Yesterday, one of the all-time great Americans, and equally great Armenian, Dr. Jack Kevorkian, passed away quietly in a Michigan hospital, from complications of his long time disease, very unlike the turbulent life that he led fighting for a fundamental human right.
On March 8, 2008, I gave a lecture at Columbia University on the topic of The Vanishing Breed of the Armenian Intellectual. That lecture turned into a series of ideas which I have elaborated since in numerous other ones as well as in essays. In it, I defined the intellectual as follows:
...
“An intellectual is one, whose output in the field of human intellect (which includes any creative output) and whose derived actions from such thought will shape and reshape the society or collective that is paying attention to him/her. This output allows such a collective to see themselves in hereto unknown frames of reference, to push the boundaries of how they think of themselves and to imagine a new reality of existence.
…. The operative word here is boundary. All systems, structures, societies, countries, even living organisms and subatomic particles are defined by their boundaries (or illusions thereof), by their edges, by what frames them. Why? Because not only do those limits define the whole, but also because edges and limits are the ones that are pushed and redefined. Interesting things happen not in the middle of the Bell curve but at its tail ends.”
I then went on to use this definition to name a few intellectuals. For my American audience, I added:
“…On the US side of our common border I would mention Dr. Jack Kevorkian. Certainly a taboo name in most Armenian circles, but who fits the definition I gave of the intellectual. Because of his convictions and actions, he has not only forced a societal debate on euthanasia in the US, but literally all over the world. Needless to say he has pushed the boundary of the system.”
For almost all of my adult life, since I heard of him and his work, I have harbored a disappointment and occasionally even anger directed against all our Diasporan organizations and media for ignoring him. Regardless of one’s position for or against assisted suicide for those who wanted to die with dignity, I was incensed by the total official and unofficial indifference towards this man who behaved true to his conscience, and wanted the betterment of the society he lived in, by continuously pushing all the boundaries and challenging the status quo. I found the attitude of the Armenian organizations backward and abhorrent, but also mostly symptomatic of the state of dysfunction we have collectively sunk into. There was no public space to discuss the issues advocated by Dr. Kevorkian within our communities. I am sure our so-called “leader”s would rather that he not even called himself an Armenian.
I am grateful that that injustice done to him by his Armenian countrymen was partially redressed by the UCLA Armenian Students’ Association and the Armenian American Medical Society of California earlier this year when they invited him to speak. They deserve credit for their honourable gesture. And yet, like most things we do collectively, it seems like that it really was a case of “too little and too late”.
The man and his work have now passed into history and both have turned into legend. Kevorkian arguably stands as a giant of the human rights movement in the US for sure and perhaps even the world. It is the Armenians, by their attitude, who had everything to gain by debating his ideas and actions and who have now lost that opportunity.
In a uniquely masterful film, You Don’t Know Jack, released auspiciously on April 24, 2010 on HBO, the great Kevorkian is portrayed by the equally great Al Pacino, along with a stellar cast. Pacino went on to earn an Emmy and two Golden Globe awards for his amazing portrayal of the amazing Armenian.
I think that as a lasting tribute, every single Armenian institution and organization in the world should schedule a screening and a debate of that film.
They don’t come like that anymore. There are not many new Al Pacinos these days.
There certainly is not and will not be another Dr. Jack Kevorkian.
My world is now diminished by another hero.
June 4, 2011
Mount Royal
He was a great pioneer of modern medicine and who believed in the first tenement of being a physician: alleviate needless suffering and pain. He became a victim of pseudo Christians.
ReplyDeleteDear Viken,
ReplyDeleteIt is hard to resist a subject so controversial like euthanasia and Dr. Kevorkian. One has to model before approaching this subject as a whole. Here are some distinct issues that cannot be mixed together: What are the boundaries between religion and state? Do Christian ethics apply to non-Christians? What do we understand by human dignity?
Before tackling all the above issues separately, I do admire Dr. Kevorkian’s fight against hypocrisy within the medical establishment. Mercy killing is done on daily basis by nurses and doctors in secrecy, this is nothing new. His fight was to make AMA come open and clean. We can elaborate more on this, but I will try to keep every issue short.
- State and rule of law is supposed to protect those who cannot defend themselves from others, while religion and ethics is supposed to protect an individual from himself from harming himself. Unfortunately, due to absence of true democracy, these can overlap.
- Christian ethics does not apply to non-Christians. According to Christian ethics, a Christian believes in sovereignty of God and a Christian trusts his destiny to God. Thus, euthanasia is an act of interference in God’s plan for a Christian. A non-Christian is not bound to adhere with Christian ethics unwillingly. For a Christian, Euthanasia is a sin and equal to murder, but this is not the case for a non-Christian. Similar to abortion, where a Christian believes any inception of human life from the start as part of God’s plan. This may sound silly for a non-believer, but for a Christian, the opposite is sad and heart breaking. But neither party should have the right to bash and humiliate the personal beliefs others, if we believe in human rights.
The list can go on. Dr. Kevorkian, is an agnostic, did not have to adhere to Christian ethics and should not have been prosecuted by Christian standards. Likewise, when a Christian expresses his opinion for objecting mercy death based on Christian ethics, they should be respected for what they stand for. Unfortunately, both sides have been misquoted and victimized by today’s media. Also, did the state have the right to prosecute Dr. Kevorkian for his ideas? This is where the legal circles had to argue whether his actions were the direct result of demise of 120 individuals or not. Then there is the medical establishment, who has many skeletons in their cupboards. AMA knows very well that Dr. Kevorkian’s arguments can open endless lawsuits and may eventually cause a permanent damage on conventional medical field and business. What I am not sure if AMA did contribute to Dr. Kevorkian’s forced silence in his prison cell. Again, the parties to this conflict are neither Dr. Kevorkian nor Christians. As a Christian, even though I have never agreed to Dr. Kevorkian’s ideas, but I came to respect him after I listened to his arguments, euthanasia was just an opening argument.
Hagop Toroyan
Freedom of speech is more than welcome and I am not including ALL chrisitians in my criticism. Quite the contrary, my point was pseudo-christians (people who profess christianity but do not practice it or who equate christianity with hating everyone who is different)persecuted him. I certainly do not suggest that all or even most christians are like that but here in the US there are a fair number of fire and brimstone hate mongers in the name of a relegion based on love and tolerance.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that, in the end, the problem is not a set of values or religious beliefs. The clash is between intolerance of and respect for the other's point of view and ethics.
ReplyDelete