THE CHANGE TRAGEDY: THE PAST, THE PRESENT AND THE FUTURE

  'Pmark

Either that the Nigerian people are wholly impatient or the government of Buhari is having a disappointing and vacillating start- something is undeniably not adding up.

Prior to the 2015 general elections the status quo in Nigeria was simply horrendous. Life was as its lowest ebb. The government of the day was busy pursuing shadows. Mayhem and complete insecurity of life and property was the order of the day.

Now the elections are over. There is a new government with promises of change. Salaries of most workers at both federal and state civil services have still not been paid, health workers at different states of the federation are on definite strike, the oil prices have fallen, the currency has been devalued (as at Friday 15^th  January 2016, the rate of exchange is N305 to $1 which is the lowest rate for over 40 years), economic austerity measures are choking, the insurgency of the “boko haram” sect is not ending, kidnapping and maiming of life of innocent citizens is on a daily basis, empty political campaigns and promises for various public offices are going on unabated, political wrangling, rumors and speculation about Nigeria’s disintegration is widespread with the problematic of Biafra rising, and now our budget for 2016 has suddenly developed wings to fly out of the national assembly? There is general disorientation and a sense of hopelessness that loams large among the citizenry. One might begin to wonder what the so called general elections brought in. One is poised to think that the prospect for a better change in Nigeria is less tenable and we might just end up with another change disaster.

 With the present, there seems to be no shift in paradigm as promised by the propaganda government led by General Buhari, who hitherto, continues to make scandalously insurmountable promises that might never come to fruition. Things can only be changed for better by change-agents of vision, not some propagandist. And we are all part of this process. Nigerian situation will only change for the better through the sacrifices of such men of vision like you, who would use their time and talent for the common good. The history of great nations has always borne witness to the volume of commitments and sacrifices of its patriots and statesmen.

 I dare to say that Nigeria does not need a hoopla of a government that will ultimately do nothing different, what it needs is dedicated pragmatism for this change to occur. This entails conscious efforts directed at solving problems in practical ways. It means people would have to start thinking and acting differently from the way they used to. This is when re- orientation comes in. It is believed that for handy change to occur, good orientation has to be entrenched in the lives and consciousness of the citizenry.

This re-orientation is premised on the fact that Nigeria has lost direction at a point of our political cum social development. Thus, re-orientation implies orienting the one that has been oriented before but veered off the right path. That is what our government need. That is what Nigerians need!

The present dispensation claims to have what it takes to change the future of the country. They promised to deal with issues decisively and within time. They promised that every facet of the country would change and above all, they would hit the ground running.

Perhaps, it is not the case that Buhari, underestimated the problems of Nigeria or that he over rated his administration before coming onboard, it seems rather, that it’s the case that he has discovered that the nation is not where he left it about 40 years ago. Whether or not he knew his promises were unrealizable within the time frame that the constitution allots him would not be tenable on the day of reckoning. It is in collective interest that he makes ample use of his time, knowing full well that his days are already numbered.

Nonetheless, the collective enterprises of the citizens in service of the common good are the index of a nation’s development. No nation can develop above the well-being of its citizens, it is the well-being of the citizens that determines the parameter of its national development. The Nigerian state needs chivalrous contributions of its patriots and statesmen for the needed socio-economic transformation that everybody is preaching. The questions are: Do we really have a change of leadership? Are the citizens alienated from this mishap? Can this change be attained? Would we ever get to the Promised Land? And can Buhari be the Moses of Nigeria?

               

              Let love reign!

My first post!

pmark'sbog

WHEN MURDER BECOMES LEGAL

’Pmark

As a kid, Aunty Kate would always buy meat pie and ice-cream for me every Sunday after church. So it was not debatable that she was my favorite aunty. I loved her kindness!  She returned from work one fateful Saturday with a swollen face and complained about a severe headache. She took Panadol and was told to have sufficient rest. But two days later she collapsed after a series of seizures and was taken to the hospital and was diagnosed with acute case of stage two lung cancer. The cause unknown. There was no cure. She had to live with the knowledge of death starring at her. Or so she thought! The pains increased over the next few weeks and all she could do was to bear them because morphine or any other pain killers were relatively useless. Aunty Kate always cried because of the constant pains she experienced. Before we knew it, her doctor started educating her about what he referred to as “mercy killing” this according to him, was to stop the pain of both her and Ovie the only child and to quicken the process that would still end with the same outcome (death!) and was guzzling a huge chunk of Ovie’s trust fund. Aunty Kate was quick to succumb, perhaps the pains overwhelmed her that she could think of nothing better than “assisted suicide”. The doctor gave her some drips and two hours after saying goodbye to us and giving us her beautiful smile, she died. Interestingly, three months after her death, after a review of her hospital file, the doctor discovered it was a misdiagnosis. Wait! A misdiagnosis???

Mortality is the greatest mystery of life. Not knowing when our time is going to run out. Curiosity, even fear, about what our precious last moments on this earth will be.  Many of us place our faith in science, medicine and religion. Ultimately though, the only thing certain about death is that at some point, we will each individually succumb to it. But to determine when that end will come is not ours or our physician’s.

