Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with fast, free delivery
Amazon Prime includes:
Fast, FREE Delivery is available to Prime members. To join, select "Try Amazon Prime and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery" below the Add to Cart button.
Amazon Prime members enjoy:- Cardmembers earn 5% Back at Amazon.com with a Prime Credit Card.
- Unlimited Free Two-Day Delivery
- Instant streaming of thousands of movies and TV episodes with Prime Video
- A Kindle book to borrow for free each month - with no due dates
- Listen to over 2 million songs and hundreds of playlists
- Unlimited photo storage with anywhere access
Important: Your credit card will NOT be charged when you start your free trial or if you cancel during the trial period. If you're happy with Amazon Prime, do nothing. At the end of the free trial, your membership will automatically upgrade to a monthly membership.
Buy new:
$18.52$18.52
FREE delivery: Tuesday, Jan 23 on orders over $35.00 shipped by Amazon.
Ships from: Amazon.com Sold by: Amazon.com
Buy used: $7.46
Other Sellers on Amazon
+ $3.99 shipping
99% positive over last 12 months
+ $3.99 shipping
97% positive over last 12 months
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End Hardcover – Deckle Edge, October 7, 2014
Purchase options and add-ons
#1 New York Times Bestseller
In Being Mortal, bestselling author Atul Gawande tackles the hardest challenge of his profession: how medicine can not only improve life but also the process of its ending
Medicine has triumphed in modern times, transforming birth, injury, and infectious disease from harrowing to manageable. But in the inevitable condition of aging and death, the goals of medicine seem too frequently to run counter to the interest of the human spirit. Nursing homes, preoccupied with safety, pin patients into railed beds and wheelchairs. Hospitals isolate the dying, checking for vital signs long after the goals of cure have become moot. Doctors, committed to extending life, continue to carry out devastating procedures that in the end extend suffering.
Gawande, a practicing surgeon, addresses his profession's ultimate limitation, arguing that quality of life is the desired goal for patients and families. Gawande offers examples of freer, more socially fulfilling models for assisting the infirm and dependent elderly, and he explores the varieties of hospice care to demonstrate that a person's last weeks or months may be rich and dignified.
Full of eye-opening research and riveting storytelling, Being Mortal asserts that medicine can comfort and enhance our experience even to the end, providing not only a good life but also a good end.
- Print length304 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherMetropolitan Books
- Publication dateOctober 7, 2014
- Dimensions5.8 x 1 x 8.55 inches
- ISBN-109780805095159
- ISBN-13978-0805095159
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Frequently bought together

Similar items that may ship from close to you
One has to decide whether one’s fears or one’s hopes are what should matter most.Highlighted by 14,370 Kindle readers
Courage is strength in the face of knowledge of what is to be feared or hoped. Wisdom is prudent strength.Highlighted by 12,610 Kindle readers
The lesson seems almost Zen: you live longer only when you stop trying to live longer.Highlighted by 12,447 Kindle readers
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com Review
An Amazon Best Book of the Month, October 2014: True or false: Modern medicine is a miracle that has transformed all of our lives.
If you said “true,” you’d be right, of course, but that’s a statement that demands an asterisk, a “but.” “We’ve been wrong about what our job is in medicine,” writes Atul Gawande, a surgeon (at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston) and a writer (at the New Yorker). “We think. . .[it] is to ensure health and survival. But really. . .it is to enable well-being. And well-being is about the reasons one wishes to be alive.” Through interviews with doctors, stories from and about health care providers (such as the woman who pioneered the notion of “assisted living” for the elderly)—and eventually, by way of the story of his own father’s dying, Gawande examines the cracks in the system of health care to the aged (i.e. 97 percent of medical students take no course in geriatrics) and to the seriously ill who might have different needs and expectations than the ones family members predict. (One striking example: the terminally ill former professor who told his daughter that “quality of life” for him meant the ongoing ability to enjoy chocolate ice cream and watch football on TV. If medical treatments might remove those pleasures, well, then, he wasn’t sure he would submit to such treatments.) Doctors don’t listen, Gawande suggests—or, more accurately, they don’t know what to listen for. (Gawande includes examples of his own failings in this area.) Besides, they’ve been trained to want to find cures, attack problems—to win. But victory doesn’t look the same to everyone, he asserts. Yes, “death is the enemy,” he writes. “But the enemy has superior forces. Eventually, it wins. And in a war that you cannot win, you don’t want a general who fights to the point of total annihilation. You don’t want Custer. You want Robert E. Lee... someone who knows how to fight for territory that can be won and how to surrender it when it can’t.” In his compassionate, learned way, Gawande shows all of us—doctors included—how mortality must be faced, with both heart and mind. – Sara Nelson
Review
“Being Mortal, Atul Gawande's masterful exploration of aging, death, and the medical profession's mishandling of both, is his best and most personal book yet.” ―Boston Globe
“American medicine, Being Mortal reminds us, has prepared itself for life but not for death. This is Atul Gawande's most powerful--and moving--book.” ―Malcolm Gladwell
“Beautifully crafted . . . Being Mortal is a clear-eyed, informative exploration of what growing old means in the 21st century . . . a book I cannot recommend highly enough. This should be mandatory reading for every American. . . . it provides a useful roadmap of what we can and should be doing to make the last years of life meaningful.” ―Time.com
