What Ilyich faces in the final moment is grace. He is graced with the realization that he needs to offer care. Knowing that the real is compassion is not his accomplishment but is the gift of his son’s presence. We, who would so quickly assist him out of this life, would do so because we can bear with neither grace nor compassion. They ask too much of us for another. 

Because death is not taken from him by “assistance” that offers no real help, Ilyich is graced with realization that death is no more. “Instead of death there was light.” He sees this light and realizes that “death is over . . . there is no more death.” Ilyich’s realization echoes Revelation 21:4 that “death will be no more.” Only a culture that can see death and care for those who are dying can be a culture open to the One who bore all our burdens. Christ’s dying offers us abundant life even in our deaths if we are willing to face them. In his Good Death, death itself dies. Euthanasia denies us a good death because it is the denial of care, the denial of facing death authentically, and the denial of the goodness of life. It is thus the denial of the Author of Life—or of any possible spiritual breakthrough at all.

Each fall for many more years, my students and I will read a novella about a dying, loveless lawyer from Tsarist Russia. We will ask what the real life is and wonder if we are living it. We will consider what love and care look like and whether we live in a culture in which we bear each other’s burdens. To bear those burdens is to face our deaths together. The direction of our culture is increasingly toward “death pods” where we will die alone, because we, like Ivan, have refused to really live together. Resisting such a culture of solitary and uncared for assisted dying will take legislation, but it will also require that we spend some time with Ilyich and try to recover the goodness of a good life and of a good death. Someday I will face death. Someday my students will face it as well. Will we do so in a world detached from reality or attached to it? A culture that dispatches the burdensome or bears their burdens? A culture that offers care or that offers death? The euthanasia of Ilyich would have made impossible his eu thanatos. Our society’s growing practice of euthanasia may well prove to be the denial not only of our good deaths but also of the only real thing, a good life.

Read it all.

Resisting the march of euthanasia will require numerous approaches. I hope this reflection on the good death of Ivan Ilyich contributes in some small way. https://t.co/wOO6VTKdnF

— Terence Sweeney (@TerenceJSweeney) February 19, 2025

While few modern proponents of doctor-assisted death would argue that sick people should “make way” when their lives become a draw on others’ resources, they don’t appear to believe this—inevitable—outcome should prevent the practice from being legalized. This troubling attitude goes against the U.K.’s historically Christian approach to dying people, including the belief that every person has intrinsic value, and every life ought to be equally cherished and protected.

Every single one of us has been or will be a “burden” on others. When we are young, we depend upon the care and provision of our parents. When we grow ill, or elderly, we require support from our family and friends. This is not a bad thing; to be human is to be dependent. When it comes to helping those with terminal illness, properly resourced palliative care is highly effective at mitigating suffering and ensures that every patient hears a loving message: “It’s good that you’re alive.”

U.K. politicians must ask themselves what kind of society they want to create: One where an individualistic “right to die” sees vulnerable and marginalized Britons confronted with the option of suicide and pressured to pursue it; or a society where suicide is never viewed as a fitting response to suffering, where every citizen is recognized to have intrinsic and equal value, safeguarded from harm, and offered compassionate, life-affirming support.

As the Canadian ethicist Ewan Goligher noted: “A nation’s laws are a teacher.” Legalizing assisted suicide teaches society to doubt human value and to see it as merely extrinsic and conditional. Prohibiting it reflects the true depth of human dignity.

Read it all.

It’s Good That You’re Alive https://t.co/n78pfTOVXG “As the Canadian ethicist Ewan Goligher noted: ‘A nation’s laws are a teacher.’ Legalizing assisted suicide teaches society to doubt human value and to see it as merely extrinsic and conditional”

— David Mulroney (@David_Mulroney) January 17, 2025

New cases of dementia will double by 2060, when 1 million U.S. adults are projected to develop the memory-robbing condition each year, according to a sobering new study published Monday in the journal Nature Medicine.

The new analysis shows that the risk a person faces over their lifetime is higher than some previous estimates: After age 55, 4 in 10 adults are likely to develop some form of dementia. That’s in part because the new analysis is based on decades of close follow-up, including regular cognitive assessments, of a racially diverse group of people — a quarter of whom were Black and face an increased risk of dementia.

“If you start at age 55 and go forward until your 95th birthday, there are two options: You die before dementia, or you get to dementia before death,” said Josef Coresh, founding director of the Optimal Aging Institute at the New York University Grossman School of Medicine. From age 55 to 75, he noted, the risk of developing dementia is only about 4 percent. That increases substantially over the next two decades, particularly after people’s 85th birthdays.

Read it all.

