Elizabeth Edwards' situation
Thursday March 22, 2007
She's got Stage 4 breast cancer, which is the final stage. Her doctor said that this kind of cancer is "heterogenous," meaning that some people who get it respond well to treatment, but others don't. It is not curable, only...
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Advertisement
Advertisement
Search This Blog
Recent Posts
About Crunchy Con
Rod Dreher is an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, and author of "Crunchy Cons" (Crown Forum), a nonfiction book about conservatives, most of them religious, whose faith and political convictions sometimes put them at odds with mainstream conservatives. The views expressed in this blog are his own.
Subscribe
Archives
Blogs Worth Reading
- Front Porch Republic
- The American Conservative
- Patrick Deneen
- Conventional Folly
- The American Scene
- First Things
- Andrew Sullivan
- The Plank
- Eunomia
- Get Religion
- Postmodern Conservative
- Alex Massie
- The Corner
- Contentions
- Sharon Astyk
- Barry Ritholtz
- The Oil Drum
- Mere Comments
- First Principles (ISI)
- Brian Kaller
Top Features
- Inspiration and Hope from The Dolphin
- Let It Shine: Inspiring Quotes About Light
- 10 Tips for a Fearless Life
- All You Ever Wanted
- 7 Ways to Discover Joy
- Allow Good Things Into Your Life
- Seven Patron Saints for Healing and Comfort
- Love Is a Many Splendored Thing
- 'Expect God's Favor': Interview with Joel Osteen
- Spider Raid
- 10 Tips for Inner Confidence
- 7 Ways to Discover Joy
- Seven Patron Saints for Healing and Comfort
- 10 Law of Attraction Lessons in Film
- 10 Tips for a Fearless Life
- Let It Shine: Inspiring Quotes About Light
- Inspiration and Hope from The Dolphin
- A Reason to Celebrate
- Famous Scientology Couples
- Love Is a Many Splendored Thing
Only if you immediately assume it is his ambitions alone that keep him in the race. He was going to leave. She insisted that he stay. She said that this race was too important to drop out. And it is very likely that the guilt she would feel for being responsible for dropping out would, to her, be worse than the stress. (And having gone through a campaign, she does know what it is like.)
She also said that dealing with the three kids is probably going to be more stressful and tiring than the campaign.
So, the immediate (but a little subtle) slam of Edwards, that this is just about ambition, isn't really called for in this case.
My mother died of this cancer. She lived LONGER because she had something to look forward to. Many do, with a goal other than living longer, in front of them.
Oh, and people do die. And First Ladies have died in office before. And been seriously ill while in Office. It is a part of life, and no reason why it wouldn't be part of a President's life.
While I've not lost my wife to cancer, I nearly lost her several years ago to respiratory failure caused by COPD. My father died at age 50 from prostate cancer, my sister at age 39 from breast cancer, and my brother at age 35 from complications arising out of MS. Thus, I speak from experience about dealing with death (and the impending death) of loved ones. John needs to realize that every minute he spends away from his wife is a minute he'll never retrieve. Her finite pool of minutes here on Earth are dripping away, drop by drop, faster and faster. Maybe he and she are correct, and that for them, time occupied on the campaign trail will somehow make it easier for both of them to cope. Yet, I find it hard to believe that he won't look back with regret, and wish that instead of glad-handing and making speeches, he'd spent that same time simply being with her. I may be wrong, and I hope that I am.
As a trivial aside, three first ladies have died while their husbands were in office: Letitia Tyler, Caroline Harrison, and Ellen Wilson.
This is the man you refer to as the Kingfisher, so I'm not surprised you would take a negative slant to John Edwards' decision to remain in the race. If he had made another decision, I suspect you'd have found a reason to dismiss that.
When you don't like someone, Rod, you make it very clear. Elaine
So, the immediate (but a little subtle) slam of Edwards, that this is just about ambition, isn't really called for in this case. I disagree that it's a "slam" of Edwards, but certainly I don't understand his decision to stay in the race. It seems clear to me that the Edwardses deeply love each other. I'm sure she quite genuinely told him to carry on with his campaign. My wife would do the same thing for me, because she loves me more than she loves herself. But I don't understand how a husband who doesn't need to keep working to support his family does anything other than stay with his wife during this illness, especially because there's a three-in-four chance she'll be dead within five years.
Like I said, it's not really for me to judge why this married couple made this decision. But I don't think there's anything wrong with speculating one way or another on what we would have done, or would have hoped to have done, when faced with the same crisis. I don't see that we all have the obligation to uncritically approve of this decision, even as we do have the obligation to temper any critical comments with charity.
Elaine: This is the man you refer to as the Kingfisher, so I'm not surprised you would take a negative slant to John Edwards' decision to remain in the race. If he had made another decision, I suspect you'd have found a reason to dismiss that.
