Dealing with chronic pain/illness at church

[bsjkki]

This article truly struck home for me. It is amazing how unkind people can be when you deal with chronic pain and illness at church. So many of the comments made to this girl, I have heard directed at my loved ones. But in the end, she has a hopeful message about dealing with flippant judgments of the ignorant. (Those will always be with us--they don't know what they don't know.) https://bycommonconsent.com/2018/03/27/the-pain-of-being-in-pain-at-church/

"I don’t recount these instances because I want to call these people out or because these experiences are representative of my experience in the church. I recount them because people don’t understand what I mean when I say that church can be painful for people who are already in pain. 

I mean that I am exhausted by the burden of dealing with the spiritual pain brought about others who are unable to understand how a sick person could possibly have true faith. I mean that the addition of this pain to the physical pain I already experience because of my illness has often felt unbearable. I mean that it has made me question my place in a gospel that is supposed to be for everyone.

In the last session of General Conference, Elder Hallstrom posed the following question:

“Do we have the faith ‘not [to] be healed’ from our earthly afflictions so we might be healed eternally?”

...For so long, my church experiences came with messages of ensured healing for the faithful. This message, meant to give hope, often caused me to doubt. However, knowing that Christ’s love for me isn’t any less because I’m sick has been a blessing that, for me, far exceeds the potential blessings of healing that I have not received....If you aren’t in pain at church, or if you are interacting with other members in your ward who are, please don’t assume you can heal the pain of those around you. Compassion, empathy, and charity are key to honestly bearing one another’s burdens, mourning with those that mourn, and comforting those who are in need of comfort.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 27, 2018 by bsjkki

[will227457]

I read the article, color me not impressed. While I have sympathy for those who suffer from chronic illness the young lady who writes the article somehow manages to find 6 plus hours a day for school and homework, and time to write the article. Yet going to church or church activities is a burden.  I believe that she received bad counsel from her church leaders but she need to look inward not outward.

[rongo]

12 minutes ago, will227457 said:

I read the article, color me not impressed. While I have sympathy for those who suffer from chronic illness the young lady who writes the article somehow manages to find 6 plus hours a day for school and homework, and time to write the article. Yet going to church or church activities is a burden.  I believe that she received bad counsel from her church leaders but she need to look inward not outward.

You raise a good point in that the opportunity cost of actions chosen and actions declined do raise the question of priority. I say this because I know members who live with excruciating pain, but who attend church regularly. It can be done, because people do it all the time. And, as you point out, members who say they can't do this or that due to pain find the wherewithal to do other things, despite the pain. 

In my experience, too, I am unimpressed with members who try to justify medical marijuana due to pain. In my experience, it has only been chronically inactive members who justify this vehemently, not active (but in pain) members. One had his back shattered but chose not to have it fused because he was told it is the beginning of the end (first fusion would last about 15 years, and the second fusion about 15 more, but then that's it. He uses ibuprofen only because he doesn't want to develop opioid dependency). Another cannot sleep well and is in extreme pain sitting or lying. Yet another manages to attend sacrament meeting despite congestive heart failure, complete kidney failure, stroke, pulmonary problems, and terminal stomach cancer (granted, he is on morphine).

[Tacenda]

12 minutes ago, rongo said:

You raise a good point in that the opportunity cost of actions chosen and actions declined do raise the question of priority. I say this because I know members who live with excruciating pain, but who attend church regularly. It can be done, because people do it all the time. And, as you point out, members who say they can't do this or that due to pain find the wherewithal to do other things, despite the pain. 

In my experience, too, I am unimpressed with members who try to justify medical marijuana due to pain. In my experience, it has only been chronically inactive members who justify this vehemently, not active (but in pain) members. One had his back shattered but chose not to have it fused because he was told it is the beginning of the end (first fusion would last about 15 years, and the second fusion about 15 more, but then that's it. He uses ibuprofen only because he doesn't want to develop opioid dependency). Another cannot sleep well and is in extreme pain sitting or lying. Yet another manages to attend sacrament meeting despite congestive heart failure, complete kidney failure, stroke, pulmonary problems, and terminal stomach cancer (granted, he is on morphine).