“Masterful . . . Essential . . . For more than a decade, Atul Gawande has explored the fault lines of medicine . . . combining his years of experience as a surgeon with his gift for fluid, seemingly effortless storytelling . . . In Being Mortal, he turns his attention to his most important subject yet.” ―Chicago Tribune
“Beautifully written . . . In his newest and best book, Gawande . . . has provided us with a moving and clear-eyed look at aging and death in our society, and at the harms we do in turning it into a medical problem, rather than a human one.” ―The New York Review of Books
“Powerful.” ―New York Magazine
“Atul Gawande's wise and courageous book raises the questions that none of us wants to think about . . . Remarkable.” ―John Carey, The Sunday Times (UK)
“A deeply affecting, urgently important book--one not just about dying and the limits of medicine but about living to the last with autonomy, dignity, and joy.” ―Katherine Boo
“Dr. Gawande's book is not of the kind that some doctors write, reminding us how grim the fact of death can be. Rather, he shows how patients in the terminal phase of their illness can maintain important qualities of life.” ―Wall Street Journal (Best Books of 2014)
“Being Mortal left me tearful, angry, and unable to stop talking about it for a week. . . . A surgeon himself, Gawande is eloquent about the inadequacy of medical school in preparing doctors to confront the subject of death with their patients. . . . it is rare to read a book that sparks with so much hard thinking.” ―Nature
“We have come to medicalize aging, frailty, and death, treating them as if they were just one more clinical problem to overcome. However it is not only medicine that is needed in one's declining years but life--a life with meaning, a life as rich and full as possible under the circumstances. Being Mortal is not only wise and deeply moving, it is an essential and insightful book for our times, as one would expect from Atul Gawande, one of our finest physician writers.” ―Oliver Sacks
“Gawande's book is so impressive that one can believe that it may well [change the medical profession] . . . May it be widely read and inwardly digested.” ―Diana Athill, Financial Times (UK)
“Eloquent, moving.” ―The Economist (Best Books of 2014)
“A great read that leaves you better equipped to face the future, and without making you feel like you just took your medicine.” ―Mother Jones (Best Books of 2014)
“Beautiful.” ―New Republic
“Gawande displays the precision of his surgical craft and the compassion of a humanist . . . in a narrative that often attains the force and beauty of a novel . . . Only a precious few books have the power to open our eyes while they move us to tears. Atul Gawande has produced such a work. One hopes it is the spark that ignites some revolutionary changes in a field of medicine that ultimately touches each of us.” ―Shelf Awareness (Best Books of 2014)
“A needed call to action, a cautionary tale of what can go wrong, and often does, when a society fails to engage in a sustained discussion about aging and dying.” ―San Francisco Chronicle
About the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
Being Mortal
Medicine and What Matters in the End
By Atul GawandeHenry Holt and Company
Copyright © 2014 Atul GawandeAll rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-8050-9515-9
Contents
Title Page,Copyright Notice,
Dedication,
Epigraph,
Introduction,
1 • The Independent Self,
2 • Things Fall Apart,
3 • Dependence,
4 • Assistance,
5 • A Better Life,
6 • Letting Go,
7 • Hard Conversations,
8 • Courage,
Epilogue,
Notes on Sources,
Acknowledgements,
Also by Atul Gawande,
About the Author,
Copyright,
CHAPTER 1
The Independent Self
Growing up, I never witnessed serious illness or the difficulties of old age. My parents, both doctors, were fit and healthy. They were immigrants from India, raising me and my sister in the small college town of Athens, Ohio, so my grandparents were far away. The one elderly person I regularly encountered was a woman down the street who gave me piano lessons when I was in middle school. Later she got sick and had to move away, but it didn't occur to me to wonder where she went and what happened to her. The experience of a modern old age was entirely outside my perception.
In college, however, I began dating a girl in my dorm named Kathleen, and in 1985, on a Christmas visit to her home in Alexandria, Virginia, I met her grandmother Alice Hobson, who was seventy-seven at the time. She struck me as spirited and independent minded. She never tried to disguise her age. Her undyed white hair was brushed straight and parted on one side, Bette Davis–style. Her hands were speckled with age spots, and her skin was crinkled. She wore simple, neatly pressed blouses and dresses, a bit of lipstick, and heels long past when others would have considered it advisable.
As I came to learn over the years—for I would eventually marry Kathleen—Alice grew up in a rural Pennsylvania town known for its flower and mushroom farms. Her father was a flower farmer, growing carnations, marigolds, and dahlias, in acres of greenhouses. Alice and her siblings were the first members of their family to attend college. At the University of Delaware, Alice met Richmond Hobson, a civil engineering student. Thanks to the Great Depression, it wasn't until six years after their graduation that they could afford to get married. In the early years, Alice and Rich moved often for his work. They had two children, Jim, my future father-in-law, and then Chuck. Rich was hired by the Army Corps of Engineers and became an expert in large dam and bridge construction. A decade later, he was promoted to a job working with the corps's chief engineer at headquarters outside Washington, DC, where he remained for the rest of his career. He and Alice settled in Arlington. They bought a car, took road trips far and wide, and put away some money, too. They were able to upgrade to a bigger house and send their brainy kids off to college without need of loans.