1 million U.S. adults will develop dementia each year by 2060, study says. Important story by ⁦@Carolynyjohnson⁩ https://t.co/1H2tmnKtLM

— Laurie McGinley (@lauriemcginley2) January 13, 2025

Referring to the prevalence of suicide and how “huge efforts” are being made “to try to prevent people feeling despair and feeling that they have no other choice but to take their own lives”, Archbishop Martin said, “I find a profound contradiction between that and the idea of assisting somebody to take their own life at any stage during their life.”

He noted that fears and concerns regarding the introduction of assisted suicide were voiced to some extent during the lead up period to the Westminster vote.

“In Ireland we need a very careful reflection on this.” He expressed disappointment that the Dáil “seemed to be rushing to adopt what we [the Irish bishops] believe was a flawed report of the Oireachtas Committee just before it broke up for the election.”

“It gave me some consolation to see that none of the parties appeared to be making the introduction of assisted dying in Ireland a manifesto issue and therefore I feel that none of the parties have actually a mandate now to proceed on this issue.”

“I really do feel that our concerns about the slippery slope, how this issue invariably gets expanded and increased as time goes on, which we see from other countries, is something we should reflect long and hard about.”

Read it all.

Archbishop ‘very disappointed’ over assisted dying vote https://t.co/2kBwTtpM9A

— Eamon Martin (@ArchbishopEamon) December 23, 2024

Christians are not alone in valuing life; many Jews, Muslims, and other people of goodwill also affirm the intrinsic goodness of human life. But there is a distinctly Christian conviction at work here, and it is bedrock to our faith: Every human being, from conception to death, is created by God, loved by him, and stands under his protection. 

The claim that innocent human life is inviolable is not primarily a claim about us humans, then, but about our Creator. To murder (or torture or enslave, as the church father Gregory of Nyssa saw as early as the fourth century) is to trespass without authority, to assert rights where one has none. It is to unsay God’s “very good” spoken over a fellow creature, to reject and despise a man or woman whom the Lord has brought into being and for whom Christ died. Inviolability is the upshot of our creation in the divine image. 

Unlike many topics in theology and ethics, this is not an issue on which the church has ever been ambiguous. There were no early church councils to debate the taking of innocent life. It didn’t take centuries of conflict to adjudicate. On the contrary, Christians were known from the start for their adamant rejection of pagan disrespect for those unwanted by their families or deemed socially useless—the unborn and newborn, disabled and elderly. 

Read it all.

Why do Christians oppose euthanasia?

Brad East’s answer:https://t.co/cviFstiPVB

— Christianity Today (@CTmagazine) December 11, 2024

As a supporter of assisted suicide, Lord Sumption’s argument is commendably honest. He recognises that the Leadbeater bill creates a new kind of society. Although it sprinkles us all with the same fairy dust of autonomy, our new-found entitlement does not land on us all equally. Rather, because of pre-existing social inequalities, it creates two distinct groups. In one, we find “strong-minded, articulate individuals.”

They have a high sense of self-worth and good support networks. To them, assisted suicide represents an idealised form of dying on their own terms. It is an empowering possibility for a future dark day, an option (perhaps that such a person will never actually use) rather than an obligation. In the other group, Lord Sumption writes, we find “the genuinely vulnerable”. For many reasons (illness, old age, hard life circumstances) people in this group often feel dictated to by life. They cannot hold prime ministers to personal account, and are not of much interest to the media. In many cases, their support networks are threadbare.

Lord Sumption admits that such people have good reason to fear the Pandora’s Box opened by Leadbeater’s bill. For them, in time, it will be less an empowering hypothetical option for a future day and more a dark cloud that will hang over every day, a silent obligation to be resisted rather than a liberating insurance plan. Although he supports assisted suicide, it is for the sake of the vulnerable that he is unable to “rejoice” in the first wave of an incoming tide.

Read it all (subscription).

Excellent piece!

“When elevated to life’s highest value, autonomy is an uncompromising and rapacious master. Given time, the strength of its logic bursts through our arbitrary restrictions on it.” –@DrJamesEglinton https://t.co/BbAOKmEeWl

— Keith Plummer (@XianMind) December 7, 2024

Bishop Mullally, who is the C of E’s lead bishop for health care and a former Chief Nursing Officer for England, said: “The Church of England believes that the compassionate response at the end of life lies in the provision of high quality palliative care services to all who need them.

“Today’s vote still leaves the question of how this could be implemented in an overstretched and under-funded NHS, social care, and legal system. Safeguarding the most vulnerable must be at the heart of the coming parliamentary process; today’s vote is not the end of the debate.”