When you don't like someone, Rod, you make it very clear. No, I call him the Kingfish. It's a Huey Long reference. My position on his decision here has nothing to do with his politics, and everything to do with family. If he had chosen to drop out, I'd call him Husband of the Year. He has not chosen to do that, and I find that decision sad and inexplicable. But perhaps it will be for the best in the end. I pray so.
So I'm sure you expected Ronald Reagan to resign the presidency when Nancy was diagnosed with breast cancer so he could spend time with her. They could have assumed they might have even less time together, given her age.
My own thought is the decision to stay in the race will probably be revisited, should her treatment be more demanding than she believes at this time. Potential contributors may shy away, fearing that he'll drop out later. John and Elizabeth actually may be role models to the rest of us as to how to deal with the crap life throws our way. Sitting at home watching his wife might be the worst thing he could do for her.
I guess I fundamentally don't understand why you have to equate this with his "ambition." My first thought was that they were showing us that they chose not to give in to despair, which is a good lesson for all of us.
Elaine
"As a trivial aside, three first ladies have died while their husbands were in office: Letitia Tyler, Caroline Harrison, and Ellen Wilson." Yes, though all of those were back in the distant past. These days, with the media and all, the personal lives of public figures are watched much more. It would be a strange thing, to constantly hear news that a First Lady is in the hospital, now in, now out... The Edwardses know the situation best, so their decision should be respected---after all, they and their doctors know her health best. Still, I agree that this is a puzzling position. I had no intention of voting for Edwards anyway, but that aside, it seems to me that running a presidential campaign---and possibly a presidency---is too much for a man who also has to deal with a wife this ill. I think if it were me, I would drop out. But again, they presumably know what is best for them. May God bless them both.
I think she wants part of he family legacy to be that she has decided to spend he final time trying to get the man she believes in and loves elected president. Any way one looks at this...and Rod's examples all work.... make sense. His wife is dying; drop out, have quality time left as one can. But they are a team and have faced death together before with their son and therefore have more to draw on than most mortals. God speed.
...but certainly I don't understand his decision to stay in the race. Because his wife has sacrificed just as much for his career as he has. She might even want him to stay in more than he does.
Mixed feelings about this. First, if it were my husband, I think I would feel better in some ways about his going on. That's assuming, of course, that the situation doesn't become dire. Personally, I've never liked being "the anchor", and if I have complete faith that your husband is the right man for the office, I would want him to go on. But for a second, I'm going to be horribly blunt. Let's say she makes 4-5 years, and let's say Edwards is elected president. What kind of focus can you have on the presidency if your wife is dying the lingering death cancer sometimes dishes up? It's a horrible decision for them to make, my prayers are with them.
er, that's complete faith that MY husband is the man for the office. Sorry, changed wording there.
This must be really tough on them, and I sincerely offer them my prayers. I would not have the emotional strength to carry on through a campaign while my wife was dying of cancer. But anyone who wants the job of POTUS and is willing to put up with all the crap you have to go through is probably made of sterner stuff.
I take her words at face value, and in charity, don't see any reason not to. Amen.
If Mr. Edwards is elected (I hope not), it would sure be aweful to watch his wife die. But this is a country that could probably stand a little awefulness. Most of us are kept farther from the reality of death than we ought to be.
"I had no intention of voting for Edwards anyway, but that aside, it seems to me that running a presidential campaign---and possibly a presidency---is too much for a man who also has to deal with a wife this ill." On the other hand, if he deals well with both, then that speaks well of his ability to handle the pressures of a Presidency, does it not? We've had a president for six years who can't even handle a compound sentence, let alone doing two things at once - maybe our expectations are far too low.
I kinda wonder if the DC press corp will, consciously or not, grease the rails to get Edwards into the presidency. Not for political reasons, but because of the rich motherlode of stories he would represent. You have the stories about Elizabeth's health, the in-depth cancer stories pegged to it, the wall-to-wall funeral coverage should she succumb, and then - wonder of wonders - a US President who is rich, handsome, and SINGLE. The DC press corps would have more fun writing about Edwards than has been had since... EVER. I frankly suspect this is why they gave Bush such an easy ride - they thought a Gore presidency would be dull, and would involve a lot of familiar faces.
Rod, You have incorrectly and without compassion read into the Edwards statement and actions. They make ALL decisions together. You need to understand what John and Elizabeth say should be taken at face value. Their altruistic commitment to this country, and all those suffering, is their calling. They are, in fact, sacrificing their lives to help others. How can you criticize their efforts and motives? If you watched their press conference you would be 100% convinced of their motives and interest. These are VERY good people, willing to sacrifice their own lives for the good of others. Shame on you Rod.
I didn't see the press conference, but I understand that it was genuinely touching. I don't like John Edwards politically, but obviously I wouldn't wish their situation on anyone. I hope their love for each other provides them with much strength for the battles ahead. From a purely political standpoint, however, I have never thought that John Edwards had a chance of winning the nomination let alone the presidency. It may be that the campaign will offer a welcome distraction from their situation for a while, and when the time comes to call it quits, they can quietly slip out of public view and spend their time together knowing that they gave it the good fight.