Then, on a business trip to Seattle, Rich had a sudden heart attack. He'd had a history of angina and took nitroglycerin tablets to relieve the occasional bouts of chest pain, but this was 1965, and back then doctors didn't have much they could do about heart disease. He died in the hospital before Alice could get there. He was just sixty years old. Alice was fifty-six.
With her pension from the Army Corps of Engineers, she was able to keep her Arlington home. When I met her, she'd been living on her own in that house on Greencastle Street for twenty years. My in-laws, Jim and Nan, were nearby, but Alice lived completely independently. She mowed her own lawn and knew how to fix the plumbing. She went to the gym with her friend Polly. She liked to sew and knit and made clothes, scarves, and elaborate red-and-green Christmas stockings for everyone in the family, complete with a button-nosed Santa and their names across the top. She organized a group that took an annual subscription to attend performances at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. She drove a big V8 Chevrolet Impala, sitting on a cushion to see over the dashboard. She ran errands, visited family, gave friends rides, and delivered meals-on-wheels for those with more frailties than herself.
As time went on, it became hard not to wonder how much longer she'd be able to manage. She was a petite woman, five feet tall at most, and although she bristled when anyone suggested it, she lost some height and strength with each passing year. When I married her granddaughter, Alice beamed and held me close and told me how happy the wedding made her, but she'd become too arthritic to share a dance with me. And still she remained in her home, managing on her own.
When my father met her, he was surprised to learn she lived by herself. He was a urologist, which meant he saw many elderly patients, and it always bothered him to find them living alone. The way he saw it, if they didn't already have serious needs, they were bound to develop them, and coming from India he felt it was the family's responsibility to take the aged in, give them company, and look after them. Since arriving in New York City in 1963 for his residency training, my father had embraced virtually every aspect of American culture. He gave up vegetarianism and discovered dating. He got a girlfriend, a pediatrics resident from a part of India where they didn't speak his language. When he married her, instead of letting my grandfather arrange his marriage, the family was scandalized. He became a tennis enthusiast, president of the local Rotary Club, and teller of bawdy jokes. One of his proudest days was July 4, 1976, the country's bicentennial, when he was made an American citizen in front of hundreds of cheering people in the grandstand at the Athens County Fair between the hog auction and the demolition derby. But one thing he could never get used to was how we treat our old and frail—leaving them to a life alone or isolating them in a series of anonymous facilities, their last conscious moments spent with nurses and doctors who barely knew their names. Nothing could have been more different from the world he had grown up in.
* * *
MY FATHER'S FATHER had the kind of traditional old age that, from a Western perspective, seems idyllic. Sitaram Gawande was a farmer in a village called Uti, some three hundred miles inland from Mumbai, where our ancestors had cultivated land for centuries. I remember visiting him with my parents and sister around the same time I met Alice, when he was more than a hundred years old. He was, by far, the oldest person I'd ever known. He walked with a cane, stooped like a bent stalk of wheat. He was so hard of hearing that people had to shout in his ear through a rubber tube. He was weak and sometimes needed help getting up from sitting. But he was a dignified man, with a tightly wrapped white turban, a pressed, brown argyle cardigan, and a pair of old-fashioned, thick-lensed, Malcolm X–style spectacles. He was surrounded and supported by family at all times, and he was revered—not in spite of his age but because of it. He was consulted on all important matters—marriages, land disputes, business decisions—and occupied a place of high honor in the family. When we ate, we served him first. When young people came into his home, they bowed and touched his feet in supplication.
In America, he would almost certainly have been placed in a nursing home. Health professionals have a formal classification system for the level of function a person has. If you cannot, without assistance, use the toilet, eat, dress, bathe, groom, get out of bed, get out of a chair, and walk—the eight "Activities of Daily Living"—then you lack the capacity for basic physical independence. If you cannot shop for yourself, prepare your own food, maintain your housekeeping, do your laundry, manage your medications, make phone calls, travel on your own, and handle your finances—the eight "Independent Activities of Daily Living"—then you lack the capacity to live safely on your own.
My grandfather could perform only some of the basic measures of independence, and few of the more complex ones. But in India, this was not of any dire consequence. His situation prompted no family crisis meeting, no anguished debates over what to do with him. It was clear that the family would ensure my grandfather could continue to live as he desired. One of my uncles and his family lived with him, and with a small herd of children, grandchildren, nieces, and nephews nearby, he never lacked for help.
