Emily’s review of Me Before You (Me Before You, #1) > Likes and Comments
2017 likes · Like
I totally agree with your comments. I loved reading the book, but hated the ending and the point I think the author made with the way she wrapped up the story. It was very disturbing in its implications regarding the value of someone's life who is severly disabled.
I absolutely agree! I don't have a problem with a sad ending and I even think the author could have had Will die at the end, but do it in a way that doesn't send such a disturbing message. It really shocks me to read all those reviews talking about how romantic or inspirational this ending is (or how brave it is of Will to take this last step - WHAT?)... Made me a little angry.
You all have clearly missed the point "it was HIS choice". All of the other characters fought for him & tried to show him that the chair (his disability) didn't define him. In the end they loved him enough to support his wishes. One never knows how one will respond or feel until they are truly in that exact situation. Whatever choices you make in life, I hope those around you love & support you even if they don't agree with you.
I don't think I missed the point. Just because it was HIS choice, doesn't mean it wasn’t a horrible choice that sends a disturbing message. He said himself that his life could be a good life, but it's not enough. What exactly do you think the author meant by that?
Also, I find it very disturbing how people romanticise his suicide by the trance-like repetition of his choice, his choice, his choice… Of course it was his choice, that’s what suicide is per definition! (I really don’t understand why people keep throwing that at anyone who didn’t like the ending.) But it was NOT the first time after his accident that he decided something for himself (as stated so frequently) and I think the way it was delivered sends a disturbing message.
I wrote a similar review. I really hated this book for exactly the reasons you state. He had such a BIG life before that he couldn't possibly go on. So Stephen Hawking hasn't had a BIG life? What kind of message is this author trying to convey? Oh, I get it, it was his choice. It was a small-minded choice, and nothing to be celebrated.
I don't think his choice is one to be celebrated and it was as the implications were, tragic. However, I felt that he made the decision to end his life to free himself and the people around him. I don't think it was that his life was no longer big enough. I think that is what he told people - what I think he felt was that he was a prisoner in his own body and he was imprisoning the people he loved who were caring for him.
Now, it was obvious that the people who loved him didn't feel this way but in the end, he did get his wish. His father moved on with the woman he loved and Lou moved on with her life.
I think he ultimately sacrificed his life to give life back to those he loved.
I I completely agree! To the people saying things like "it was his choice" or "he felt like a prisoner in his own body", why in the world are you commending suicide? This is disturbing to me, especially in the wake of Robin Williams' untimely death. What if Will had suffered badly from depression, and felt like a prisoner to his mind, would you still be celebrating this story?
Couldn't agree more, Emily... I gave the book 4 stars for everything up until the last few chapters, which get 0 stars from me as I felt like it was just right-to-die propaganda. So disappointing.
I actually think the book presented both angles - you can also have a meaningful good life despite being quadriplegic, like some of Lou's online friends. I think for Will it was not just a question of being in a wheel chair, but being in constant pain, getting infections etc. Also for him, it was probably too bad not to be in charge of his own life anymore. I am not defending his decision as a right one or saying it was wrong either - I don't think it can be generalized. It's good that books explore themes like this and make us think!
I actually think the book presented both angles - you can also have a meaningful good life despite being quadriplegic, like some of Lou's online friends. I think for Will it was not just a question of being in a wheel chair, but being in constant pain, getting infections etc. Also for him, it was probably too bad not to be in charge of his own life anymore. I am not defending his decision as a right one or saying it was wrong either - I don't think it can be generalized. It's good that books explore themes like this and make us think!
I agree with you, Emily. I was ready for this book to end at about the halfway mark. It was a bit shallow in my opinion and I disliked the message conveyed by the ending.
At last a rational review of this propagandist piece of work! Thank you!
Exactly what bothered me about this book!
As a disabled person, I hated the hell out of this book. WRONG WRONG WRONG MESSAGE.
It's an individual decision, no right or wrong. And until you are in that position ( or any other such), you really have no reality to make your judgments/pronouncements. The book put out both sides for assisted suicide, whatever your thoughts on the characters are incidental, whatever thinking occurred in your brain is the purpose of literature.