The Archbishop of York was reported in the Guardian as saying: “I regret this decision. It changes the relationship between the state and its citizens, between doctors and their patients, and within families between children and their terminally ill relatives. Once begun it will be hard to undo and control.”

Read it all.

Church figures have expressed concern after the first steps towards making assisted dying legal in England and Wales were taken on Friday. https://t.co/O4jCF3HaEI

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) December 2, 2024

MPs have backed proposals to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales in a historic vote which paves the way for a change in the law.

In the first Commons vote on the issue in nearly a decade, MPs supported a bill which would allow terminally ill adults expected to die within six months to seek help to end their own life by 330 to 275, a majority of 55.

It followed an emotional debate in the chamber, where MPs from both sides shared personal stories which had informed their decisions.

The bill will now face many more months of debate and scrutiny by MPs and peers, who could choose to amend it, with the approval of both Houses of Parliament required before it becomes law.

Read it all.

MPs back proposals to legalise assisted dying https://t.co/fPRg05cakA

— BBC News (World) (@BBCWorld) November 29, 2024

Some time ago, I found myself sitting at a dinner opposite a Labour peer. We chatted over various things as the evening proceeded. Just before we were getting up to leave a new topic came up. “I am a convinced campaigner for assisted dying,” she said. “As a bishop, I suspect you’re not. Why don’t you think we should do it?” Put on the spot, struggling to know what to say, and knowing I probably had one line to deliver as we stood up to leave, I said something like this: “Life is a gift from God. It’s not up to us to decide when it ends.” She looked across at me with a pitying look and walked away, clearly unconvinced.

I’ve often wondered what I should have said. Lord Falconer suggests that only secular people like him are ‘objective’ and religious people like me or Shabana Mahmood are biased and therefore our views are to be discounted. The idea that his secular perspective is not colouring his views, but that our religious ones are, or that he is not imposing his beliefs on others whereas we are, is of course, as Isabel Hardman has argued, philosophical nonsense.

Our religious beliefs shape our views, as his secular views shape his. The question is which perspective gives us a better, healthier and more coherent way of living together. I spoke recently to a key figure in the Church of England’s response to Assisted Dying who told me in no uncertain terms that religious arguments simply don’t wash in this debate. We have to use pragmatic and political ones that appeal to a wide audience. And so, the main arguments we have heard from church leaders and others against assisted suicide refer to the slippery slope argument: that legislation will inevitably in time become looser to include more candidates; care for the vulnerable, such as the elderly or the disabled who will feel pressurised into taking their own life, or, as the Health Secretary Wes Streeting has argued, the fact that palliative care is not yet robust enough in our health system to enable a proper choice.

Read it all.

My thoughts on why religion matters in the assisted dying debate https://t.co/SJBK4fUI3B

— Graham Tomlin (@gtomlin) November 27, 2024

Don’t turn our doctors into killers, says the Star. Like several of the opposing factions to the bill, it cites Canada as exemplifying the slippery slope, with one in twenty deaths there being by assisted dying.

This argument that the bill will open up unforeseen consequences for the disabled, and indeed for the unfortunate residents of bad care homes, is common, Archbishop Welby, facing down former Archbishop Carey, said that assisted dying was in effect a sword of Damocles over the disabled and aged. We should add that many Canadians choosing state sponsored suicide cite feeling a burden on family and caregivers as their motive. Canada surely vindicates Welby.

This argument really is cogent and necessary, but is it sufficient for a Christian view which sees humanity made in the image and likeness of God, leading to the doctrine of the sanctity of life? As Frost says this a doctrine that has permeated and grounded western civilization. Is it not simply wrong to kill people even those begging to die? Hospices and care giving was the Christian answer, but Christianity is fading fast with its practical altruistic legacy of looking after the sick and dying.

Lord Frost has pointed to our society’s reliance on Judaeo Christian ethics for all its institutions and to the perilous situation of breaking with this tradition of the sanctity of life for a callous utilitarianism. So far his is the deepest theological apologia for the classical Christian ethic of life  on offer, we trust Christian leaders will step up to the challenge soon.

Read it all.

Ask MPs to oppose assisted suicide

Some helpful tips here https://t.co/wr1LYSQylr

— Better Way (@betterwayUK) October 24, 2024

“It’s very important that we discuss it here in the Senedd today because although the private member’s bill is going forwards in Westminster, if it were passed the implication would be very important in Wales because we have responsibility for health and social care.”

Ms Morgan said it is important to have safeguards to ensure people meet specific criteria, with medical people present when the decision is made….

Carys Moseley, a public policy researcher and analyst for Christian Concern based in Cardiff, said the group was “concerned” about the motion.