The arrangement allowed him to maintain a way of life that few elderly people in modern societies can count on. The family made it possible, for instance, for him to continue to own and manage his farm, which he had built up from nothing—indeed, from worse than nothing. His father had lost all but two mortgaged acres and two emaciated bulls to a moneylender when the harvest failed one year. He then died, leaving Sitaram, his eldest son, with the debts. Just eighteen years old and newly married, Sitaram was forced to enter into indentured labor on the family's two remaining acres. At one point, the only food he and his bride could afford was bread and salt. They were starving to death. But he prayed and stayed at the plow, and his prayers were answered. The harvest was spectacular. He was able to not only put food on the table but also pay off his debts. In subsequent years, he expanded his two acres to more than two hundred. He became one of the richest landowners in the village and a moneylender himself. He had three wives, all of whom he outlived, and thirteen children. He emphasized education, hard work, frugality, earning your own way, staying true to your word, and holding others strictly accountable for doing the same. Throughout his life, he awoke before sunrise and did not go to bed until he'd done a nighttime inspection of every acre of his fields by horse. Even when he was a hundred he would insist on doing this. My uncles were worried he'd fall—he was weak and unsteady—but they knew it was important to him. So they got him a smaller horse and made sure that someone always accompanied him. He made the rounds of his fields right up to the year he died.
Had he lived in the West, this would have seemed absurd. It isn't safe, his doctor would say. If he persisted, then fell, and went to an emergency room with a broken hip, the hospital would not let him return home. They'd insist that he go to a nursing home. But in my grandfather's premodern world, how he wanted to live was his choice, and the family's role was to make it possible.
My grandfather finally died at the age of almost a hundred and ten. It happened after he hit his head falling off a bus. He was going to the courthouse in a nearby town on business, which itself seems crazy, but it was a priority to him. The bus began to move while he was getting off and, although he was accompanied by family, he fell. Most probably, he developed a subdural hematoma—bleeding inside his skull. My uncle got him home, and over the next couple of days he faded away. He got to live the way he wished and with his family around him right to the end.
* * *
FOR MOST OF human history, for those few people who actually survived to old age, Sitaram Gawande's experience was the norm. Elders were cared for in multigenerational systems, often with three generations living under one roof. Even when the nuclear family replaced the extended family (as it did in northern Europe several centuries ago), the elderly were not left to cope with the infirmities of age on their own. Children typically left home as soon as they were old enough to start families of their own. But one child usually remained, often the youngest daughter, if the parents survived into senescence. This was the lot of the poet Emily Dickinson, in Amherst, Massachusetts, in the mid-nineteenth century. Her elder brother left home, married, and started a family, but she and her younger sister stayed with their parents until they died. As it happened, Emily's father lived to the age of seventy-one, by which time she was in her forties, and her mother lived even longer. She and her sister ended up spending their entire lives in the parental home.
As different as Emily Dickinson's parents' life in America seems from that of Sitaram Gawande's in India, both relied on systems that shared the advantage of easily resolving the question of care for the elderly. There was no need to save up for a spot in a nursing home or arrange for meals-on-wheels. It was understood that parents would just keep living in their home, assisted by one or more of the children they'd raised. In contemporary societies, by contrast, old age and infirmity have gone from being a shared, multigenerational responsibility to a more or less private state—something experienced largely alone or with the aid of doctors and institutions. How did this happen? How did we go from Sitaram Gawande's life to Alice Hobson's?
One answer is that old age itself has changed. In the past, surviving into old age was uncommon, and those who did survive served a special purpose as guardians of tradition, knowledge, and history. They tended to maintain their status and authority as heads of the household until death. In many societies, elders not only commanded respect and obedience but also led sacred rites and wielded political power. So much respect accrued to the elderly that people used to pretend to be older than they were, not younger, when giving their age. People have always lied about how old they are. Demographers call the phenomenon "age heaping" and have devised complex quantitative contortions to correct for all the lying in censuses. They have also noticed that, during the eighteenth century, in the United States and Europe, the direction of our lies changed. Whereas today people often understate their age to census takers, studies of past censuses have revealed that they used to overstate it. The dignity of old age was something to which everyone aspired.
But age no longer has the value of rarity. In America, in 1790, people aged sixty-five or older constituted less than 2 percent of the population; today, they are 14 percent. In Germany, Italy, and Japan, they exceed 20 percent. China is now the first country on earth with more than 100 million elderly people.
As for the exclusive hold that elders once had on knowledge and wisdom, that, too, has eroded, thanks to technologies of communication—starting with writing itself and extending to the Internet and beyond. New technology also creates new occupations and requires new expertise, which further undermines the value of long experience and seasoned judgment. At one time, we might have turned to an old-timer to explain the world. Now we consult Google, and if we have any trouble with the computer we ask a teenager.
Perhaps most important of all, increased longevity has brought about a shift in the relationship between the young and the old. Traditionally, surviving parents provided a source of much-needed stability, advice, and economic protection for young families seeking pathways to security. And because landowners also tended to hold on to their property until death, the child who sacrificed everything to care for the parents could expect to inherit the whole homestead, or at least a larger portion than a child who moved away. But once parents were living markedly longer lives, tension emerged. For young people, the traditional family system became less a source of security than a struggle for control—over property, finances, and even the most basic decisions about how they could live.