This latest comment, taken to its logical conclusion, says anything goes, all choices are up to the individual. And, each one of us must judge, whether we are severely handicapped, 100% healthy, caretakers, or family members of someone who is disabled.
I still believe this was a work of propaganda, that the characterization of the young woman was often emotionally overwrought, which is the book's second greatest weakness.
Polly wrote: "It's an individual decision, no right or wrong. And until you are in that position ( or any other such), you really have no reality to make your judgments/pronouncements. The book put out both side..."
I'm sorry to go on about it, but I feel it's important so I'll state my point again.
It's not about judging people who want to die. I wouldn't dream of judging them. I wouldn't dream of judging anyone who feels desperate enough to commit suicide. And it's not about the right or wrong of that decision.
But I read the book and I can judge the decisions of the author and what she intentionally or unintentionally conveyed with them.
She spends half the book showing us that there can be joy and love and beauty even in a life that's as hard and limited as Will's. Then she has the character himself tell us, that he knows his life could be good. It could even be very good. Please let that sink in. The character tells us, that he knows his life could be very good.
But, eff it. Being severly disabled is just so horrible that he still wants to die.
Understandably many people draw conclusions like: He didn't want to tie her down. He didn't want to be a burden to the people around him... And they find it romantic or brave. Which is the worst possible message you can send when writing a book like that. And we can - and imho should - judge that message.
I think that this is about Will's choice. It's his life and so, it will be his choice. This does not really imply that his kind of life, with the disability is not worth living. The issue discussed is about the choices regardng our lives. We choose how to live and so we also have the power to decide how to end it.
I recommend you all watch How to Die in Oregon - a very well done documentary. You might think differently. (You might not, too).
As I grow older I learn more and more that it is arrogant to believe that what I think is right is the only possible answer. Who am I to say that I am infallible? I think that is important to keep in mind. Will's choice was his own to make. Whether it was right or wrong does not matter. And I have lived the aftermath of someone making the decision Will did, so I don't say this lightly.
I have to say that I disagree with you about the overall message of the book. I see the message as being that it is about an individual's right to make decisions about their own life.
Interesting. As I was reading this book, I actually found Louisa's and her mother's judgmental reactions to WIll's decision, and their reaction to his parent's compliancy to be disconcerting. While I hoped that Will would change his mind and not go through with it, I 100% understood why he did; because he is the one who has to endure the pain and suffering everyday. Yes, life is valuable, but so is freedom of choice, and I think that this book recognizes both of these things. The character of Ritchie I think highlights this, as he has adapted to his new life, and loves his new life, yet understands Will's decision. In sum, I don't think it's so simple. One of my loved ones suffers day to day in a similar situation, but he cannot even speak--so his wishes can't even be taken into account.
I admit I was disturbed he wished to complete his wish after he found love. I am completely torn as to what I think would me "right" but that would be for me. Sometimes the hardest gift to give a loved one is the best one for THEM. My heart is broken to bits a little as I just finished reading the story, and sad on many levels. It isn't a devalued life in a wheelchair, it is a decision as to how much control we still maintain on our own life.
Of course this is a hot topic. Always has been, always will be. It is ultimately his choice. According to the last chapter of the book, he was of sound mind, clearly going thru psych evals, etc. Thus why the case was dropped.
I still find it amazing that it is okay that we humanly put down animals, but if we help humans we are doing sinful work, etc. It's not about not having morals or ethics-I have both and I think if people are of sound mind and they want to do this-it is their right and choice. I've been a healthcare worker for many many years and have seen people suffer-they suffer by choice and usually that choice is to make their loved ones (not themselves) feel better. If anyone is selfish in this world-it is the loved ones that want them to keep suffering.
But again-it's all about opinions and comfort.
I agree....Will could probably returned to his previous job and lived a wonderful life, there's no reason a stock broker can't be in a wheelchair. What upsets me most is the lack of spiritual awareness on the part of the author or any of the readers who thought Will had "the right" to die. That's God's choice, not ours.
