Denver Catholic

19 DENVER CATHOLIC | SEPTEMBER 24-OCTOBER 7, 2016 Leaving our values at the door of the strip club I was recently talking to a Massa- chusetts family with a 21-year- old son on the autism spectrum. Because of the Asperger syndrome and obsessive compulsive disorder that have a€ ected him since child- hood, he is only about 13 or 14 in his understanding and behaviors. Jimmy (not his real name) has been in and out of mental institutions and recently had to be placed into a group home because his single mom could no longer manage him at home. Jimmy came from a good family, con- scientious and Catholic, raised in a clean environment by his mother and grandmother, who hoped to see him cared for in a protected and secure setting at the group home. Soon they saw, however, that there were issues: the residents had unlimited TV access in their private rooms; there seemed to be high worker turnover; and some of the tattooed sta€ were not only heavy smokers but used foul language. Things took an unexpected turn as Jimmy prepared to celebrate his 21st birthday. Others at the group home started pushing him to visit the strip club in a nearby town now that he was "going to be an adult." Always guileless, and never hesitant to talk openly about whatever was going on around him, Jimmy blurted out to his grandmother that the group home sta€ were going to drive him the next weekend to the Foxy Lady Club. A series of phone calls ensued. When the grandmother spoke with a sta€ member at the home, she was informed there was nothing she could do to prevent it, that the group home routinely o€ ered transportation to the strip club not only for their residents, but for residents of the other group homes run by the same company in nearby towns. The sta€ member said that Jimmy was now 21 and the group home had to let him do what he wanted. A second phone call to the sta€ supervisor resulted in the same song and dance: the group home had no choice but to cater to his wishes; he was within his legal rights now that he was 21; they would drive others at the home to the strip club, etc. Finally, the grandmother called the Massachusetts Department of Developmental Services, which had contracted with the company running the group home, and spoke to the woman in charge of Jimmy's case. She noted that Jimmy was not only within his legal rights, but it was, she asserted, a matter of basic human rights to allow him go to the strip club. His grandmother replied it would be a failure to care for persons with mental disabilities if caretakers facilitated sexually-addictive prac- tices, which such persons were prone to engage in anyway, often struggling with self-control and masturbatory behaviors, and this might set them up for a trip back to the mental hospital. When she continued to protest that visit- ing such a club was not a good or moral activity, the oŒ cial replied, "Well, if you're concerned about 'values,' I leave my values at the door every time I go to work in order to get my job done." Cases like Jimmy's serve as a disappointing reminder of how low the bar has come to be set in certain segments of our society. The misap- propriation of public tax money by state agencies to subsidize damaging behaviors in a vulnerable patient pop- ulation is also regrettable and funda- mentally unjust. The family's strug- gles further highlight an astonishing cultural misunderstanding around the idea of "human rights." To suggest that the activity of leering lecherously at the bodies of naked women is a "basic human right" is itself a pro- found perversion, and represents a lamentable instance of outright moral bankruptcy. Probably the most striking ele- ment of a case like Jimmy's is the remarkably well-honed ability of some who serve in positions of authority and leadership — while professing to be "good" or even "religious" people — to jettison their values and beliefs the moment they are called upon to stand up and defend what is right. Because individuals like Jimmy are consistently unable to make good decisions on their own behalf, it goes without saying that they require a guardian to attend to their interests and protect them. Yet legal guard- ians, like Jimmy's grandmother, are fi nding themselves in the unenviable position of being ignored on certain issues by those entrusted with the care of institutionalized residents, apparently determined to bypass the guardian's will whenever spe- cifi c sexual agendas or views about "rights" need to be duly imposed. Good parents never drive their children to strip clubs, and neither should any institution entrusted with a protective parental role; on the con- trary, such institutions should erect appropriate boundaries and limits on harmful behaviors, so their residents can grow and fl ourish, contribute positively to society, and perhaps one day become good and mature moral agents themselves. which bring about the conception of children. And the most important change of all is simply this: children die, every day. Language matters. Now advocates of physician-as- sisted suicide want you to be lulled into silence once again. "Medical aid" and "options in dying " want to hide this real truth that human beings are asking not for aid or options, but death. John Stonestreet, who is with the Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview, is quoted in this article as saying: "'Dying with dignity' is a euphemism for killing elderly and terminally ill patients by giving them a cocktail of drugs. 'Medical aid in dying ' doesn't convey the reality of what's at stake. The phrase makes it sound as if doctors are only making their patient comfortable as they die, not providing the prescription that ends their life." It is a truth that each of us will die. It is also true that death is not clinical and pretty. People age, people su€ er, some face long-term battles with debilitating diseases. But death should never be a quick fi x. Death should require the most compas- sionate and personal response from families and communities, especially communities of faith. For years, doctors, nurses, social workers, musicians, scientists and people of all walks of life have been working to help people as they die know their worth, know that they are cared for, know that they are surrounded by a community that has not forgotten them. We as a Church have a great and remarkable chal- lenge to join in this most human act— accompanying those who are dying with love until their death. The article in The Denver Post raises another challenging issue: "Coloradans probably will get tired of both terms by the election, after they are bombarded with TV and radio ads." This is exactly what the proponents of physician-assisted sui- cide are hoping for. We do have short attention spans, and often fi nd it troubling to engage with the issues of our modern age thoughtfully, prayer- fully, and for more than 10 minutes. But we also have the example of our God who walked among us. Not abandoning creation to its follies, God became fl esh in our midst. Jesus walked the way of the cross, and as he hung dying, did not complain that he had had enough of this folly and zip o€ to other places in greater need of his attention. Jesus died on the cross. He surrendered his life to teach us that there are things worth dying for—namely all of us. Let us never tire of walking in his footsteps as we also take up our cross. This column fi rst appeared in the Sept. 4 bulletin of Good Shepherd Catholic Parish. It has been slightly edited for style, and reprinted here with permission. Making Sense of Bioethics Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk, Ph.D., serves as director of education at the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia, www.ncbcenter.org. FATHER TADEUSZ PACHOLCZYK, PH.D. Cases like Jimmy's serve as a disappointing reminder of how low the bar has come to be set in certain segments of our society." "

• Cover