And indeed, in my grandfather Sitaram's traditional household, generational tension was never far away. You can imagine how my uncles felt as their father turned a hundred and they entered old age themselves, still waiting to inherit land and gain economic independence. I learned of bitter battles in village families between elders and adult children over land and money. In the final year of my grandfather's life, an angry dispute erupted between him and my uncle with whom he lived. The original cause was unclear: perhaps my uncle had made a business decision without my grandfather; maybe my grandfather wanted to go out and no one in the family would go with him; maybe he liked to sleep with the window open and they liked to sleep with the window closed. Whatever the reason, the argument culminated (depending on who told the story) in Sitaram's either storming out of the house in the dead of night or being locked out. He somehow made it miles away to another relative's house and refused to return for two months.
Global economic development has changed opportunities for the young dramatically. The prosperity of whole countries depends on their willingness to escape the shackles of family expectation and follow their own path—to seek out jobs wherever they might be, do whatever work they want, marry whom they desire. So it was with my father's path from Uti to Athens, Ohio. He left the village first for university in Nagpur and then for professional opportunity in the States. As he became successful, he sent ever larger amounts of money home, helping to build new houses for his father and siblings, bring clean water and telephones to the village, and install irrigation systems that ensured harvests when the rainy seasons were bad. He even built a rural college nearby that he named for his mother. But there was no denying that he had left, and he wasn't going back.
Disturbed though my father was by the way America treated its elderly, the more traditional old age that my grandfather was able to maintain was possible only because my father's siblings had not left home as he had. We think, nostalgically, that we want the kind of old age my grandfather had. But the reason we do not have it is that, in the end, we do not actually want it. The historical pattern is clear: as soon as people got the resources and opportunity to abandon that way of life, they were gone.
* * *
THE FASCINATING THING is that, over time, it doesn't seem that the elderly have been especially sorry to see the children go. Historians find that the elderly of the industrial era did not suffer economically and were not unhappy to be left on their own. Instead, with growing economies, a shift in the pattern of property ownership occurred. As children departed home for opportunities elsewhere, parents who lived long lives found they could rent or even sell their land instead of handing it down. Rising incomes, and then pension systems, enabled more and more people to accumulate savings and property, allowing them to maintain economic control of their lives in old age and freeing them from the need to work until death or total disability. The radical concept of "retirement" started to take shape.
(Continues...)Excerpted from Being Mortal by Atul Gawande. Copyright © 2014 Atul Gawande. Excerpted by permission of Henry Holt and Company.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Product details
- ASIN : 0805095152
- Publisher : Metropolitan Books; 1st edition (October 7, 2014)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 304 pages
- ISBN-10 : 9780805095159
- ISBN-13 : 978-0805095159
- Item Weight : 2.31 pounds
- Dimensions : 5.8 x 1 x 8.55 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #25,392 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #4 in Hospice Care
- #11 in Health Policy (Books)
- #23 in Sociology of Death (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
Important information
To report an issue with this product or seller, click here.
About the author

Atul Gawande is the author of three bestselling books: Complications, a finalist for the National Book Award; Better, selected by Amazon.com as one of the ten best books of 2007; and The Checklist Manifesto. He is also a surgeon at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, a staff writer for The New Yorker since 1998, and a professor at Harvard Medical School and the Harvard School of Public Health. He has won two National Magazine Awards, a MacArthur Fellowship, and been named one of the world's hundred most influential thinkers by Foreign Policy and TIME. In his work as a public health researcher, he is Director of Ariadne Labs a joint center for health system innovation. And he is also co-founder and chairman of Lifebox, a global not-for-profit implementing systems and technologies to reduce surgical deaths globally. He and his wife have three children and live in Newton, Massachusetts.
You can find more at http://www.atulgawande.com.
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonReviews with images

-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Being Mortal essentially provides a long, thoughtful, multi-faceted, historically-grounded complaint about the medicalization of aging and death, from someone who really knows and cares. Older adults may become less capable of caring for themselves in various ways, but for the most part they still want the things they always wanted: autonomy in their schedules and surroundings, community, privacy, a specific and concrete reason to get up in the morning. It’s a hell of a demand, to ask people to adjust to completely new surroundings and routines when they’ve never been older and/or sicker.
Institutions like hospitals and nursing homes are sort of good at providing some things (specific instances of treatment) and terrible at providing others (emotional warmth, exceptions to the rules, etc). The “assisted living” concept has an interesting history (read it in the book!). Unfortunately, by now assisted living has become a watered-down way station between hospital and nursing home, rather than remaining a bastion of alternative values in elder care as originally conceived.
Indeed, the logic of institutions is largely inexorable. If providing meaning (or a lifestyle ripe for it) cannot be measured and incentivized, it will not be reliably or scalably produced.
Admittedly, Being Mortal raises more questions than it provides answers. Everyone loves a good news story about kindergarteners who visit nursing homes. But are they changing diapers? Is there really any feasible model for caring for a rapidly aging population other than institutions? And how are you supposed to reward institutions for preserving meaning (an inherently individual task) even while they do the things that institutions are meant to do – get a lot of services provided quickly/reliably in a standardized fashion?