I hope you feel the same way about artificial means to keep people alive right? because that is not "god's wishes" but the wish of the family.
it's always a situation of interferring with what "God wants" when it comes to making decisions like these.
I don't feel extraordinary ary means are necessary to keep people alive. As a person of faith I beleive there is eternal life with the Lord so, while it would be painful, I would let my loved one (or myself) go. In Will's case he still had plenty of opportunity for a good quality of life..,just look at how great their trip was.
I thought it sent a powerful message about personal choice....many times, families and friends desire to do anything they can to relieve THEIR grief and suffering, and they think nothing about the person who is actually experiencing it. If a person is able bodied and of sound mind, their families do not go around making decisions for them. In fact, we may even tell people to grow up....make decisions for themselves.....If a person has a sound mind, but perhaps, not a fully functioning body, what gives others the right yo treat them like children?
Heike said it best. Anyone who commented that this book supports suicide/assisted suicide, or that a disabled life isn't worth living, is missing the point.
Heike said it best. Anyone who commented that this book supports suicide/assisted suicide, or that a disabled life isn't worth living, is missing the point.
I feel that the author wasn't saying that because your disabled your life matters less. She was saying from his point of view he wanted to end his life. He was so heavily in mourning of his previous life that he didn't want to live the rest of his life in his current state. Those who loved will recognized his value and acknowledged that he matter and and didn't want for him to die. This book for me was so moving poignant and if the author changed the ending in any other fashion we as the reader would of been cheated. As much as I cried and was mad with the author for choosing the ending she did , anything else would of taken away the core message of the book ...
It's terribly sad that you entirely missed the point of the story.
It's terribly sad that you miss the point of LIFE!
Have you realized that the message of the story is that you should live life on your own terms and choices?
Have you realized that the message of the story is that you should live life on your own terms and choices?
I agree. As someone who's lost many people to suicide, I identified with Louisa and Will's family, who were left wondering why they weren't enough.
I agree with you. I dont like end of the story:(
I absolutely disagree. The message of the book is that we should all be able to choose how we live our lives. Over and over you see that being the theme between Will and everyone else in his life who all want him to embrace life in a way that satisfies THEM, and not him. I've seen this over and over as an ICU nurse: families of suffering patients want them to keep living despite the immense change in quality of life, suffering and chronic pain. Who does that ultimately benefit?
I absolutely disagree. The message of the book is that we should all be able to choose how we live our lives. Over and over you see that being the theme between Will and everyone else in his life who all want him to embrace life in a way that satisfies THEM, and not him. I've seen this over and over as an ICU nurse: families of suffering patients want them to keep living despite the immense change in quality of life, suffering and chronic pain. Who does that ultimately benefit?
Monica wrote: "I thought it sent a powerful message about personal choice....many times, families and friends desire to do anything they can to relieve THEIR grief and suffering, and they think nothing about the ..."
Conversely, sometimes relieving THEIR grief and suffering to family and friends means "letting" the person die. One of the most disturbing parts of this book to me was the one chapter told from Will's Dad's POV, where he says: "Only on my son's death would I be free to live the life of my choosing."
Now, obviously that's nestled between a lot of talk about how he wants him to be happy and blah blah blah... But the fact remains that his father would gain something positive from Will's death, which is not rarely the case in right-to-die scenarios.
Suicide is not a decision most would just accept if it was an able bodied person wanting to die. If you watched someone trying to jump off a bridge you wouldn't just walk past and say, well, that's his decision. Most of us would try to stop them. Why? Because we assume that someone who is suicidal is not "of sound mind" and in 90% of the cases we'd be right. Somehow, when it's a disabled person, being suicidal makes total sense to us, because we can totally understand that you'd want to commit suicide if you had to live like that. The fact is, the vast majority of disabled people do not want to die. With the right support and time to "adjust" even severely disabled people want to live. The problem in this book - to me - was that Will had clearly not received the right support and time to adjust. His situation could have been improved in many ways, starting with the obvious of moving away from his parents.
