The thing that struck me in Laura Ungar’s article “Poverty fuels medical crisis: Access to care is difficult for rural, urban residents” was the fatalist attitude of the locals in response to their own extreme poverty. Ungar quotes Jim Neeley, a disabled veteran, “If cigarettes don’t kill me, something else will anyway […] When the good Lord’s ready, when it’s your turn, you’re gonna go.” I don’t know whether to take this attitude as a coping response to dreadful circumstances or true faith in the Lord brought from true despair. Fatalism is a tricky thing. Where is the balance between accepting one’s fate and fighting against it? Should medicine be considered at all, or should we all just trust in the timing and power of something greater than us as Neeley does?
Another thing to consider is that while fatalism may seem like a personal decision, it has the potential of affecting other people. By neglecting his poverty, and not trying to change the state of things, Neeley is allowing his community to continue their downward spiral of health. As the poor get sicker, the taxes and health expenses of those who are healthy get higher. Sometimes fatalism, just means inaction. Sometimes inaction is irresponsible as it doesn’t acknowledge how us not acting still affects those around us.
This all reminds me of the attitude of Lia’s parents in “The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down.” At home, they would have accepted Lia’s medical problems and not taken action in curing or treating them. Even more, Lia’s condition and seizures could’ve led her to the role of a shaman. However, as the book testifies, in America we would not allow such neglect of health to occur. Americans too hesitate in accepting Neeley’s fatalist attitude. Ultimately they would rather do all they could medically to save him. Should we accept fatalism as part of our culture as the Lees did, instead changing our world to meet the circumstances of our situation (ie: giving Lia the role of shaman)? And why wouldn’t we approach things in this way, when obviously, the opposite, the demand of healthcare, isn’t happening anyway.
3 comments:
I definitely agree with your second paragraph on inaction; I was surprised to see how long the trend has gone on in Kentucky and while reading, I kept wondering why these people didn't try to get out of that situation, it definitely seems like something you end up born in, but as they said, lack of education and lack of health insurance go hand in hand. I'm sure there have been people who got out of those rural areas in Kentucky, but of course they're not the ones who are the concern of the article.
Jim's comment reminds me of the priest from the Sicko clip when he said that the people in his community have not experienced real health or that sense of thriving.
As one of our classmates mentioned, a person who is high on top sees so many ways for them to continue to succeed. A person who is at the bottom rung of the social/economic ladders sees numerous obstacles and ways for them to fail. These struggles affect their attempts to find a balance between accepting their fate and fighting to change it
Dealing with the fatalism you describe in your post is like walking on eggshells. On one hand, we can chalk it up to strong religious faith. We can praise such people for having such solid convictions. But regardless of faith, a fatalist attitude prevent may its holder from seeking medical attention in emergencies, from striving to break free of poverty, and from pressing for a better future. Whether religious or secular, fatalism simply impedes progress. The post reminded me of an anecdote that I am sure you have all heard. In short, the story tells about man caught in a flood. He was a kind and religious person so he figured that God would save him. When a car came by and asked if he needed a ride, he refused, saying that God will deliver him. When a boat and finally a helicopter came by he said the same thing. In the end, the man drowned and went to heaven. He asked God why he did not save such a faithful and upright man as himself. God answered: “I did. I sent for you three times.” In the same way, holding fatalist religious convictions as ultimate or unchangeable verdicts only hurts the faithful.
Post a Comment