She said: “We’ve got a visual display of the actual cases that have been happening in different jurisdictions in the western world.

“These are tragic cases – diabetes being treated as a long-term illness in Oregon, assisted suicide the fifth leading cause of death in Canada – these are very grave issues.”

She said the public question the issue more when they hear about other countries.

“Once you introduce this choice – dying – there is a pressure then which eventually becomes a duty to die,” she said.

“There isn’t such a thing as (going on) ‘your own terms’, because it affects all the doctors that become responsible for killing patients or assisted killing rather than preserving life.

Read it all.

The Welsh Senedd, which has a progressive majority, has overwhelmingly voted down a motion to legalise assisted suicide. The more people learn about assisted suicide the less they like it. pic.twitter.com/fww05M1fLi

— Yuan Yi Zhu (@yuanyi_z) October 23, 2024

The Bishop of Newcastle, Dr Helen-Ann Hartley, wrote on X/Twitter: “By all means let’s have the debate. Consideration should also be given to proper investment in pal­liative and social care. And let’s call it what it is: assisted suicide. It’s a slip­pery slope and an absolute de­­grada­tion of the value of human life.”

The Bill was also condemned by leaders of the Church in Wales, who said in a statement on Tuesday that the Christian faith had always been rooted “in the reality of pain and mortality”, as well as “the incalculable value of each human person, irrespective of social standing, access to resources, or physical or mental ability. . . In that spirit, shown to us in the person of Jesus, we give our heartfelt support to the extension of the best possible palliative care to all who require it, so that no limits are put on the compassion which we show as individuals and as a society.”

“This is an extremely difficult issue over which different people, including Christians, will have arrived at differing views with the best of intentions,” said the statement from the Archbishop of Wales, the Rt Revd Andrew John, with the Bishops of Bardsey, Llandaff, Monmouth, St Davids, St Asaph, and Swansea & Brecon.

Read it all.

Bishops warn of ‘duty’ to die if Leadbeater Bill is carried https://t.co/owjUo4W5Xz

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) October 16, 2024

… legalising assisted suicide would disproportionately impact many millions of vulnerable people, who might perceive themselves as a burden on those around them and the health service. My concern is that once you can ask for assisted suicide, it soon becomes something that you feel that you ought to do. Permission slips into being duty. This does not represent true choice for all, and I worry that no amount of safeguards will ensure everyone’s safety at the most vulnerable point of their lives.

A good death and compassionate care should be available to everyone, but the Bill being introduced today will not achieve that.”

Read it all.

Not half.

Assisted Dying Legislation is 'Dangerous' says Archbishop Welby – BBC News https://t.co/NhK26S8S9c

— Erica Wooff (@ericauk) October 16, 2024

As this debate unfolds there are three points I would like to put before you. I hope that you will take part in the debate, whenever and wherever you can, and that you will write to your Member of Parliament.

The first point is this: Be careful what you wish for.

No doubt the bill put before Parliament will be carefully framed, providing clear and very limited circumstances in which it would become lawful to assist, directly and deliberately, in the ending of a person’s life. But please remember, the evidence from every single country in which such a law has been passed is clear: that the circumstances in which the taking of a life is permitted are widened and widened, making assisted suicide and medical killing, or euthanasia, more and more available and accepted. In this country, assurances will be given that the proposed safeguards are firm and reliable. Rarely has this been the case. This proposed change in the law may be a source of relief to some. But it will bring great fear and trepidation to many, especially those who have vulnerabilities and those living with disabilities. What is now proposed will not be the end of the story. It is a story better not begun.

The second point is this: a right to die can become a duty to die.

A law which prohibits an action is a clear deterrent. A law which permits an action changes attitudes: that which is permitted is often and easily encouraged. Once assisted suicide is approved by the law, a key protection of human life falls away. Pressure mounts on those who are nearing death, from others or even from themselves, to end their life in order to take away a perceived burden of care from their family, for the avoidance of pain, or for the sake of an inheritance.

Read it all.

This Wednesday a bill will be introduced to Parliament proposing a change in the law to permit assisted suicide. As this debate unfolds, I ask you to play your part in it. Write to your MP. Have discussions with family, friends and colleagues. And pray.https://t.co/mgjUOwehms

— Cardinal Nichols (@CardinalNichols) October 10, 2024

Public pension systems in the U.S. have seen a significant increase in unfunded liabilities, particularly during the Great Recession. Between 2007 and 2010, unfunded liabilities grew by over $1.11 trillion—a 632% increase—reflecting the financial challenges faced during that period. Despite some improvements in funding ratios over the last decade, these liabilities have continued to rise, underscoring ongoing financial pressures.

