13 months ago, after a lengthy debilitaing illness. The last years of his life were spent as a quadraplegic connected to a respirator. As sad as this was, he was still able to enjoy a life of quality with family and friends, in spite of his limitiations and frequent pain. Some of the things he could still enjoy were the company of kind visitors, rich conversations, books, ideas, good food and sunny days. Throughout this difficult time, he still had hope for living and was an optimist.
However, one day he simply said "I have had enough. I can't take anymore". I can only guess that his body had experienced enough trauma: he passed away quietly 2 days later, moments after Shabbat.
I thank G-d for those last years with my brother. The time we shared together was powerful: and I have heard from so many others how much they valued their time with him and how this had affected their lives profoundly. He was the sick one and yet he added so much to other people's lives.
13 months ago, my brother succumbed to sepsis, the same blood poisoning that ended Christopher Reeves'life. I would like to think that both were Supermen.
(4) Jane La Lone, February 27, 2005 12:00 AM
Said too easily!!!!!!!!!!!!
The plot of the movie, as described, sounds very simplistic. If one has taken care of patients in understaffed nursing homes, psych centers, or any other health care facilitie where people linger with trachs, abdominal feeding tubes, without visitors and pushed feeds, bedsores, abandoned, in apparent umremitting pain............you would not wish this life for yourself or anyone you love. The ones who lovingly take care of these people, despite the feeling of frustration at a system and society that forces them to live out these torturous lives. yeah, sounds good, we should change societal attitude to support people in such desperate situations, but please, tour a dozen or so nursing homes....unannounced visits, and speedily.....not that the caretakers are necessarily without care and compassion................you might see a new reality. I pray to God that I do not have to spend the end of my life in a nursing home! I have too many trials and tribulations in life to be expected to live without mental or physical capacities, in any society that exists today. There is more dignity in a death non hindered by someone else's personal beliefs.......autonomy is a paramount consideration!!!!!
Maureen, August 19, 2018 3:48 PM
Jane La Lone: "Said too easily!!!!"
Exactly. Well put. Reminds me of the quote (often bandied about in various forms, in computer science circles) "The difference between theory and practice in practice is greater than the difference between theory in practice in theory."
In theory, it is proper to 'let Nature run its course' and 'let God decide' when life should cease. In practice, it is more humane to end the horrific pain and suffering when reality dictates the path ahead.
A loving God will understand our decisions to be sensible and help the one in intractable distress, even when we make mistakes. In this too, we are only human and cannot be divine.
(3) Beverly Kurtin, Ph.D., February 27, 2005 12:00 AM
Suicide isn't painless
I'm a former crisis intervention/suicide prevention counselor. I've heard some of the most trivial excuses possible given to me for someone who wants to throw away their lives...a lost boy/girl friend, financial problems, things that are easily handled in the long run. The calls that bothered me the most was from people whose doctors refused adequate pain relief from cancer, broken backs, nerve damage and the like. Why do doctors still feel that pain is a necessary adjunct to life?
Suicide leaves behind people who are deeply hurt by the suicide's callous neglect in "offing themselves." Sometimes the result of suicide is a secondary suicide.
(2) Dennis Byrnes, February 27, 2005 12:00 AM
preserving life
Re: The Million Dollar Baby commentary. Certainly there is much to be said about the remarkable accomplishments of Christopher Reeves. His strength of spirit and family support was boundless. Not all cases are as fortunate. Jewish Law is strict on this subject and I cannot, in my hear, as a Reform Jew, believe all cases to be the same. The woman in Florida who has been proven to be brain dead is one such case. Here is an example of where the Religious Right has stepped into politics where it does not belong further weakening the United States. However, the lady in question made a verbal agreement with her husband that they would not allow each other to die without dignity. That is what I have read. This woman is clinically dead to herself and everyone around her. To me this flies in the face of everything moral and decent. How could G-d want this to go on? Shame on those who have so twisted technology to keep bodies alive and the soul trapped.
THE AUTHOR RESPONDS:
Dear Dennis,
Good ethics start with good facts. It is very disheartening that people
are willing to make life and death decisions (especially for others)
without really understanding the cases. There is no one who asserts that
Terri Schiavo is brain dead (not her husband, not the courts). All agree
that she is in at least a persist vegatative state and her parents think
she is really better than this. Under no definition of death is she dead.
Second, There only one who claims that Terri Schiavo stated that she would
not want to be kept alive with a feeding tube is her husband who:
1. stands to inherit a large amount of money if she dies.
2. is living with another woman and has a baby with her.
3. has been accused of previouly abusing his wife (Terri).
Would you really grant the right to make life and death decisions to this
man when her parents are willing to care for her?
Daniel Eisenberg, MD
(1) Hertzel Schechter, February 27, 2005 12:00 AM
Where there is life, there is hope.
On Aug. 19, 2003, our son, Yitzchak Dovid, a 43 year old father of nine, suffered a cardiac arrest and collapsed. This happened as he was about to drive his wife and children home from a family simcha. Had it happened while driving, there would have been a terrible accident. Miracle number 1.
He then went into a coma for seven weeks and emerged completely physically disabled, but totally mentally alert. Miracle number 2.
After almost a year of rehabilitation, he was able to use his legs to propel his wheelchair and was also able to feed himself. He was however still unable to see. Despite his handicaps, our son made a conscious decision to go full speed ahead with life, and to utilize every possible moment for doing mitzvot and spiritual growth. Thanks to the help of devoted friends and relatives, he learned Torah every spare moment.
In Aug 2004, he unfortunately suffered another cardiac arrest. This caused another complete physical setback, but his mind remained totally alert. Miracle number 3.
He continued his daily Torah learning with more determination than ever before. To this date he has completed six tractates of the Talmud, and is well on the way to completing the seventh.
Where there is life, there is hope -- and growth.