The problem with people saying they are struggling against cancer;



[ad_1]

When Big! Alex Trebek on 6th day announced he had level 4 pancreatic cancer, asked his audiences, along with his family and friends, to help him survive the disease.

"I'm going to fight this," he said. "Keep faith, and we shall win. We shall get it."

This is the kind of language that we often hear about battle, battle, triumph, loss, loss – and it does not sit well with some of the families whose lives have been changed forever by the disease.

Donna, a 4-year-old girl from America, Sheila Quirke died of cancer. So was Quirke's mother and father. Quirke traveled to Washington, DC, last spring with her son, Jay, for lobbying for further research into consent to cancer.

LEABH MORE:
* Breast cancer women are caught in a series of photographs, but not all have lived to see the pictures
* US Senator John McCain says, “I'll be back quickly” because it's struggling for brain cancer t
* The battle of Christchurch's mother and her daughter struggling

When cancer emerges in national conversations – as it did when Trebek appeared to be a witness, as he did when John McCain pronounced it, as it is when his home name is published t publishes a judgment – Quirke is claiming a different set of words about the disease.

Big! hotel host Alex Trebek says that he is determined to address pancreatic cancer.

Chris Pizzello / AP

Big! hotel host Alex Trebek says that he is determined to address pancreatic cancer.

"I do not understand the synergies of the war and how they came into contact with people who were diagnosed with cancer," she said. T is false. "

A few hours earlier, she had annoyed her: "I wish he could be better for Alex, a well-known and present-day man, with his news as well shared. T I am struck, again, in the language in which we are speaking and being cured, setting, and winning, relates to disease, affecting death as missing.

I asked her to understand why he didn't win and lose the right ones.

“If one is struggling hard enough, they win,” she said. “If they lose, even though they have managed to fight or fight, they are air in need, is not of the matter. If they lose one, isn't it? Is that how he works in war and other battles? winner and loser.

“People who die from the cancer test aren't weak, missing, not lost,” she added. "People who are recovering from diagnosis will not have benefited from a powerful enemy."

The survivors, she said, are on cells that responded to treatment and intervention.

"It's a hopeful and awe-inspiring and sometimes secretive, so is it more robust, more costly or more effective than those who did not respond in the way they preferred?" she said. "No, it makes them lucky. I wish every patient had cells that included available treatments. Unfortunately, he doesn't work like that."

I asked her why the language is important.

“I'm struggling with this question. Who am I, who carries my baggage and the prejudice, saying if he needs Alex Trebek or other cancer patients – they need to – think of themselves as heroes in a great pitched battle. should they? “said she.

Early in the treatment of Donna, Quirke said she had taken war.

"I myself, attacked her as a hero," she said. 'I need to see it like that. I wanted to believe that it had great powers which could suppress what was happening inside it.

“Then one day, after a bit of work or another, seeing her as vulnerable and just, tiny, I realized she was not a hero. She was a little girl who was diagnosed with a cure for nothing, ”she said. "I can see her who she was, I didn't have her. She was fighting without a battle, she had no weapons, she would not lose."

The heaviest words, Quirke, said Donna's cancer had been diagnosed, as did Quirke's mother, who had failed to answer the medicine.

“But more precisely, there was no sort of cancer that was certainly understood by researchers to manage protocols,” she said. "Because of that, they died. Warif and destructive language was not necessary."

As well as cancer patients or their relatives, Quirke challenges journalists and others writing about cancer to think honestly and honestly about their language.

"Allow cancer patients to explain themselves, always, but stopping putting past all of this quickly to this particular disease," she said. "Don't worry because someone has lost the battle with cancer. Don't be alarmed by someone who has been put to death. T the use of language which is not dependent on this war war of immense war. ” t

She promised that, when she said, when President Barack Obama supported McCain, he could be affected by anyone who was a prisoner of war.

"It was taken out so wrong," Quirke said. “And when someone is in a situation like that, it's harder for the rest of us to be right.”

She asks us to think about how our language stands with the lives of people who live without their children, their sisters, children, parents, friends who have died of cancer.

“The symbol of war serves survivors, but not those who die because of cancer, or those they love,” she said. "And when we see it used in the media, on social media and in other places, the words of the sting. There must be a way of speaking about cancer without the full verdict of winners and winners. T bearers, battles and fighting. "

– Chicago Tribune

[ad_2]
Source link