No individual person can change the system anyways, but it does seem that (even within the system we’ve got) people are making some crap decisions. Ok, so people are valuing the wrong things – namely, safety over autonomy and the “lottery ticket” of survival/recovery over a better death, sooner. You’re someone who wants to value the right things. So what do you do?
You have to do your own research and ask doctors hard questions, because they don’t really like facing imminent death either. You have to broaden your imagination about what acceptable living arrangements for an older person might look like.For instance, maybe you have to accept that your loved one might not get medicine exactly on time or the diet just as the doctor prescribed, because he’s going to sleep in his own bed and raid his own fridge instead. But maybe people don’t want to do those things. Then what?
That brings us to my main quibble with Being Mortal: Gawande waffles a bit between what people do value and what they should value. It’s so tempting to talk a big game about what “matters.” But if something really matters, why don’t people choose it? Don’t lots of different things matter? And how could it ever be anything less than very difficult to switch from life mode (focus on safety and the long-term) to end-of-life mode?
Perhaps Gawande ought to have sought out some different examples of these values in action. It’s not too hard to imagine a terminal patient forgoing last-ditch treatment, even if it’s not what we’d choose ourselves. It’s much more difficult to imagine a role model of, for instance, an adult child allowing her parent to live in what are widely considered to be “unsafe” living conditions specifically for the sake of that parent’s broader well-being.
I want to see examples of real “free-range” senescence. I’d like to read the account of someone who got a call from the police, who found mom passed out in the yard, or even whose parent died in an accidental house fire or something.
Many worst-case scenarios (of elders living unaided) will not come to pass, but some certainly will. Then what? Does that change people’s minds, one way or the other? Like trendy “free-range parenting,” it’s probably just much easier said than done. Does that mean a value is going unrealized, or that the person doesn’t hold it in the first place?
Maybe many patients don’t even know what they value the most. That’s fair, and part of what palliative care can help them to define, as it becomes increasingly relevant. But maybe there’s nothing satisfying to uncover. There’s no rule that everyone must necessarily value different components of life in a stable fashion. Some people will have very consistent desires, but others will vacillate (especially as they experience the stages of progressing towards death). If you draw a patient’s attention to the dangers of her living independently, she shudders. But when you tell a sad story about a nursing home, she cringes. Maybe she fights with her adult children about where she should go. Maybe she can’t afford her first choice. But that’s simple interpersonal conflict and lack of resources, not unique to old age.
You can’t live both independently and in a nursing home. Something’s got to give, and that totally sucks. Some values will be pursued better, and some values will be pursued worse, and some kind of balance must be reached. Care institutions put a finger on the scale, but they didn’t create the problem.
The personal economy of value pursuit is simply tricky, from the day we’re born until the day we die. Gawande knows that there are costs associated to the “old” way of dying – it tends to create autonomy for elders at the expense of the younger generation, especially women sandwiched between their children and parents. Many children (and parents) aren’t happy with this anymore, for a variety of reasons, so they face new sets of options (i.e. tradeoffs). Having access to medicine is a double-edged sword, and like many historically-novel conditions humans aren’t inherently well-equipped to deal with it. There’s no technocratic solution to that. If “dying as we lived” is some kind of standard for how we should go, then maybe alone and medicalized makes some sense right now after all.
I don’t really have any caveats in recommending this one, though. Just read it (and then try to forget Gawande’s description of how aging bodies feel in a surgeon’s hands as quickly as possible).
Book #3 for read about death dot com
You would think that when your daughter-in-law encourages you to read a book—you would read it. Ditto book recommendations from your wife.
Melinda and Joanne—sorry it took me a year to read this. But thank you. Because “Being Mortal” is now on my Top-10 book list for 2018.
In this riveting book, Dr. Atul Gawande reminds us: “People die only once.” So when facing fork-in-the-road sick and dying decisions, “They have no experience to draw on. They need doctors and nurses who are willing to have the hard discussions and say what they have seen, who will help people prepare for what is to come—and escape a warehouse oblivion that few really want.”
“Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End” changed—totally changed—my thoughts about end-of-life decisions. Whew. On one level, I agree that this New York Times bestseller (7,000 reviews on Amazon!) is a brilliant and deep look at the “…still unresolved argument about what the function of medicine really is—what, in other words, we should and should not be paying for doctors to do.” Yet on another surprising level, this writer (four bestsellers), surgeon, and public health leader—delivers fresh management and leadership insights in every chapter.
CUSTER OR ROBERT E. LEE? The author says that medicine’s job is to fight death and disease—the enemy—but that the enemy eventually wins. “And in a war that you cannot win, you don’t want a general who fights to the point of total annihilation. You don’t want Custer. You want Robert E. Lee, someone who knows how to fight for territory that can be won and how to surrender it when it can’t, someone who understands that the damage is greatest if all you do is battle to the bitter end.”