First, 'every moment away'.. You have to realize what a modern campaign is like. There will BE no 'time away'. Politicians and their spouses during Presidential campaigns are generally glued at the hip. They are either standing, with his left arm around his wife, each waving the opposing hand, or she sits behind and to the right, seen over his shoulder, applauding at the speeches. That's not counting on the bus, hotel, etc. They will likely get more time together on this campaign than most families ever get a chance to.
Secondly, no, you don't understand. And I'm sure they wouldn't understand your relationship either.
My mother died of the same exact type of cancer. The same situation. Relapse, metasis. She lived LONGER because she had something to work toward. Having a goal can often extend your lifespan. And he said the minute she needed time off, he would be with her for that.
Dear John and Elizabeth, I just want to send my prayers to you and your family. I wanted you to be president in 2004 and now am so glad that you are running. God be with you. You are a very special couple.
I could understand this decision if it just affected the two of them but what about their youngest children? I have not read one word about the children.
You know, there's always the possibility that Mrs. Edwards truly believes this country would be better off with her husband in charge. What a comfort that would be in her declining years (months?) to know that she helped her nation before she died...
I would be very surprised if Edwards stays in the Presidential race much longer. Although the decision not to drop out surprised me, I do believe it was Elizabeth Edwards decision as well as John's.
I can only say that, at this point, I think they are setting a good example of how to live with a terrible disease. As a breast cancer survivor myself, my heart goes out to the Edwards (and is in my throat if I am perfectly honest). What terrible news.
Nancy: They make ALL decisions together. You need to understand what John and Elizabeth say should be taken at face value. Their altruistic commitment to this country, and all those suffering, is their calling. They are, in fact, sacrificing their lives to help others. How can you criticize their efforts and motives? If you watched their press conference you would be 100% convinced of their motives and interest. These are VERY good people, willing to sacrifice their own lives for the good of others. Shame on you Rod. In all due charity, Nancy, go jump in the lake. I did watch their press conference. It was classy and touching. Why do I "need" to understand that a politician and his wife do everything from altruistic motives? Why do you feel the "need" to "shame" anyone who questions a public figure's motives for an action taken in public? Ultimately, no one but the Edwardses can know what the right decision for them in this matter is, and absent any good reason to think there's anything untoward going on here, we should respect it. I think it's completely credible that Mrs. Edwards would decide that even if she should suffer and die before her husband made it to the White House, it would be a fitting legacy that he did so. But I also think that quite a few husbands and wives, esp those with children, asked themselves what they would do in a similar situation. Some of them came up with a different answer than the Edwardses. So what?
I don't understand his decision either. My heart sank when I heard the news. I've had this in my family too. He's not a frontrunner, and the other two Dem cands are getting the big money, so his dropping out would not have been a huge surprise. Maybe the Edwards feel that his staying in will shape the race and bring certain issues to consciousness? Knowing what a cancer fight entails, I don't see how he will be able to continue in the race for long.
The obvious temptation is to be cynical and assume that it will help with the fundraising but as he has about the same chance of actually getting nominated as a snowball in hell, we will probably be spared the boring death watch that the media loves to inflict on people and at least their should not be a fight over where to bury the poor woman.
The Edwardses' children are 25, 9, and 7. Different strokes for different folks, but, speaking as a cancer survivor with young children, I would want to spend every minute I could with my family -- especially if I had the money so that finances were not a worry. But it is also true that people's lives are enhanced when they fill their days with meaning. We know that the Edwardses found politics gave their life meaning after their son's death. So, for them, they have a history of working through grief in this matter.
The point was, Rod, you didn't just say 'Well, I would've done things differently'. You made the decision, a decision you admit you don't know how they came to, about his 'ambition'. Or as it is quoted.. But I must say that as a husband, I do find it difficult to imagine putting my ambition to be president over being wholly and unreservedly available to my wife in her struggle" Especially since one of her key issues, and I mean HER key issues is about health care and insurance. She's stated that she considers herself to be blessed and lucky, even with her cancer, and she is working for those who are not so lucky. In other words, the very note people have made about Edwards' having the luxury to not have to work, and to take care of his wife? That's why SHE wants him to carry on, for those who don't have that same luxury.
My heart and prayers sincerely go out to the Edwardses. I really wonder if their decision to go forward with the campaign won't be reassessed down the line.
A political campaign means being away from home almost continuously, and having very little time for family even when not travelling. To lead that kind of a mind-numbing life while dealing with a terminal illness (and with 2 young children) is almost unimaginable. This is not a judgment of John Edwards, his decision yesterday, or his personal motives. But 6 months from now, I won't be surprised if he and his wife change their minds. Either way, they deserve nothing less than our heartfelt prayers.
Perhaps a First Lady with cancer will bring a long-needed focus on access to medical care in America.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.