As of the end of the 2023 fiscal year for each public pension system, total unfunded public pension liabilities (UAL) reached $1.59 trillion, with state pension plans carrying the majority of the debt.

The median funded ratio of public pension plans stood at 76% at the end of 2023, but stress tests suggest that another economic downturn could significantly increase unfunded liabilities, potentially raising the total to $2.71 trillion by 2025.

Read it all.

At the end of the 2023 fiscal year, the nation's public pension systems had $1.59 trillion in total unfunded liabilities.https://t.co/msg89p70Mr

— Pension Integrity Project (@ReasonPensions) October 3, 2024

The Bishop of London, Sarah Mullally, the joint lead bishop on health care for the Church of England, echoed Bishop Smith’s concern.

She said: “No amount of safeguards could ensure the safety of the most vulnerable in society, should there be a change in the law allowing for assisted suicide”

Bishop Mullally, a former chief nursing officer for England, said: “I worked for many years as a nurse in the NHS, including as a cancer specialist, and I understand first-hand the crucial importance of compassionate care and dignity for all patients, including those who are most vulnerable and reaching the end of their lives.

“In the Church of England, we are backing urgent calls for adequate funding and resourcing of palliative care services, to ensure the highest possible standards of care for all. This should include action to ensure that our hospices receive the level of state funding that they are so badly lacking at present.”

Read it all (registration or subscription).

Letby and Shipman murders show NHS workers cannot be trusted on assisted dying https://t.co/51pSDKdIzO

— Anna Gaudreault (@ladevita12) October 5, 2024

Earlier this year, full-time carer Mary hid all the knives in her home. Her husband Richard, nine years after his diagnosis of Alzheimer’s aged 55, had become angry and unpredictable. For the first time, Mary, a former fashion designer, was scared of him. Over the course of two quick weeks, it became apparent that it was no longer safe for her to live in the same house and in August, she made the heartbreaking decision to move him into a care home.

Mary and Richard’s story was one of several told in Channel 4’s hour-long documentary Anna Richardson: Love, Loss & Dementia. Best known for her work presenting headline-grabbing shows on provocative subjects like Naked Attraction and The Sex Education Show, Richardson wanted to shine a light on what she views as another taboo topic: dementia. “We are not talking about the fact that it’s a crisis,” she said of the disease which brutally entered her life with her father’s diagnosis of vascular dementia.

Formerly a leading figure in the Church of England, 83-year-old Jim now lives semi-independently in an assisted living facility. The film opened with Richardson receiving an alert while on holiday – Jim had suffered yet another fall. Aware that he is still in the relatively early stages of symptoms – he knows who she is and retains his sense of humour (pretending to row a boat as Richardson pushed his wheelchair around his hometown) – she acknowledged what is to come: “Either one day, he will have a catastrophic stroke. Or he will just get incrementally worse.”

Read it all.

In this one-off doc, @AnnaRichardso shares how this debilitating disease affected her family after the onset of her father’s vascular dementia – exploring myths, social taboos and the new drugs that provide hope for the future. #LoveLossAndDementia, 10pm on @Channel4. pic.twitter.com/3AjCbKxl3J

— 4Viewers (@4Viewers) October 2, 2024

Longevity has officially become a competitive sport.

Welcome to the “Rejuvenation Olympics.” In this contest founded by tech entrepreneur and longevity bro Bryan Johnson, anti-agers take their health obsession to new levels. Just not dying isn’t enough. Instead, you have to not-die better than your competitor.

You may know Johnson, 46, as the man who founded—and sold, for $800 million—the payments company Braintree. Or you may know him as “that crazy guy trying to not die,” as Johnson self-identifies in his X bio. He says he has spent millions on a viral self-experiment to age as little as possible—one that involves a regimen of dozens of daily powders and pills, gene therapies and more. 

Once he began publishing his methods and corresponding health data, he encountered reactions from skepticism to outright vitriol. He decided to reframe his pursuit like a professional sport—and invite other players to the game.

Read it all.

Outliving Your Peers Is Now a Competitive Sport

Longevity zealots vie in contest to slow aging; ‘that crazy guy trying to not die.’

By @AlexLJanin @WSJ

Featuring: @julsg50 @bryan_johnson @siimland @Dode__Man https://t.co/27EZDhne9K

— AgingdocDavid BarzilaiMD PhD MS MBA DipABLM (@agingdoc1) July 11, 2024

When the next academic year begins in theological colleges this autumn, some of the new students will be bringing a lifetime of experience inside and outside the Church to their theological studies.