Once upon a time you could go to a doctor in a hospital and count on them to do everything to save your life but the story now is quite the reverse. The rapid advance of medical technology has staggered our imagination and challenged our moral sensitivities. What seemed to be both science fiction and moral impossibility only a short while ago are now a reality. Practices such as, abortion, test tube conception, contraceptive control of conception, surrogate motherhood, homosexuality, gender transmogrification, role change, gender equality, euthanasia and a host of others have become the order of the day. The evil of euthanasia would seem to be clearly manifested and indeed, has hitherto been generally recognized in a world where there seems to be a redefinition of the whole idea of the human person and how he should relate to his environment, where human lives is equated to nothing in terms of value appropriation.

As a fundamental knowledge, euthanasia can be explained as the practice of intentionally and painlessly killing a human being or animal for humane reasons, especially in order to end great suffering or poor quality of life. It also viewed as an easy death or the means to bring about such a death. It is also known as “mercy-killing”.

So-called “world powers” have already placed legal stamp on the idea and in fact in some countries it is a given- a non-negotiable subject. For instance, Dutch parliament in response to the Netherlands crisis decriminalized it in 2002. Then, beginning in 2007, the numbers began to dramatically climb at a worrisome rate of 15% per year around the world.  For instance, in the Netherlands, one out of every 28 deaths is due to euthanasia as recorded by 2015. It has now become a better option and cost effective to those who have little or no possibility of survival and living a normal life. This was the path that my aunty Kate plod but happened to be a decision that was too quick. If the whole idea of suicide is frowned at; while then do we accommodate assisted suicide? By changing the semantics?

In the utilitarian point of view we have a duty to own happiness, and so many approach euthanasia as an option to avoid, depression, family conflict feelings of abandonment and hopelessness. To make them happy regardless of the consequences on the other. How can we grow so used to God that we now decided when to die? But is this a choice that is up to us to make? That is, the decision to die? Is this not a redefinition of murder and/or suicide?

Murder is seen as a grievous and an unforgivable crime in the law system of most part of the world, regardless of what kind, method or degree, but which it was committed. Law firms and institution  has come to a verdict (although in some countries) that if euthanasia, were to become legal, it would form a downward spiral of the society , it may become self-inflicted and even turn into serving menace to sick people especially  those terminally ill. Legally it is said to be a second degree murder. Although it has been legalized in a fear countries like, Oregon, Netherlands, Belgium and others whose processes have not been finalized. Where they see it as an option to curb pain and to save money spent on sick people.

A nuanced response to this troubling and tragic act must begin by conceding the pain and mystery of suffering and dying. The fear that fuel the movement toward euthanasia must also be recognized and the fear of being a burden on one’s saving, fear of prolonging dying with tubes and machines. These fears were what I think consumed aunty Kate and led her to make the decision that actually ended her life.

The bible provides a sum foundation and sure direction as we wrestle with this complex issue and fear, however, in turning to the scripture for guidance concerning such difficult emotional decision, we must remember that the Bible by itself will not be able to give all answers. Quite simply neither Moses nor Jesus had to worry about respirators and feeding tubes! But they did think about life, it’s  meaning and limits: these major points emerges from the scriptures (1) life is a basic and absolute, (2) we are to be stewards of life, but we do not have complete control (3) we understand death in the context of belief in new life.

Life is a basic gift, an absolute good and we are stewards of life: death is not the final word. The conviction that we are stewards of life would push to an opposition of euthanasia. As stewards we respond with care and compassion to those who are suffering. Indeed, we have much to learn about better methods of pain control the example and work of the hospital movement has been particularly helpful in this area. As stewards, we also acknowledge that we face limits that not all pain can be eliminated and ultimately death cannot be avoided.  Over the years there has been proof that most of the ailments were misdiagnoses by physicians, others, even though correctly diagnosed, could change tide and healing could come from nowhere.

A major basis for the opposition to euthanasia is not that life has an absolute value, but that the disposal of life is in God’s hands. Man has no absolute control over his life but holds it as a trust. He has the use of it but may not destroy it at will. Likewise, we should recognize the principle of the sanctity of life. The only occasion when a person may take the life is when he is an unjust aggressor against individuals of the common good.

Euthanasia has always provided a challenge to careful moral reasoning, in many cases it does some to be the merciful response. Would it be not be more merciful to hasten he death of severe in great pain? However strong that tag, there is an astute methodology that recognizes a profound difference between allowing to die and taking life- difference not for the patient but for us, the doers of the action. Taking life in this situating even though for a good motive is an action which will undermine our humanity. It is a line we ought not to cross.

Our society too, easily evaluates people in terms of their productivity. We must be careful to proclaim the unique value of each person and to protect the rights of people with physical handicaps, mental illness and disabilities or other special needs, so we don’t contradict the fundamental reality of our lives. Do not be oblivious of the fact that even the imbecile has a right to his life, but he does not have the choice to manipulate or redefine its essence.