Kind of taken aback with the bold (mine). What did you mean by this? Justify? As if they need to justify? I live in Utah and medical marijuana is being put on the ballot coming up because 80% signed petitions for this. Not to derail but that just seemed like an out of the ballpark swipe on people who use cannibus. I'm using it to prevent Alzheimer's (read the research behind it). Wouldn't you want someone to try it instead of opioids? This statement is really bothering me. No wonder people in church who suffer are speaking out. Rongo, I hope I read you wrong. This doesn't sound right coming from you. 

[bsjkki]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facepalm

[rongo]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

Kind of taken aback with the bold (mine). What did you mean by this? Justify? As if they need to justify? I live in Utah and medical marijuana is being put on the ballot coming up because 80% signed petitions for this. Not to derail but that just seemed like an out of the ballpark swipe on people who use cannibus. I'm using it to prevent Alzheimer's (read the research behind it). Wouldn't you want someone to try it instead of opioids? This statement is really bothering me. No wonder people in church who suffer are speaking out. Rongo, I hope I read you wrong. This doesn't sound right coming from you. 

I would be stunned if it passes in Utah. But then, I was stunned when it passed in Arizona. Society is changing. 

Yes, justify. The Church doesn't have a policy, and is supposed to be working on one, but conversations I've had with members who use have all been them wanting the Church's blessing or at least for their membership to not be restricted because of it. It doesn't seem to me that it is indispensable for them, but rather, that they are wanting to justify why they should be able to use it without Church sanctions. 

I'm aware of all of the extreme hypotheticals (glaucoma, terminal cancer, etc.), but that hasn't been my experience. 

[bsjkki]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy

[rongo]

2 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy

Does discussing and trying to help people do the best they can constitute not having empathy?

Or would empathy only entail agreeing with them and trying to make sure they don't try to do better and improve?

[Gray]

42 minutes ago, rongo said:

You raise a good point in that the opportunity cost of actions chosen and actions declined do raise the question of priority. I say this because I know members who live with excruciating pain, but who attend church regularly. It can be done, because people do it all the time. And, as you point out, members who say they can't do this or that due to pain find the wherewithal to do other things, despite the pain. 

In my experience, too, I am unimpressed with members who try to justify medical marijuana due to pain. In my experience, it has only been chronically inactive members who justify this vehemently, not active (but in pain) members. One had his back shattered but chose not to have it fused because he was told it is the beginning of the end (first fusion would last about 15 years, and the second fusion about 15 more, but then that's it. He uses ibuprofen only because he doesn't want to develop opioid dependency). Another cannot sleep well and is in extreme pain sitting or lying. Yet another manages to attend sacrament meeting despite congestive heart failure, complete kidney failure, stroke, pulmonary problems, and terminal stomach cancer (granted, he is on morphine).

Why would active members object to appropriate pharmaceutical use? Any drug can be abused, that doesn't mean it doesn't have a valid clinical application.

Edited March 27, 2018 by Gray

[bsjkki]

11 minutes ago, rongo said:

I'm aware of all of the extreme hypotheticals (glaucoma, terminal cancer, etc.), but that hasn't been my experience.

"Empathy has many definitions that encompass a broad range of emotional states, including caring for other people and having a desire to help them; experiencing emotions that match another person's emotions; discerning what another person is thinking or feeling;^[7] and making less distinct the differences between the self and the other.^[8] It can also be understood as having the separateness of defining oneself and another blur.^[9]

It also is the ability to feel and share another person's emotions. Some believe that empathy involves the ability to match another's emotions, while others believe that empathy involves being tenderhearted toward another person.^[10]

Having empathy can include having the understanding that there are many factors that go into decision making and cognitive thought processes. Past experiences have an influence on the decision making of today. Understanding this allows a person to have empathy for individuals who sometimes make illogical decisions to a problem that most individuals would respond with an obvious response. Broken homes, childhood trauma, lack of parenting and many others factors can influence the connections in the brain which a person uses to make decisions in the future.^[11]

 

44 minutes ago, rongo said:

You raise a good point in that the opportunity cost of actions chosen and actions declined do raise the question of priority. I say this because I know members who live with excruciating pain, but who attend church regularly. It can be done, because people do it all the time. And, as you point out, members who say they can't do this or that due to pain find the wherewithal to do other things, despite the pain. 