As such, mature students — particularly the over-65s — are a much valued cohort, theological institutions say.

Wycliffe Hall, Oxford, currently has eight students in that category; their oldest is 73. Most opt for part-time study, and are generally interested in more introductory qualifications, a spokesperson said.

At Sarum College, in Salisbury, student ages range from their twenties to their seventies. The college has a commitment to lifelong learning and to a broad offer of theological learning, the director of marketing and communications, Ms Christine Nielsen-Craig, said.

Read it all.

“The college was very accommodating, and the pathways were flexible. I can’t see anything negative, age-wise. Naturally, you have to be aware of pacing yourself, and your own levels of fatigue, but I am a young 66-year-old."https://t.co/xrhPgOoBJk

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) June 25, 2024

Americans are getting older. By 2032, about a quarter of the US population will be over 65, up from 10% in 1970. And while it’s true that people are both living and staying healthier for longer, many will eventually need someone to care for them. A report by Wells Fargo in March estimated that an additional 1.7 million people will need some form of elder care in a decade.

This is hard on families for so many reasons — emotional, logistical — but today I’ll focus on the economic ones. First, the good news: The rise in the need for elder care means there will also be an increase in the number of elder care jobs available. The Department of Labor projects that the elder care industry will add 22% more jobs by 2032, and the majority of them will probably go to women. (Currently 82% of home health and personal care aides are women.)

Now the bad news: the pay for elder care is notoriously low, with a median salary of just $33,530 per year. That’s less than what preschool teachers ($37,130) and secretaries make ($46,010), and roughly on par with that of a childcare worker. The rise in demand has led to an increase in wages, but the pay is still pretty bad. That’s why, much like child care, the elder care industry is beset by staffing shortages and a high turnover rate.

Also like child care, elder care is incredibly expensive.

Read it all.

America’s ‘Silver Tsunami’ Crisis Is Only Just Beginning ⁦@markets⁩ https://t.co/Hnn7PVN9Kl

— Amb Antonio Garza (@aogarza) June 21, 2024

Diagnosing dementia early gives us more time to put precautions in place and to study exactly how the condition progresses – and a new method for predicting conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease is promising up to nine years of advance warning.

The method, developed by a team from the Queen Mary University of London in the UK and Monash University in Australia, involves a neurobiological model that analyzes brain scans captured by functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI.

In tests, the model was more than 80 percent accurate at predicting the development of dementia. That has huge potential in terms of early diagnosis, and it also addresses another challenge: the large number of people with dementia who don’t get diagnosed at all.

“Predicting who is going to get dementia in the future will be vital for developing treatments that can prevent the irreversible loss of brain cells that causes the symptoms of dementia,” says neurologist Charles Marshall, from the Queen Mary University of London.

Dementia Breakthrough: Brain Scans Predict Disease Up to 9 Years Early https://t.co/iuabrmwIa3

— ScienceAlert (@ScienceAlert) June 12, 2024

In the UK in 1965, the most common age of death was in the first year of life. Today the most common age to die is 87 years old. This startling statistic comes from a remarkable new book, ‘The Longevity Imperative’, by Andrew Scott of the London Business School. He notes, too, that a newborn girl in Japan has a 96 per cent chance of making it to 60, while Japanese women have a life expectancy of nearly 88. Japan is exceptional. But we are living longer everywhere: global life expectancy is now 76 for women and 71 for men (clearly, the weaker sex).

This new world has been created by the collapse in death rates of the young. Back in 1841, 35 per cent of male children were dead before they reached 20 in the UK and 77 per cent did not survive to 70. By 2020, these figures had fallen to 0.7 and 21 per cent, respectively. We have largely defeated the causes of early death, by means of cleaner food and water, vaccination and antibiotics. I remember when polio was a great threat. It is almost entirely gone, as is the once vastly greater peril of smallpox.

This is humanity’s greatest achievement. Yet our main reaction is to fret over the costs of an “aging” society. Would young and middle-aged adults prefer to know that they and, worse, their children might die at any moment? We know the answer to this question.

Yes, the new world we live in creates challenges. But the crucial point Scott makes is that it also creates opportunities.

Read it all.

Increased longevity will bring profound social change, by @martinwolf_
People will have to work longer and pension systems will need to be transformedhttps://t.co/2NH6beNGvK @ft pic.twitter.com/xayC8b8iwc

— Rafael Domenech | @BBVAResearch & @UV_EG (@rdomenechv) May 14, 2024

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees just released their annual reports on the financial status of the Social Security and Medicare programs. The Trustees project that both the Social Security and Medicare trust funds are within 12 years of insolvency and in need of trust fund solutions. Specifically, they project the Social Security Old Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) trust fund will run out of reserves in 2033, the Medicare Hospital Insurance (HI) trust fund will become insolvent by 2036, and the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) trust fund will remain solvent over the 75-year projection window. Assuming revenue is reallocated in the years between OASI and SSDI insolvency, the theoretically combined Social Security trust funds will be insolvent by 2035.

