My Blog

Racism, Classism. Anti-Semitism. These are the three strikes apparent in this year’s World Series Championship. But it’s not the competition between the White Sox and the Astros or Cardinals that is on the tongues of Chicagoans or the nation, but the not so silent divide in the city between black and white, rich and poor, and sort of surprisingly Christian and Jewish. Unfortunately, this opportunity for examination of our city’s difficulties in the shadow of celebration, is being oversimplified by the Chicago Tribune as its coverage of the various divides is done in a tongue and cheek manner.

We don’t frequently hear about the segregation that exists in this great, beautiful city. But to live in the city of Chicago is like living in the South in the 1960s. Neighborhoods are racially and ethnically homogenous. Recently I have been exiting the Skyway at St. Lawrence Ave. I will drive at least five miles without seeing a white face. I can go days in my own neighborhood without seeing more than one person of color.

How is this possible when, according to the Racial Segregation Measurement Project, the city of Chicago has 1,053,739 Blacks and 907,166 Whites? The numbers tell the story with more than 85 percent of whites living segregated from African Americans in the city of Chicago. This percentage is higher than the segregation numbers in Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Boston, and New York. Of course, there are historical reasons for this segregation: mostly blockbusting and steering by realtors and discrimination and exploitation by landlords according to an article titled Race and Housing on Chicago.

But why is this still relevant today and what does it have to do with Major League Baseball? The White Sox stadium is located in the predominantly black, poor South side. The Cubs stadium is located in the white, gentrified, North side. There are many whites that are White Sox fans and blacks that are Cubs fans, but the two teams have symbolized the racial and economic divide in the city. While Wrigley is filled even when the Cubs are out of the playoffs, US Cellular struggles to sell out even though it hosts the best team in baseball. On the North Side, one is lucky to buy a one-bedroom condo for $300,000; on the South Side, there are many abandoned houses and public housing high rises.

Chicago’s dirty little secret is usually kept quiet through multi million dollar parks (Millenium) and pretty flowers planted in the on the greens of Michigan Avenue. But now that the White Sox are in the World Series the secret is out for the nation to see and critique. There is also the issue that Jerry Reinsdorf, owner of the Chicago Bulls and White Sox, has been the subject of hyper criticism due to anti-Semitism by sports writers and others in the professional sports establishment. This may or may not be true, but this leads to my point. These are very serious issues, but ones that the Chicago Tribune has not covered particular well or with particular care.

I take particular issue with Dawn Turner Trice’s October 17 article entitled, “Have winner on your side is beyond compare.” The column details differences of living on the North and South sides of Chicago paragraph by paragraph: If you live on the South Side, you watch the 10 p.m. news and cringe every time the bad news emanates from your side of the city.

If you live on the North Side, you don’t fret too much about crime defining your area of town.

If you live on the South Side, you listen to traffic reports and expect to hear the travel times on the southern expressways last.

If you live on the North Side, you expect traffic jams (and parking to be nearly impossible) throughout the area so there’s less of a need for up-to-the-minute travel updates.

It’s not that her column isn’t interesting to read, or even compelling. But it is an oversimplification and a knee jerk reaction to a problem that doesn’t just exist during the World Series, but one that requires attention by the media, including Trice herself, year round. Her examples are sort of silly and petty and detract from the truth that segregation still exists and in fact thrives in this city that suffers from a lack of affordable housing for both blacks and whites.

As for the anti-Semitism, Melissa Isaacson touches upon it in such a superficial way that it’s difficult to understand why she broached the subject at all:

When the "two Jerrys" were being widely lambasted, one longtime friend of Reinsdorf’s said, "it was like you could substitute the two Jerrys with "the two Jews."

Harrelson takes it a step further. "Over the years from some of the columnists, no question, it has been so antisemitic it’s unbelievable."

Reinsdorf would prefer to think otherwise. "There’s antisemitism just like there’s racism, but I don’t think it’s rampant," he said. "I don’t think that has caused me any problems, I really don’t. Even during the years when I was getting ripped all the time, the fans themselves were always very nice."

Wouldn’t it have been more compelling had Isaacson actually demonstrated these so- called columns or anti-Semitic attitudes? I’m not doubting their existence. But if you accuse someone of something, isn’t it your duty to prove your accusation?

This is an exciting time for the city of Chicago which hasn’t had a World Series in several. But this is also a deeply divided and troubled city with many pressing issues. The questions and challenges that I pose are:

Does the City’s top newspaper cover these issues adequately and not in oversimplified terms in response to a perhaps salacious murder or a twice in a lifetime World Series? And if not, why?

Web sites and articles cited in order of reference:

Racial Residential Segregation Measurement Project

Race and Housing on Chicago

Having winner on your side is beyond compare

Chairman of the Adored

Who has the right to die and when? That’s the ethical question being posed by pundits and average Americans after oral arguments were heard in Gonzales v. Oregon on Oct. 5 at the U.S. Supreme Court. The case is not actually about euthanasia, but whether or not the Federal Government overstepped its boundaries when it threatened to revoke the licenses of physicians who prescribed medication in accordance with Oregon’s assisted suicide laws.

This case has hit a little too close to home.

Video footage of Right to Die and Anti Euthanasia protesters on the steps of the Supreme Court today played on the television of my aunt’s hospice room. I was there last Wednesday when she moved in to the same room in Hospice House where my grandfather passed away; she asked me to set the television to CNN. I said, “Aunt Sharon, you want to die to CNN?” And she said, “Yes.” It wouldn’t be my first choice, but it’s better than Fox News.