Some people are just wimps, aren't they. They must lack a strong testimony if their pain keeps them from church.

 

[smac97]

My oldest son is currently serving as a Church Service Missionary.  He lives at home (we live in Provo), and works at the MTC Referral Center.  He talks to people online.

My son has bipolar disorder, and also Celiac Disease.  Since late December, he has also struggled with near-constant pain in his gut (likely Irritable Bowel Syndrome).  This has resulted in a reduction in his time at the MTC, and also his time at Church.  Chronic pain creates special circumstances.  And while people struggling with it should be encouraged to do all they can, they ultimately must be trusted to be telling the truth.  If they are malingering (and yes, that can happen), then they will need to work through that on their own.

My son has occasionally referenced his medical issues when he has given talks in our ward or borne his testimony.  That helps.  Judgmentalism is, in part, a sin of ignorance.  We presume to judge others when we do not really know them or their circumstances.  By providing some contextual information about his circumstances to our ward, our ward's members have been utterly supportive and loving.  No judgmentalisms at all.  This in turn has helped my son during difficult times.  We have also lived in our ward for 12 years, so that helps a lot too.  Many in the ward have known my son for most of his life, and have interacted with him in primary, scouting, Young Men's, etc. 

There can be situations where a particular person ends up malingering.  Using claims of illness to avoid going to Church.  That can happen, but there is really very little that anyone else should say about such things.  The bishop (and perhaps the RS president or a very close friend or family member) may be in a position to assess this situation and speak to the person privately about it.  Otherwise, however, our job as Latter-day Saints should be to love others and offer them encouragement and support.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited March 27, 2018 by smac97

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, will227457 said:

I read the article, color me not impressed. While I have sympathy for those who suffer from chronic illness the young lady who writes the article somehow manages to find 6 plus hours a day for school and homework, and time to write the article. Yet going to church or church activities is a burden.  I believe that she received bad counsel from her church leaders but she need to look inward not outward.

I agree.  She is young and bitter and resentful and hopefully will learn how to grow from the experiences.  Resentment kills you and eats at your soul, and comes out of a sense of entitlement and pride that life should be something other than the reality of what it is- pain turned to joy.

All of religion- both Eastern and Western is about transforming pain into joy- that is the central teaching of the atonement if you think about it.

Pain can be the greatest teacher if you use it properly to build your life.  It lets you know every day why we are here and how difficult life is, and demonstrates the plan of salvation every day if you but see it that way

I see it as a gift in many ways.  It can be a constant reminder of of how to turn trials into joys, if we but have the right attitude.

[smac97]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

Quote

You raise a good point in that the opportunity cost of actions chosen and actions declined do raise the question of priority. I say this because I know members who live with excruciating pain, but who attend church regularly. It can be done, because people do it all the time. And, as you point out, members who say they can't do this or that due to pain find the wherewithal to do other things, despite the pain. 

In my experience, too, I am unimpressed with members who try to justify medical marijuana due to pain. In my experience, it has only been chronically inactive members who justify this vehemently, not active (but in pain) members. One had his back shattered but chose not to have it fused because he was told it is the beginning of the end (first fusion would last about 15 years, and the second fusion about 15 more, but then that's it. He uses ibuprofen only because he doesn't want to develop opioid dependency). Another cannot sleep well and is in extreme pain sitting or lying. Yet another manages to attend sacrament meeting despite congestive heart failure, complete kidney failure, stroke, pulmonary problems, and terminal stomach cancer (granted, he is on morphine).