In other words, Social Security’s retirement trust fund will reach insolvency when today’s 58-year-olds reach the normal retirement age and today’s youngest retirees turn 71. At that point, all beneficiaries will face a 21 percent across-the-board benefit cut. On theoretically combined basis, all beneficiaries will face a 17 percent cut in 2035. Over the full 75-year projection window, Social Security’s combined funds faces an actuarial imbalance of 3.50 percent of taxable payroll, which is the equivalent of 1.2 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) or 20 percent of all future benefits.

Read it all.

ANALYSIS: The latest #Medicare Trustees' projections show:

➤ The HI Trust Fund will run out of reserves in 12 years, and faces a large shortfall;
➤ Total Medicare costs will grow rapidly;
➤ Medicare's outlook has largely improved since last year, but might be far worse… pic.twitter.com/G7fyrvCILX

— CRFB.org (@BudgetHawks) May 7, 2024

In the context of our responsibilities as a wider society, we are grateful to the medical, nursing and care staff who support our loved ones in their last weeks, days and hours. Sadly, however, palliative care is underfunded and limited in Scotland, and our Parliament should focus its energies on improving palliative care rather than on contemplating assisted suicide or euthanasia.

The private member’s bill to introduce assisted suicide for those aged sixteen and over, recently published in the Scottish Parliament, amounts to a rejection of the common responsibility we owe to each other and to those who are ill and dying.

Campaigners call it ‘assisted dying’ when what is really meant is assisted suicide. Palliative care and the process by which families and communities accompany and support those in the final moments of their lives is what we all usually mean by assisted dying. What is now being proposed is that doctors hand a lethal concoction of drugs to a patient to kill themselves. It is a direct, intentional action to end the patient’s life and truly crosses a Rubicon in Scotland.

Read it carefully and read it all.

We heard the Scottish Catholic bishops letter against the assisted suicide bill in Scotland read out at Mass at Castlebay, Barra this morning. A very well-argued document which deserves wide dissemination.

— john milbank (@johnmilbank3) April 28, 2024

First the cartel cut its teeth with drug trafficking. Then avocados, real estate and construction companies. Now, a Mexican criminal group known for its brutality is moving in on seniors and their timeshares.

The operation is relatively simple. Cartel employees posing as sales representatives call up timeshare owners, offering to buy their investments back for generous sums. They then demand upfront fees for anything from listing advertisements to paying government fines. The representatives persuade their victims to wire large amounts of money to Mexico — sometimes as much as hundreds of thousands of dollars — and then they disappear.

The scheme has netted the cartel, Jalisco New Generation, hundreds of millions of dollars over the past decade, according to U.S. officials who were not authorized to speak publicly, via dozens of call centers in Mexico that relentlessly target American and Canadian timeshare owners. They even bribe employees at Mexican resorts to leak guest information, the U.S. officials say.

Read it all.

“Over 5 years, American timeshare owners were bilked out of $288 million. The real number is most likely $350 million, as about 20% never register a complaint.”

A Mexican Drug Cartel’s New Target? Seniors and Their Timeshares https://t.co/DAKwfJwE37

— Dan Beucke (@DanBeucke) March 21, 2024

Some Democrats inside and outside of Biden’s bubble were privately anxious about what’s next for the campaign. The report came during a week when Biden made a number of high-profile flubs, confusing current and past world leaders. He didn’t help matters when he referred to the Egyptian president as the president of Mexico in his remarks on the counsel’s report Thursday night, and his decision to forego a high-profile interview ahead of Sunday’s Super Bowl has also drawn scrutiny.

“Anytime his age and capacity is front and center is bad for his re-election prospects. That said, it does provide an opportunity to more forcefully deal with this issue which they have to do,” said Brian Goldsmith, a Biden donor and a Democratic consultant based in Los Angeles. “The right response is that Biden is a better president because of his age and wisdom and experience, not despite his age and wisdom and experience.”

“They need to find a way to jujitsu this and turn it from a negative into a positive because it is not going away,” Goldsmith said. He added: “Avoiding the Super Bowl interview is a mistake.”

Read it all.