I know people who have suffered from medical related trauma, having all that he had, but still either contemplated or did commit suicide. It is a misjudgement to determine that someone's survival should be based on what it is perceived that person had. It was clearly illustrated that he knew he had those things, yet he could not fully absorb them in his life or benefits from them to a level he felt was his right. If that is the case, that those things you listed support a persons life, we can we can judge every suicide of a person who has a loving family and a partner. We don't live in a vacuum and these factors aren't the hinge that keeps everyone together. With his love he was explicit that he could not offer his full self, but also that he had tremendous guilt of not being able to provide this. His decision was balanced and an accurate description of suicide, at least from what I've encountered with friends and clients. He enjoyed those things he could and determined his life wasn't fulfilling, which is ultimately a very personal and individual thing.
Ann but it's important to both validate your pov but establish that your faith is a reflection of your beliefs and not everyone else's. We have self agency and body integrity, both of which no third party has control over. Isn't it assumed God gave us free will? There are many situations that go against your insistence that it'd God's choice, but regardless we are in charge of who we are and make decisions for ourselves
Ann the point of life is subjective. That is the point of life. How we, personally, experienced it. How we personally make decisions and choice.
I disagree. I would like you to go and lay still and not move a muscle forgo hour. just one hour and see how hard it would be. Some people hate heights, some hate spiders, Will hated being still. It was spoon fed to us on the first scene. This was HIS ultimate fear and he could not face it day in and day out, no matter the love he had. I had a relative that spent 21 years as a non-verbal quadriplegic and he lived a compelling life and his funeral was attended by hundreds, we could all be so honored by those we leave behind. He died of natural causes but he could handle it. I had a fiance diagnosed with a brain tumor at 29 years of age who "offered" to take me "with him". he, too, ultimately died of natural causes but only because assisted suicide is illegal and the doctors in his family would have lost their licenses.he stayed alive and suffered for the people he loved and it was a huge sacrifice on his part because his death was painful and horrifically slow. The same for my SIL who passed away from lung cancer, one year ago tomorrow. She handled it differently and cracked jokes the day before she died. did you know that not giving a feeding tube to terminal cancer patients actually makes their death less painful. Almost no pain medication. Is needed if the patient is allowed to dehydrate and suffer the effects of malnutrition because the nerve endings are the first to go. Is that assisted suicide? Put the tube in and the loved ones mashing on another month or more but it will be an even slower more painful death. I loved this book, as for the heroine, many, many people never step out of their little spot on life. She wasn't unhappy and she was helping her family. I think she did love Running Man, but who doesn't question whether love is enough. So ordinary, irritating people can never be characters in books? I have never written anything on Goodreads before, and the dialogue in just these reviews tells me that the writer got people thinking and discussing a sensitive topic, for that discourse alone I give her book five stars
There is no "message". It's just a story. Not propaganda. A story. Fiction. Just let it be.
If this is what the book made you think then I do not think you grasped the full meaning of this book. But then again we must agree to disagree.
I agree that the moral of the story is shit. It's a failure in his life and he would rather kill himself than even try to create a good life for himself? There's people without legs and arms that have fufilling lives. Hell there's blind people that live their life to the fullest and don't go on a suicide rampest just 'cause their life isn't as grandiose as someone who's able to see.
I hated this book for that and many other reasons. Why do so many people love it????? Terrible!
To be trapped in a body you can't control with no hope of release is not something that everyone can willingly adjust to. Some can, others will always struggle. To be in near constant pain, and know that it will only get worse as the years pass, that you will become weaker and sicker and more dependent, relinquishing more and more control, knowing that your loved ones will keep you alive no matter how sick you get until maybe you can't even move that hand or speak anymore...it sounds terrifying. I understand Will's decision completely. Which is not to say that quadriplegics cannot live fulfilling or happy lives...simply that Will felt he could not, and after consideration and despite everything, he still wanted to end his pain and suffering. He chose, and the people around him were gracious enough, in the end, to respect that.
back to top
message 1:
by
Lisa
(new)
Mar 20, 2013 05:01PM
I totally agree with your comments. I loved reading the book, but hated the ending and the point I think the author made with the way she wrapped up the story. It was very disturbing in its implications regarding the value of someone's life who is severly disabled.
reply
|
flag
I absolutely agree! I don't have a problem with a sad ending and I even think the author could have had Will die at the end, but do it in a way that doesn't send such a disturbing message. It really shocks me to read all those reviews talking about how romantic or inspirational this ending is (or how brave it is of Will to take this last step - WHAT?)... Made me a little angry.
