Pages

Monday, January 29, 2007

Hospice arranges for disabled man...

.... to be with prostitute when Nick Wallis, who has muscular dystrophy and is in his 20's , but never had sex, made the request. The hospice is run by an Anglican nun.

His story will be featured on BBC 2 in the UK.

5 comments:

Rosemary said...

After having read both articles, I am under the impression that Nick does not live at the Hospice, but rather, spends time there regularly.

If he is not a full time resident, I don't understand the Hospice getting involved in this, Anglican administration or not.

I really do understand his desire, but I'm totally uncomfortable with an institution becoming involved in this. He could have arranged this on his own, couldn't he? He did all the research, so???????

Ruth said...

I don't know his exact living conditions, but it appears that the hospice acts in a carer role (in the UK, caregivers are referred to as carers). Based on the fact that he has a progressive disabiility and the article indicates that he could have done it himself when he was in college, I assumed that meant at this point his circumstances were such that he could not. (Although I don't have all of the details). It's unlikely the hospice would have become involved if it wasn't necessary in some way, in my opinion. What's interesting here as an issue is , if he could not do it hiimself, do institutions have the right to bar such requests? Apparently the hospice feels they do not in their role as a carer.

Rosemary said...

Take a look at the Hospice site, and see what you think.

http://www.helenanddouglas.org.uk/news76.html

Ruth said...

Interesting link, thanks. It sets forth the hospice's position pretty clearly, I think as well as the ethical dilemnas faced with this kind of situation.

Warren said...

Wouldn't a kiss from someone he loved have been more intimate than sex with a stranger? It would be wonderful to hope for, and pray for a chance to experience the full depth of human intimacy.

The funny thing for me is that the issue turns on the shock value of the prostitution angle, rather than on the difference between fornication and a christian notion of marital conjugal love.

His capacity to take a risk in order to experience sex is praised, and yet his full humanity is in fact patronizingly dismissed. The moral issue is not paying for sex, it's his desire for, and his capacity for profound spiritual union with another human being is subtly discounted, or considered hopeless. Can we just blame society, and do whatever we want? I don't see much Christian input on this decision, the care center seems Anglican enough, I am surprised to see "Sister" praising him for "taking this risk".

What do you think Ruth? I am deeply interested. One of the principles I believe in is to be unflinchingly blunt in expressing my principles while discussing these topics, ignorant provincial clod though I am. Forgive me if I tread on any toes. :-)

Warren