Yet Gawande admits, “More often, these days, medicine seems to supply neither Custers nor Lees. We are increasingly the generals who march the soldiers onward, saying all the while, ‘You let me know when you want to stop.’ All-out treatment, we tell the incurably ill, is a train you can get off at any time—just say when. But for most patients and their families we are asking too much. They remain riven by doubt and fear and desperation; some are deluded by a fantasy of what medical science can achieve.”
What should families do? My suggestion: ask your doctor (like I did this week) if he or she has read “Being Mortal.” (He had.) Gawande notes that medical school taught him two styles of doctor/patient interactions: paternalistic and informative.
The “paternalistic relationship” is the “priestly, doctor-knows-best model, and although often denounced it remains a common mode, especially with vulnerable patients—the frail, the poor, the elderly, and anyone else who tends to do what they’re told.”
Doctors make the critical choices. “If there were a red pill and a blue pill, we would tell you, ‘Take the red pill. It will be good for you.’ We might tell you about the blue pill; but then again, we might not.”
The “informative relationship” sounds good, at first. “’Here’s what the red pill does, and here’s what the blue pill does,’ we would say, ‘Which one do you want?’ It’s a retail relationship. The doctor is the technical expert. The patient is the consumer.”
The down side? Doctors become “ever more specialized” and “We know less and less about our patients but more and more about our science.” He writes, “In truth, neither type is quite what people desire. We want information and control, but we also want guidance.” In his medical school, there was also the brief mention of a third type of doctor-patient relationship often labeled “interpretive.”
“Here the doctor’s role is to help patients determine what they want. Interpretive doctors ask, ‘What is most important to you? What are your worries?’ Then, when they know your answers, they tell you about the red pill and the blue pill and which one would most help you achieve your priorities.”
Makes sense right? Gawande notes that this relationship is also called “shared decision making” and added, “It seemed to us medical students a nice way to work with patients as physicians. But it seemed almost entirely theoretical. Certainly, to the larger medical community, the idea that most doctors would play this kind of role for patients seemed far-fetched at the time. (Surgeons? ‘Interpretive?’ Ha!)”
But two decades later, the author describes a meeting with his father (also a surgeon) and his father’s neurosurgeon. The task: review the MRI images of his father’s giant and deadly tumor. The neurosurgeon “saw himself as neither the commander nor a mere technician in the battle but instead as a kind of counselor and contractor on my father’s behalf. It was exactly what my father needed.”
To get the conversation going in your family, maybe insert a reminder into your Thanksgiving prayer next Thursday that everyone around the table will die only once! Then, mention this book as required reading for at least one family member. (“Grammy—please pass the turkey and that Being Mortal book.”)
Dr. Gawande is an amazing writer. The poignant stories are page-turners. The innovative solutions—inspiring and encouraging. I’ve already re-told many of the memorable fork-in-the-road stories (tears will flow) to friends and colleagues and ordered the book for several friends. Be sure to read the hilarious story of the very creative nursing home that added two dogs, four cats, and 100 parakeets! (Memo to Purchasing: Next time, order the cages before the birds are delivered!)
I should have jumped on this 2014 book much, much sooner—because I still rave about Gawande’s 2010 insightful bestseller, “The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right.”
I had no idea that there were checklist connoisseurs! “The Checklist Manifesto” moves eloquently through medicine, aeronautics, and sky-scraper construction—noting why checklists will make or break a venture. For example, Boeing’s checklist expert uses “pause points” when designing checklists for pilots in crisis. Within each pause point, he limits the checklist to between five and nine items.
As a staff writer for the New Yorker, Gawande’s latest article, “Why Doctors Hate Their Computers,” was published on Nov. 12, 2018. You can read or listen to the article online. (Customer Bucket Pop Quiz: Are computer systems for the doctors or for the patients?)
And—get this—Gawande is also CEO of the health care venture formed by Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, and JPMorgan Chase to deliver better outcomes, satisfaction, and cost efficiency in care. Stay tuned!
Top reviews from other countries
- In this book the author, Atul Gwande (a man someone should make a saint) has written a book about death that is full of hope. He looks at how we can better manage and have a good death. Previously most of us died at home but now the majority of us die in hospitals attached to drips and adding to the prolonged memory of end-of-life care.
- Man has spent most of the 200 - 300,000 years of existence on this planet, with an average life expectancy of living to the ages of 30 or 40. It is only in the last century that we start to live in longer lives and move from living to an average age of 30 or 40 to an average age of 70 or 80, and our bodies have to adjust the fact that we are ageing and this is not necessarily a natural course of events but we are kept alive for these long periods of time for many people through medicines and healthcare and understanding how we can do this. However, do we really want to then end our final few years separated from loved ones, living in an institution and buried by a mass of tubes keeping us barely conscious.
- This book is a fascinating look at how we view ageing and how we might wish to end our days or those of a loved one. Ending up in an institutions such as nursing homes have been likened to a similar institutionalisation that you would resemble prisons or mental facility for people with mental health problems, it's not dignified, it's often neglect where old people lose all the sense of dignity that they may have had whilst being independently living on their own, and be given nightdresses and institutionalised clothes with wardens going around making sure you behave in a certain way and do the right thing and end up being treated like a child or someone beneath them. Just because you're in an institution where you are cared for and there is a lot of care going on doesn't mean that they can make you fit in with scheduled events and where everything is regimented once they have your money.