You all have clearly missed the point "it was HIS choice". All of the other characters fought for him & tried to show him that the chair (his disability) didn't define him. In the end they loved him enough to support his wishes. One never knows how one will respond or feel until they are truly in that exact situation. Whatever choices you make in life, I hope those around you love & support you even if they don't agree with you.
I don't think I missed the point. Just because it was HIS choice, doesn't mean it wasn’t a horrible choice that sends a disturbing message. He said himself that his life could be a good life, but it's not enough. What exactly do you think the author meant by that?Also, I find it very disturbing how people romanticise his suicide by the trance-like repetition of his choice, his choice, his choice… Of course it was his choice, that’s what suicide is per definition! (I really don’t understand why people keep throwing that at anyone who didn’t like the ending.) But it was NOT the first time after his accident that he decided something for himself (as stated so frequently) and I think the way it was delivered sends a disturbing message.
I wrote a similar review. I really hated this book for exactly the reasons you state. He had such a BIG life before that he couldn't possibly go on. So Stephen Hawking hasn't had a BIG life? What kind of message is this author trying to convey? Oh, I get it, it was his choice. It was a small-minded choice, and nothing to be celebrated.
I don't think his choice is one to be celebrated and it was as the implications were, tragic. However, I felt that he made the decision to end his life to free himself and the people around him. I don't think it was that his life was no longer big enough. I think that is what he told people - what I think he felt was that he was a prisoner in his own body and he was imprisoning the people he loved who were caring for him. Now, it was obvious that the people who loved him didn't feel this way but in the end, he did get his wish. His father moved on with the woman he loved and Lou moved on with her life.
I think he ultimately sacrificed his life to give life back to those he loved.
I I completely agree! To the people saying things like "it was his choice" or "he felt like a prisoner in his own body", why in the world are you commending suicide? This is disturbing to me, especially in the wake of Robin Williams' untimely death. What if Will had suffered badly from depression, and felt like a prisoner to his mind, would you still be celebrating this story?
Couldn't agree more, Emily... I gave the book 4 stars for everything up until the last few chapters, which get 0 stars from me as I felt like it was just right-to-die propaganda. So disappointing.
I actually think the book presented both angles - you can also have a meaningful good life despite being quadriplegic, like some of Lou's online friends. I think for Will it was not just a question of being in a wheel chair, but being in constant pain, getting infections etc. Also for him, it was probably too bad not to be in charge of his own life anymore. I am not defending his decision as a right one or saying it was wrong either - I don't think it can be generalized. It's good that books explore themes like this and make us think!
I actually think the book presented both angles - you can also have a meaningful good life despite being quadriplegic, like some of Lou's online friends. I think for Will it was not just a question of being in a wheel chair, but being in constant pain, getting infections etc. Also for him, it was probably too bad not to be in charge of his own life anymore. I am not defending his decision as a right one or saying it was wrong either - I don't think it can be generalized. It's good that books explore themes like this and make us think!
I agree with you, Emily. I was ready for this book to end at about the halfway mark. It was a bit shallow in my opinion and I disliked the message conveyed by the ending.
At last a rational review of this propagandist piece of work! Thank you!
Exactly what bothered me about this book!
As a disabled person, I hated the hell out of this book. WRONG WRONG WRONG MESSAGE.
It's an individual decision, no right or wrong. And until you are in that position ( or any other such), you really have no reality to make your judgments/pronouncements. The book put out both sides for assisted suicide, whatever your thoughts on the characters are incidental, whatever thinking occurred in your brain is the purpose of literature.