Why would active members object to appropriate pharmaceutical use? Any drug can be abused, that doesn't mean it doesn't have a valid clinical application.

I am really conflicted about medical marijuana.  

I am also very concerned about the opioid epidemic in our country.  

I am particularly concerned about the susceptibility of Latter-day Saints to opioid abuse because, as Gray points out, "any drug can be abused."  However, Mormons may be more prone to misuse opioids because they are "legal" and prescribed by a doctor.  So we end up using riskier-and-more-addictive-but-still-culturally-acceptable-because-they're-legal opioids to manage pain, but then turn around and oppose less-addictive-but-illegal-and-culturally-repugnant-because-of-its-association-with-recreational-use marijuana.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

Edited March 27, 2018 by smac97

[CV75]

1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

This article truly struck home for me.

Grace can help us endure, overcome, or transcend. Like forgiveness, once we receive it, we extend it to others.

[mfbukowski]

49 minutes ago, rongo said:

I would be stunned if it passes in Utah. But then, I was stunned when it passed in Arizona. Society is changing. 

Yes, justify. The Church doesn't have a policy, and is supposed to be working on one, but conversations I've had with members who use have all been them wanting the Church's blessing or at least for their membership to not be restricted because of it. It doesn't seem to me that it is indispensable for them, but rather, that they are wanting to justify why they should be able to use it without Church sanctions. 

I'm aware of all of the extreme hypotheticals (glaucoma, terminal cancer, etc.), but that hasn't been my experience. 

Here in California, we had medical marijuana for years.   It became a farce.  Every phony doctor in every ghetto was writing prescriptions for "medical" marijuana.  I know of a guy who said he sprained his thumb in a fight with his girlfriend and got legal marijuana.

Now of course it is legal here for recreational use and is a booming booming industry.  But it is still illegal by federal law, so that is going to be fun to watch when Trump sends in the Feds. 

I am not putting down its use as a drug- it is what it is.  We know herbs can be very beneficial and they like anything else can also be abused.  God gave us them for a reason and it is up to us to use them properly or misuse them

But just commenting on the social path- first you get medical marijuana which is inevitably misused and then you get legalization.   I see that as an inevitable progression.

Hey- I remember when people were actually trying to smoke banana peels because it was supposedly a legal high.  I remember when LSD was legal because it had just been invented.

I see society as being sick and full of opportunities for abusing drugs of any kind including alcohol.  There is not much you can do about it really- just like guns.  Drugs in themselves are not evil nor are guns.  It's what some people do with them that makes their use- under certain circumstances- evil.

Making murder illegal has not stopped murder either.

Somehow the change has to come in the hearts of people to choose the right.  And politically that can work too. 

My facebook page indicating my politics says "Always Right" and I Choose the Right as often as my rotten self can do so.  

But somehow, as many here know, that other side pops out.   Grrrr. 

 

 

Edited March 27, 2018 by mfbukowski

[rongo]

27 minutes ago, Gray said:

Why would active members object to appropriate pharmaceutical use? Any drug can be abused, that doesn't mean it doesn't have a valid clinical application.

That's the central question the Brethren are wrestling with. It hinges around the word "appropriate." Elder Schweizer (a doctor) and Elder Clayton were the ones who told us that a comprehensive policy, including kava, mate, betel nut, etc. is being developed. One interesting thing is that the placebo effect is arguably strongest with marijuana as it has been tested. I think a lot of the mania with it right now as a movement du jour is that many people expect it to be a panacea for all sorts of things. 

You have to admit, the number of people who legitimately can be excused from Church due to pain is actually really small. As mentioned, I know many people who faithfully attend church with excruciating pain. It absolutely can be done, if it is a priority to someone. 

[rongo]

30 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

Some people are just wimps, aren't they. They must lack a strong testimony if their pain keeps them from church.