A week later, upon my return, a much-deteriorated Aunt Sharon was watching the coverage of the Oregon case. The irony was too much. We both giggled.

(Yeah, I know this is weird. But it’s true)

About three weeks ago my aunt decided she wanted to die. Her desire was an unpopular one. My aunt is, well, the bomb. She is awesome. She has a million friends. As she has said over the past few weeks over and over, “I have never known a stranger.” She can disarm the most intense personality and he will leave her presence calling her, lovingly, Aunt Sharon. Her love has touched the lives of many from the clerk at Myers to her six grandchildren.

She has so much to live for: a loving family, tons of friends, a nice house, financial stability: why not stick around indefinitely?

(Note: I’m struggling with tenses in this as I cannot talk about her in terms of “was.”)

Sticking around for her would mean living in horrible pain and in a debilitated state. My Aunt has spent the last 30 + years battling Multiple Sclerosis. When the pain became unbearable about three months ago, her doctor suggested inserting a pump that would deliver pain medication directly to her spine. The surgery was risky though. MS patients often have exacerbations following surgeries which makes the disease progress. Aunt Sharon decided the risk was worth it. Unfortunately, the surgery was successful for about one day. Then the place where the pump was inserted became infected and to top it off, she had an exacerbation.

When she awoke from the surgery to remove the pump she was in horrible pain and could only move her left arm and nothing else. She lost control of her bowel movements and could not feed herself.

Over the years Aunt Sharon has always said, “Once I can’t feed my face or wipe my ass it’s time to go.”

She convinced her two children, saw a psychiatrist, and the doctor signed off on the insurance form that she was eligible for hospice care. My siblings and parents (my mom is her sister) were against the suicide mission. To die, my aunt would have to starve herself to death, not a pleasant way to end one’s life. Also, she still has so much to give, and so much to live for, why not try one last time? We told her my brother and his wife are expecting. My aunt loves babies. We asked her, “Doesn’t she want to meet the new baby? Doesn’t she want to attend her grandson’s bar mitzvah in January? Doesn’t she want to attend her first granddaughter’s graduation from high school?”

But she was determined. Yes she would like to attend those events, she would like to meet my brother’s child, but even if she did stay alive, how could she do it? For how long? In what capacity? With what dignity? Would she have to come with two nurses? Would she be able to eat the food? Would she have a bedpan under her wheel chair?

This was a woman who had traveled the world. This was a woman who would slam on the breaks (or later when she was in a wheel chair, have her caregiver slam on the breaks) at the sight of a garage sale. This was a woman who wouldn’t blink at having 20 people for Thanksgiving and Passover or more for a party.

In the last week those of us who were opposed to her decision have changed our tune. It only takes one look at her limbs, which are blue from the loss of circulation, to understand the toll MS has taken on her body. When her pain medication is wearing off, her face tightens as she tries to still smile at the parade of visitors who have been attending her last party.

So today, I wanted to ask her, would she have preferred Euthanasia to starvation? I almost had the chutzpa to ask her the question after noting her mouth, which has become discolored from dryness. Instead I fetched her ice chips. She has lost the ability to swallow, so she drinks little bits of water from a syringe and sucks on tiny ice chips. 

As I said to my mother, today was probably the last day I will ever see her alive. I will never know the answer. But what I do know is it’s a difficult question, one that should be made by patients and not the Federal Government.  I offer a “Right To Die Stance” but I do so hesitantly. Although my aunt touched many people when she was health(ier) than she is now, during the last two weeks her words of wisdom and her gifts of love have been precious. During the past week I have spent several hours sitting next to her deathbed. We have laughed, sang songs, and talked about the future. I wouldn’t trade those moments just as I wouldn’t trade the times that I colored pictures at her kitchen table, helped cook Shabbat dinners at her house, and played cards in her living room.

At the Hospice House, the doctors keep her pain free. But they cannot give her back her dignity. The only dignity she has left is her decision to die the way that she wants to die.

If she had wanted to die with medication I would have supported her decision just as I supported her right to try experimental MS treatments and a surgery that ultimately failed her.

On the ride back to Chicago I asked my friend, if people can go to extreme measures to stay alive what would be so wrong to allow them to die peacefully using medical technology?   

The Euthanasia debate cannot be viewed in black and white terms. As medical technology advances, people live longer and ultimately are dying difficult deaths. The brain tumor that was shrunk five years ago returns with the patient suffering from the after effects of radiation as well as the tumor itself. The premature baby kept alive through modern medicine suffers from severe brain damage and breathing problems.

I am not being critical of the medical profession. Some of the same treatments for Multiple Sclerosis that failed my aunt have saved my mom. She continues to walk and lead a fairly normal life.

What has to be evaluated is what is in the patient’s best interest. If the patient’s answer is to be euthanized, and a physician concurs, then that decision needs to be respected. It’s not up to the Bush administration or for that matter the Supreme Court to tell someone how to die. 

This is posted with much love to my Aunt Sharon. Thank you for teaching me how to smile through the pain and how to live a full life.

For more information:

National Multiple Sclerosis Society

Hospice

Information on Living Wills

High Court clashes over assisted suicide

A balanced look at the case from On The Docket

A Jewish anti-Euthanasia article

A Euthanasia society