This latest comment, taken to its logical conclusion, says anything goes, all choices are up to the individual. And, each one of us must judge, whether we are severely handicapped, 100% healthy, caretakers, or family members of someone who is disabled.I still believe this was a work of propaganda, that the characterization of the young woman was often emotionally overwrought, which is the book's second greatest weakness.
Polly wrote: "It's an individual decision, no right or wrong. And until you are in that position ( or any other such), you really have no reality to make your judgments/pronouncements. The book put out both side..."I'm sorry to go on about it, but I feel it's important so I'll state my point again.
It's not about judging people who want to die. I wouldn't dream of judging them. I wouldn't dream of judging anyone who feels desperate enough to commit suicide. And it's not about the right or wrong of that decision.
But I read the book and I can judge the decisions of the author and what she intentionally or unintentionally conveyed with them.
She spends half the book showing us that there can be joy and love and beauty even in a life that's as hard and limited as Will's. Then she has the character himself tell us, that he knows his life could be good. It could even be very good. Please let that sink in. The character tells us, that he knows his life could be very good.
But, eff it. Being severly disabled is just so horrible that he still wants to die.
Understandably many people draw conclusions like: He didn't want to tie her down. He didn't want to be a burden to the people around him... And they find it romantic or brave. Which is the worst possible message you can send when writing a book like that. And we can - and imho should - judge that message.
I think that this is about Will's choice. It's his life and so, it will be his choice. This does not really imply that his kind of life, with the disability is not worth living. The issue discussed is about the choices regardng our lives. We choose how to live and so we also have the power to decide how to end it.
I recommend you all watch How to Die in Oregon - a very well done documentary. You might think differently. (You might not, too).
As I grow older I learn more and more that it is arrogant to believe that what I think is right is the only possible answer. Who am I to say that I am infallible? I think that is important to keep in mind. Will's choice was his own to make. Whether it was right or wrong does not matter. And I have lived the aftermath of someone making the decision Will did, so I don't say this lightly.
I have to say that I disagree with you about the overall message of the book. I see the message as being that it is about an individual's right to make decisions about their own life.
Interesting. As I was reading this book, I actually found Louisa's and her mother's judgmental reactions to WIll's decision, and their reaction to his parent's compliancy to be disconcerting. While I hoped that Will would change his mind and not go through with it, I 100% understood why he did; because he is the one who has to endure the pain and suffering everyday. Yes, life is valuable, but so is freedom of choice, and I think that this book recognizes both of these things. The character of Ritchie I think highlights this, as he has adapted to his new life, and loves his new life, yet understands Will's decision. In sum, I don't think it's so simple. One of my loved ones suffers day to day in a similar situation, but he cannot even speak--so his wishes can't even be taken into account.
I admit I was disturbed he wished to complete his wish after he found love. I am completely torn as to what I think would me "right" but that would be for me. Sometimes the hardest gift to give a loved one is the best one for THEM. My heart is broken to bits a little as I just finished reading the story, and sad on many levels. It isn't a devalued life in a wheelchair, it is a decision as to how much control we still maintain on our own life.
Of course this is a hot topic. Always has been, always will be. It is ultimately his choice. According to the last chapter of the book, he was of sound mind, clearly going thru psych evals, etc. Thus why the case was dropped.I still find it amazing that it is okay that we humanly put down animals, but if we help humans we are doing sinful work, etc. It's not about not having morals or ethics-I have both and I think if people are of sound mind and they want to do this-it is their right and choice. I've been a healthcare worker for many many years and have seen people suffer-they suffer by choice and usually that choice is to make their loved ones (not themselves) feel better. If anyone is selfish in this world-it is the loved ones that want them to keep suffering.
But again-it's all about opinions and comfort.
I agree....Will could probably returned to his previous job and lived a wonderful life, there's no reason a stock broker can't be in a wheelchair. What upsets me most is the lack of spiritual awareness on the part of the author or any of the readers who thought Will had "the right" to die. That's God's choice, not ours.