Democrats’ anxiety over Biden’s age spilled out into the public this week after a special counsel report
https://t.co/g8V3TcFRAG via @WSJ

— Dan Whitcomb (@DanWhitcomb) February 9, 2024

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

When Edith Ceccarelli was born in February 1908, Theodore Roosevelt was president, Oklahoma had just become the nation’s 46th state and women did not yet have the right to vote.

At 116, Ms. Ceccarelli is the oldest known person in the United States and the second oldest on Earth. She has lived through two World Wars, the advent of the Ford Model T — and the two deadliest pandemics in American history.

For most of that time, she has lived in one place: Willits, a village tucked in California’s redwood forests that was once known for logging but now may be better known for Ms. Ceccarelli.

Read it all.

At 116, she is the oldest known person in the U.S. and the second oldest on Earth.

For most of that time, she has lived in one place: a village tucked in California’s redwood forests that was once known for logging but now may be better known for her. https://t.co/EQ4i4LeBAf

— The New York Times (@nytimes) February 8, 2024

Less than a third of Americans say they would be willing to vote for someone nominated by their party who is over the age of 80 or has been charged with a felony or convicted of a felony by a jury. Somewhat more, but still less than half of Americans, say they would consider backing someone nominated by their party who is a socialist….

Should Biden and Trump emerge as their parties’ presidential nominees this year (as they are on track to do, by virtue of their dominance in their respective primary fields), voters would face a choice between two of the most objectionable characteristics to Americans of those measured — someone who has been charged with a felony (Trump) and someone who is older than 80 (Biden).

An analysis of the responses of those answering both of these questions suggests that a slight majority of Americans (52%) would be unperturbed by the choice between Biden and Trump. These individuals indicate they would be comfortable voting for either someone who is over 80 (23%) or who has been charged with a felony (21%), or would feel comfortable with both types of candidates (8%).

On the other hand, 43% of respondents asked about voting for someone over 80 and someone charged with a felony say they would not vote for either type of candidate, while the remaining 5% are unsure about both.

Read it all.

Americans express broad willingness to vote for candidates from several gender, racial and religious backgrounds that largely haven’t been represented in the White House.https://t.co/W6JC0DaFFo

— GallupNews (@GallupNews) January 27, 2024

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

It is unsurprising that euthanasia consistently breaks its boundaries, always presented as an expansion of choice as the route to kindness. This is rooted in liberalism’s fundamental presuppositions, for as George Grant wrote, “it is the very signature of modern man to deny reality to any conception of good that imposes limits on human freedom … man’s essence is his freedom. Nothing must stand in the way of our absolute freedom to create the world as we want it. There must be no conceptions of good that put limitations on human action.” If there is no ultimate value towards which our lives point, then “the vaunted freedom of the individual to choose becomes either the necessity of finding one’s role in the public engineering or the necessity of retreating into the privacy of pleasure”. We are reduced to utilitarian measures of the good, achieved through harm reduction and happiness maximisation, materialistically defined.

The result of the liberal conception of the human person is expressive individualism, where “persons are conceived merely as atomized individual wills whose highest flourishing consists in interrogating the interior depths of the self in order to express and freely follow the original truths discovered therein toward one’s self-invented destiny”. This conception of the human person privileges cognition, will, rationality and autonomy in defining full personhood. Our nature as embodied souls is largely ignored: if one cannot employ one’s body to achieve the desires of one’s autonomous, rational, willed cognition, then one cannot achieve full personhood.

As a result, the constraints of our existential finitude made so explicit by disability are seen as immoral barriers to maximal autonomy attained through rational will. The unchosen bonds of interdependence, obligation, reciprocity and mutual loyalty that comprise the texture and meaning of life are denigrated. Liberalism discards the weak just as the Greco-Roman world once did, now done for reasons of supposed benevolence. From Locke onwards, liberalism has always seen some more capable of, and suited to, forming political society than others. Mill took this furthest in his proposal of colonisation and slavery for those less capable of freedom.

It is not such a stretch from liberalism’s definition of the individual’s capacity for personhood to advocating the killing of disabled infants deemed incapable of fulfilling this. As Leon Kass has written, it is no surprise that those Germans who coined the phrase “life unworthy of life” were two liberals: a jurist and an academic. Better to curb the depersonalised source of the suffering with all haste. James Burnham viewed liberalism as the ideological legitimator and enabler of Western suicide. I’m not sure he meant for the title of his book to be taken so literally, across so many countries.

Read it all from 2022.

As assisted suicide is in the news again, re-upping my piece for @TheCriticMag from last year, in which I argue that assisted suicide is not only wrong in itself, but that it’s the logical endpoint of the liberal view of the human person https://t.co/ZMK8sy5Pyh

— Henry George (@intothefuture45) December 22, 2023