- However if the alternative is to put the black the burden on a family member such as a daughter who is usually in often is, then they are now the carer and provided medicine, providing meals, and having to deal with people alongside their house rules. So the emphasis of care provided by a carer can be equally bleak and difficult on both parties such as the family member and the older person who requires care.
- So if we don't like institutions and we feel we can't put the burden of care on family members, what is the solution? Another idea suggested is assisted living where people have their own houses and their own privacy, dignity and ability to control but also have the opportunity to meet other people, and have basic care when provided and necessary. Old people aren't called patients but are known as tenants and in this setting might be a better alternative. Even when people are old and frail and possibly losing memory and some faculties, we still need to ask the question: what is it that makes life live it worth living and what is a good life even when we might have other areas of concern and be old and frail.
- Rachel Carson was somebody who looked at Maslow's motivation of needs approach and noted that actually it was how perspectives can change for older people because they have a different perspective on life than younger people do. When young, you feel they're going to live forever and you're motivated by work goals and making a career. But as you age, your perspectives change - many people get less depressed and feel the more important things are close relationships with families and friends. Your days are limited, you become aware of the fact, your perspective on what’s important changes. In fact, how we perceive everything can help us lead better lives.
- However many of the institutionalised independent living places really turned into more like institutions. For what is a better life after all many of these frail people suffer from the three plagues of boredom, loneliness and frailty so could we turn places such as nursing homes into something that tries to manage boredom, loneliness and helplessness? The author also looks at life and what it means that we have to care and be connected to one another and we'll see what will happen to people even after we die. There are very few people that would ever want to imagine that when they die, an hour later everyone else would be wiped off the planet earth, we care what will happen to people after we've gone and for some, dying is the gift that they can help those left behind feel better about the death of a parent or loved one.
- The book then switches to a young mother who is giving birth to a baby but through that operation they discover that she has lung cancer and it is terminal. She is a non-smoker (note: 50% of people who have lung cancer are non-smokers). She was then given several courses of treatment and to which she will still probably live no more than a year. The question is what kind of care do we want to give to people who are in the final year of life as 25% of all Medicare in America is spent on people who will have one year left of life and the majority of that money will be spent on the last two months of care before the person dies. Often when people are in the final years or stages of an incurable disease the questions we should be asking are what would they want from this life at this time and what is important. The answers are often creating understanding or close relationships with the people in their lives, filling their lives with some meaning and closure and it's not necessarily about keeping them alive pumped full of drugs, in and out of consciousness in a hospital bed, sent via tubes and barely registering what's going on. However, we don't ask these questions and we should think, is this how I really want to spend my final weeks or days in this way.
- End-of-life care in terminally ill patients who particularly might have less than a year to live, are often under the management of doctors who continuously try to find something that might extend life by a few months rather than the years they expect. Many patients think further treatments might extend and offer them an extra 20 years of life when in actual fact almost all statistical evidence says that it might give them all three months. When patients are then given palliative care from trained nurses who without the need to stop curative care they can often form better decisions because people start asking them what is important in their life and help them to understand the realities of what is going to occur. Fascinating stuff that we should think about. In many societies where palliative care is the norm rather than further courses of treatment - particularly in countries that don’t have access to the medicines available in America - life expectancy is often longer than those on relentless courses of expensive treatments. It reminds me of a joke in regards to why they stick steel nails into coffins of people who have died of cancer, it's to stop the oncologist coming up with one further bout of treatment. After reading the account of one young lady's decision-making and the whole family's inability to accept what was going on, her life's end of life care was just one about an excessive set of treatments without necessarily looking at what is the best way to die. These are questions we need to be asking ourselves. And palliative care nurses could be the best people to do this.
- What is also interesting is the end of life care in regards to hospice treatment actually seems to have longer life expectancy than the care that has just given through medical intervention, not by years and only weeks or months, but also it may lead to a better death
- If we have to face bad news we also have to think about what we want. Do you want the doctor to inform us about the best medical decisions we can make or do we want the doctor to listen to our fears and try to manage that and address those fears. Hope that a better way would be to give us information and guidance but also try to help us make the decisions that we need to do so even a model of that is listening to the patient, giving advice but tempering that advice with what our fears and needs actually are within relation to possible surgery or further treatment. And I guess it's important to remember that lots of medical practitioners just want to try and fix a problem and those conversations are hard.
- Though Gawande tells many stories in this book - he also talks of his own experiences and of his own family (particularly his dad and grandad). It really helps to crystalise the message that he is telling with this book.
- I love the author's approach by starting with three words when you want to relate and discuss something that might be hard to tackle, and those words are "I am worried”.
- The most amazing thing about this book that is about death is that it's also about a better life to gain some insight and solutions to how we can die - and as Jim Morrison once sang “no one here gets out alive” so it's worth asking these questions now rather than waiting until it's too late. A recommended book on death that tells us a lot about how to live.




