I hope you feel the same way about artificial means to keep people alive right? because that is not "god's wishes" but the wish of the family.it's always a situation of interferring with what "God wants" when it comes to making decisions like these.
I don't feel extraordinary ary means are necessary to keep people alive. As a person of faith I beleive there is eternal life with the Lord so, while it would be painful, I would let my loved one (or myself) go. In Will's case he still had plenty of opportunity for a good quality of life..,just look at how great their trip was.
I thought it sent a powerful message about personal choice....many times, families and friends desire to do anything they can to relieve THEIR grief and suffering, and they think nothing about the person who is actually experiencing it. If a person is able bodied and of sound mind, their families do not go around making decisions for them. In fact, we may even tell people to grow up....make decisions for themselves.....If a person has a sound mind, but perhaps, not a fully functioning body, what gives others the right yo treat them like children?
Heike said it best. Anyone who commented that this book supports suicide/assisted suicide, or that a disabled life isn't worth living, is missing the point.
Heike said it best. Anyone who commented that this book supports suicide/assisted suicide, or that a disabled life isn't worth living, is missing the point.
I feel that the author wasn't saying that because your disabled your life matters less. She was saying from his point of view he wanted to end his life. He was so heavily in mourning of his previous life that he didn't want to live the rest of his life in his current state. Those who loved will recognized his value and acknowledged that he matter and and didn't want for him to die. This book for me was so moving poignant and if the author changed the ending in any other fashion we as the reader would of been cheated. As much as I cried and was mad with the author for choosing the ending she did , anything else would of taken away the core message of the book ...
It's terribly sad that you entirely missed the point of the story.
It's terribly sad that you miss the point of LIFE!
Have you realized that the message of the story is that you should live life on your own terms and choices?
Have you realized that the message of the story is that you should live life on your own terms and choices?
I agree. As someone who's lost many people to suicide, I identified with Louisa and Will's family, who were left wondering why they weren't enough.
I agree with you. I dont like end of the story:(
I absolutely disagree. The message of the book is that we should all be able to choose how we live our lives. Over and over you see that being the theme between Will and everyone else in his life who all want him to embrace life in a way that satisfies THEM, and not him. I've seen this over and over as an ICU nurse: families of suffering patients want them to keep living despite the immense change in quality of life, suffering and chronic pain. Who does that ultimately benefit?
I absolutely disagree. The message of the book is that we should all be able to choose how we live our lives. Over and over you see that being the theme between Will and everyone else in his life who all want him to embrace life in a way that satisfies THEM, and not him. I've seen this over and over as an ICU nurse: families of suffering patients want them to keep living despite the immense change in quality of life, suffering and chronic pain. Who does that ultimately benefit?
Monica wrote: "I thought it sent a powerful message about personal choice....many times, families and friends desire to do anything they can to relieve THEIR grief and suffering, and they think nothing about the ..."Conversely, sometimes relieving THEIR grief and suffering to family and friends means "letting" the person die. One of the most disturbing parts of this book to me was the one chapter told from Will's Dad's POV, where he says: "Only on my son's death would I be free to live the life of my choosing."
Now, obviously that's nestled between a lot of talk about how he wants him to be happy and blah blah blah... But the fact remains that his father would gain something positive from Will's death, which is not rarely the case in right-to-die scenarios.
Suicide is not a decision most would just accept if it was an able bodied person wanting to die. If you watched someone trying to jump off a bridge you wouldn't just walk past and say, well, that's his decision. Most of us would try to stop them. Why? Because we assume that someone who is suicidal is not "of sound mind" and in 90% of the cases we'd be right. Somehow, when it's a disabled person, being suicidal makes total sense to us, because we can totally understand that you'd want to commit suicide if you had to live like that. The fact is, the vast majority of disabled people do not want to die. With the right support and time to "adjust" even severely disabled people want to live. The problem in this book - to me - was that Will had clearly not received the right support and time to adjust. His situation could have been improved in many ways, starting with the obvious of moving away from his parents.