Are you saying that this never happens --- that in every single case where it is claimed that legitimate and debilitating pain keeps them from church activity, they are without fail heroically doing all that they can? 

We (society we, not just LDS) are increasingly soft, and have all sorts of reasons why this or that cannot be done. And when examples like Hal Eyring pulling weeds on his stomach at a stake farm assignment while in excruciating pain from bone cancer are given, there is increasingly outcry that it is insensitive and unempathetic to use such examples --- or to at least teach the ideal and encourage people to do the best that they can or even to do better if they can. It's getting to where people don't like being asked to stretch, lengthen their stride, or to go the extra mile. It makes people feel bad or guilty, and that can't ever be good in today's world. 

[bsjkki]

1 minute ago, rongo said:

Are you saying that this never happens --- that in every single case where it is claimed that legitimate and debilitating pain keeps them from church activity, they are without fail heroically doing all that they can? 

We (society we, not just LDS) are increasingly soft, and have all sorts of reasons why this or that cannot be done. And when examples like Hal Eyring pulling weeds on his stomach at a stake farm assignment while in excruciating pain from bone cancer are given, there is increasingly outcry that it is insensitive and unempathetic to use such examples --- or to at least teach the ideal and encourage people to do the best that they can or even to do better if they can. It's getting to where people don't like being asked to stretch, lengthen their stride, or to go the extra mile. It makes people feel bad or guilty, and that can't ever be good in today's world. 

 

31 minutes ago, smac97 said:

There can be situations where a particular person ends up malingering.  Using claims of illness to avoid going to Church.  That can happen, but there is really very little that anyone else should say about such things.  The bishop (and perhaps the RS president or a very close friend or family member) may be in a position to assess this situation and speak to the person privately about it.  Otherwise, however, our job as Latter-day Saints should be to love others and offer them encouragement and support.

 

[mfbukowski]

16 minutes ago, rongo said:

That's the central question the Brethren are wrestling with. It hinges around the word "appropriate." Elder Schweizer (a doctor) and Elder Clayton were the ones who told us that a comprehensive policy, including kava, mate, betel nut, etc. is being developed. One interesting thing is that the placebo effect is arguably strongest with marijuana as it has been tested. I think a lot of the mania with it right now as a movement du jour is that many people expect it to be a panacea for all sorts of things. 

You have to admit, the number of people who legitimately can be excused from Church due to pain is actually really small. As mentioned, I know many people who faithfully attend church with excruciating pain. It absolutely can be done, if it is a priority to someone. 

It's a question of attitude- seeing pain as part of life, or resenting it.  That is the choice.  One can lose a limb and see that as a handicap or opportunity as well, or feel depression or experience a loss- it is all the same.

Mental pain can be worse than physical pain, yet people deal with it or don't.

It's the attempt to escape the pain of living artificially that causes all the problems and mis-beliefs that somehow we should all be pain free and life should be perfect!

But the "placebo effect" is pure scientific proof that faith in God and a change in attitude IS a reality.

If you have faith that marijuana will heal you, it will.

For me faith in God is far better and has a much more powerful scientifically proven "placebo effect".   I am just calling it that to remain "scientific"

I have a firm faith in the "placebo effect" called "God".  

What's in a name? 

I hate smoking anyway.  Ugh.  

Every time I see the term "placebo effect" I see pure scientific evidence for the power of God/Mind over matter and am reminded of how far off science is from "reality"

 

Edited March 27, 2018 by mfbukowski

[rongo]

1 minute ago, bsjkki said:

(quoting smac): There can be situations where a particular person ends up malingering.  Using claims of illness to avoid going to Church.  That can happen, but there is really very little that anyone else should say about such things.  The bishop (and perhaps the RS president or a very close friend or family member) may be in a position to assess this situation and speak to the person privately about it.  Otherwise, however, our job as Latter-day Saints should be to love others and offer them encouragement and support.

I agree. And I think we do a good job of showing compassion, empathy, and patience for people, in the main. 