I know people who have suffered from medical related trauma, having all that he had, but still either contemplated or did commit suicide. It is a misjudgement to determine that someone's survival should be based on what it is perceived that person had. It was clearly illustrated that he knew he had those things, yet he could not fully absorb them in his life or benefits from them to a level he felt was his right. If that is the case, that those things you listed support a persons life, we can we can judge every suicide of a person who has a loving family and a partner. We don't live in a vacuum and these factors aren't the hinge that keeps everyone together. With his love he was explicit that he could not offer his full self, but also that he had tremendous guilt of not being able to provide this. His decision was balanced and an accurate description of suicide, at least from what I've encountered with friends and clients. He enjoyed those things he could and determined his life wasn't fulfilling, which is ultimately a very personal and individual thing.
Ann but it's important to both validate your pov but establish that your faith is a reflection of your beliefs and not everyone else's. We have self agency and body integrity, both of which no third party has control over. Isn't it assumed God gave us free will? There are many situations that go against your insistence that it'd God's choice, but regardless we are in charge of who we are and make decisions for ourselves
Ann the point of life is subjective. That is the point of life. How we, personally, experienced it. How we personally make decisions and choice.
I disagree. I would like you to go and lay still and not move a muscle forgo hour. just one hour and see how hard it would be. Some people hate heights, some hate spiders, Will hated being still. It was spoon fed to us on the first scene. This was HIS ultimate fear and he could not face it day in and day out, no matter the love he had. I had a relative that spent 21 years as a non-verbal quadriplegic and he lived a compelling life and his funeral was attended by hundreds, we could all be so honored by those we leave behind. He died of natural causes but he could handle it. I had a fiance diagnosed with a brain tumor at 29 years of age who "offered" to take me "with him". he, too, ultimately died of natural causes but only because assisted suicide is illegal and the doctors in his family would have lost their licenses.he stayed alive and suffered for the people he loved and it was a huge sacrifice on his part because his death was painful and horrifically slow. The same for my SIL who passed away from lung cancer, one year ago tomorrow. She handled it differently and cracked jokes the day before she died. did you know that not giving a feeding tube to terminal cancer patients actually makes their death less painful. Almost no pain medication. Is needed if the patient is allowed to dehydrate and suffer the effects of malnutrition because the nerve endings are the first to go. Is that assisted suicide? Put the tube in and the loved ones mashing on another month or more but it will be an even slower more painful death. I loved this book, as for the heroine, many, many people never step out of their little spot on life. She wasn't unhappy and she was helping her family. I think she did love Running Man, but who doesn't question whether love is enough. So ordinary, irritating people can never be characters in books? I have never written anything on Goodreads before, and the dialogue in just these reviews tells me that the writer got people thinking and discussing a sensitive topic, for that discourse alone I give her book five stars
There is no "message". It's just a story. Not propaganda. A story. Fiction. Just let it be.
If this is what the book made you think then I do not think you grasped the full meaning of this book. But then again we must agree to disagree.
I agree that the moral of the story is shit. It's a failure in his life and he would rather kill himself than even try to create a good life for himself? There's people without legs and arms that have fufilling lives. Hell there's blind people that live their life to the fullest and don't go on a suicide rampest just 'cause their life isn't as grandiose as someone who's able to see.
I hated this book for that and many other reasons. Why do so many people love it????? Terrible!
To be trapped in a body you can't control with no hope of release is not something that everyone can willingly adjust to. Some can, others will always struggle. To be in near constant pain, and know that it will only get worse as the years pass, that you will become weaker and sicker and more dependent, relinquishing more and more control, knowing that your loved ones will keep you alive no matter how sick you get until maybe you can't even move that hand or speak anymore...it sounds terrifying. I understand Will's decision completely. Which is not to say that quadriplegics cannot live fulfilling or happy lives...simply that Will felt he could not, and after consideration and despite everything, he still wanted to end his pain and suffering. He chose, and the people around him were gracious enough, in the end, to respect that.