The core of the gospel is "making bad men good, and good men better." Doesn't this also apply to encouraging people to make progress and improvements in all areas, too, including not letting pain keep them from activity to the best of their ability?

[bsjkki]

1 minute ago, rongo said:

I agree. And I think we do a good job of showing compassion, empathy, and patience for people, in the main. 

The core of the gospel is "making bad men good, and good men better." Doesn't this also apply to encouraging people to make progress and improvements in all areas, too, including not letting pain keep them from activity to the best of their ability?

I don' t think this girl was not ever going to church. I believe she was going to the best of her ability...how is anyone else able to make that judgement? Her Bishop refused her ecclesiastical endorsement to attend school. She was going to be kicked out of school because of what he thought but had no way of knowing. I think showing encouragement, love and understanding would be far more motivating then telling someone they must not be trying hard enough. Withholding an endorsement seems extreme. 

[rongo]

1 minute ago, mfbukowski said:

It's a question of attitude- seeing pain as part of life, or resenting it.  That is the choice.  One can lose a limb and see that as a handicap or opportunity as well, or feel depression or experience a loss- it is all the same.

Mental pain can be worse than physical pain, yet people deal with it or don't.

There was a man who wanted the Church to take care of his family of five forever because of pain. He declared himself unable to work, and their family was in dire straits because he had been trying to get on permanent disability for years, but neither the doctors nor the insurance company nor his former employer agreed that there was anything wrong with him (he was denied any disability after lengthy vetting). His wife was working three jobs and losing her mind. I told him that he was in his 30s, and that his insistence that he would never work again is not a plan, and isn't going to work. He became very angry (he was also smoking marijuana for his pain). I told him that the bigger problem than their profound temporal issues is the fact that his kids are not being raised in the gospel (they had been to church twice in three years), and their irreplaceable growing up years are being frittered away while he never interacts with them, goes to work, goes to church, etc. Even with the pain (which in his case no one can substantiate), you still have at least 50 years of life left. Are you really going to never work again, never do anything with your kids, never go to church? Etc. 

I agree with you that the choice is what you are going to do with your pain. Are you going to be as active in life and in the Church as you can be, or are you going to just sit your life away using either pharmaceutical or "herbal" medicine? That's the plan?

[rongo]

2 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

I don' t think this girl was not ever going to church. I believe she was going to the best of her ability...how is anyone else able to make that judgement? Her Bishop refused her ecclesiastical endorsement to attend school. She was going to be kicked out of school because of what he thought but had no way of knowing. I think showing encouragement, love and understanding would be far more motivating then telling someone they must not be trying hard enough. Withholding an endorsement seems extreme. 

We only have her blog post version, and we're never going to hear her bishop defend himself. I've had people as well whom I judged capable of doing much more who resentfully disagreed with me. Denying an endorsement is pretty drastic, and I don't think most would do it if they thought the person was doing all she could. Her tone in the post rubs me the wrong way, like she's protesting too much. 

[bsjkki]

7 minutes ago, rongo said:

Her tone in the post rubs me the wrong way, like she's protesting too much. 

Obviously...it's why you seem to lack empathy. 

[Gray]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

That's the central question the Brethren are wrestling with. It hinges around the word "appropriate." Elder Schweizer (a doctor) and Elder Clayton were the ones who told us that a comprehensive policy, including kava, mate, betel nut, etc. is being developed. One interesting thing is that the placebo effect is arguably strongest with marijuana as it has been tested. I think a lot of the mania with it right now as a movement du jour is that many people expect it to be a panacea for all sorts of things. 

You have to admit, the number of people who legitimately can be excused from Church due to pain is actually really small. As mentioned, I know many people who faithfully attend church with excruciating pain. It absolutely can be done, if it is a priority to someone. 

It sounds like the only responsible position the church could take here would be to say, "We take no position on prescribed medications, other than to say they should not be used recreationally. Follow the advice of your physician on medical matters."

Edited March 27, 2018 by Gray