I can't help speculating whether, had they been members of the ambulance crew, they would today have faced disciplinary action for this. The prevailing mood seems to be that such an action would be 'unprofessional' and an imposition of your beliefs on others. Yet surely if you believe in God, to pray with someone you believe may be dying is not an 'imposition' on them but an act of humanity? And at that stage, what matters more - so-called professionalism or a personal approach?
On the other hand, I wonder if we are seeing where the modern interpretation of 'professionalism' gets us when we read that a rigid adherence to operational guidelines may have contributed to the death of a woman whom the emergency services took over five hours to remove from the well she had fallen down.
Please give a full name and location when posting. Comments without this information may be deleted. Recommend:
The problem with all of these situations is that operational guidelines remove the humanity of those following them.
ReplyDeleteI've been in discussions where people in medical or allied professions, say that they regret their inability to pray or to offer prayer for fear of being subjected to discriminatory allegations or disciplinary proceedings. Something seems to be missing from this argument, the moral courage needed to be a Christian (or any faith) and to live up to the ideals of the faith.
Worst of all, is the posturing of those who make such rules or decisions, they claim to be doing it on the basis of equality, but in reality are acting from a sense of narrow secularism and detachment. I wonder if they're often on the front line dealing with life-preserving situations that you know are hopeless and that only God's intervention may help. I suspect never.
It's time for a national debate on whether we want, these faceless administrators running our lives or whether we want to restore our humanity and compassion to the centre of all that we do.
By what right can you assume that anyone would want your prayers? Presumably you would respect someone's wishes if they were to say, please do not pray.
ReplyDeleteIn what situations would you feel it appropriate to say, your situation is so desperate that my sensitivities as a believer override yours as a non-believer? And if they are not able to say anything, why would you make assumptions about their wishes?
What is wrong, when all practical help has been given and all that is left is to wait, with praying silently? Or did Jesus say that whenever you pray you should do so in such a way that it is clear to all around that you are praying?
Rob, these are pertinent questions, albeit phrased in a rather bellicose manner!
ReplyDeleteMy point is that such things as prayers for the dying are surely matters of common sense and common humanity. They don't need to be - and I might suggest in a truly 'civil' society shouldn't ought to be - matters of written codes and legalistic regulations, as they increasingly seem to have become.
If someone wants to pray because that is the best they can do, then they are expressing their humanity, not 'exercising their rights'.
And, incidentally, in my experience it takes a good deal of guts to ask to pray for someone, in any circumstances.
John - your problem is that when anyone dares to disagree with you it is seen by you as bellicose.
ReplyDeleteRob made the terribly sensible (and actually very gospel) suggestion that, "when all practical help has been given and all that is left is to wait, with praying silently? Or did Jesus say that whenever you pray you should do so in such a way that it is clear to all around that you are praying?"
All you can do is ignore it, become characteristically self righteous, and accuse him of being bellicose?
Andrew Godsall, Exeter
Rob, you say "By what right can you assume that anyone would want your prayers?"
ReplyDeleteI think we might equally say "By what right can we assume that anyone would want us to call an ambulance?" ...or to help them in any way at all. If somebody is very seriously injured we do not hesitate to call upon medical staff to remove them bodily to where they will be best cared for. Indeed, we would be commended for doing the best we can for them... except that prayer is also the best we can for them!
Imogen Taylor. Derby
Rob,
ReplyDeleteI can understand that someone who doesn't believe in God would condider prayer a pointless exercise however I don't see how their sensitivities are hurt in this situation. I would have thought it safe to assume that a fellow human being in desperate straits would want concern and compassion and would understand that prayer is a natural expression of care from a believer and appreciate the thought/desire to help whether or not he/she shares those beliefs.
Elizabeth Bridcut
Wirral
Why is it that you ignore Rob's excellent conclusion: "What is wrong, when all practical help has been given and all that is left is to wait, with praying silently? Or did Jesus say that whenever you pray you should do so in such a way that it is clear to all around that you are praying?"
ReplyDeleteIsn't Matthew 6:v5 and 6 pertinent?
Andrew Godsall, Exeter
I think great care is needed when using emotive stories such as these as the basis for how public servants should behave. On my first reading of this post I was reminded of C.S. Lewis’ injunction (via the mouth of Aslan in several of the Narnian Chronicles) that we should not concern ourselves with what ‘would have been’. No one was disciplined for praying, so why worry about something that didn’t happen (esp. in light of Matt 6:34)? In a sense it can be seen as placing a stumbling block in your readers’ way, when the path is clear.
ReplyDeleteThat aside, the real issue is for whom do public services exist? I have heard and read similar concerns about Christians not being able to express their faith in the course of their public office. This results in a fairly predictable response from some Christian quarters – that Christians are being persecuted and marginalised. First and foremost, leaving imaginary incidents concerning horrific racist crimes to one side, given most people work 35-40 hours a week, there are plenty of opportunities to express one’s Christian faith in one’s own time outside of work. But for some reason some Christians (and members of other faiths) feel they have a right to steal their employer’s time.
I think what is needed is to turn this on its head and think about such situations from another perspective. What if (God forbid) you were hit by a lorry while out running and a devout Muslim ambulance driver decided to pray with you; would that be acceptable? Or a Jehovah’s Witness or Hare Krishna? Or what if you weren’t a Christian – being either a person of another faith or no faith, were incapacitated because of trauma, and against your will had someone praying over you - in essence a species of abuse. More importantly I think we also have to ask for whose benefit is this desire for prayer? Would it be for the person who has suffered the trauma or for the benefit of the person doing the praying?
These are all thorny issues and therefore why it is better just to keep public services generic and ‘professional’. From a social work perspective (one of the several strings to my bow) praying with a client would be rightly seen as very unprofessional; however ensuring a client was able to have her/his spiritual, religious and cultural needs met would be an essential. i.e. altho’ as a public servant one cannot impose or even practice one’s religion with a client, one can advocate for the client to practice his/her religion. In the main this is what public services do and therefore there is little evidence to suggest religion is being marginalised... Except, perhaps, in the minds of those seeking the inverted pride of paranoia bordering on delusion.
As for where ‘professionalism gets us’ – exceptions aren’t rules! And there is no doubt about the fact professionalism has saved more lives than one unfortunate incident. Moreover, if it wasn’t for ‘professionalism’ it is likely there would not have been an inquiry and the matter would have been neatly swept under the carpet – as no doubt happened in the past. Given the BBC story doesn’t really tell us what the issues were, with any clarity, it is hard to comment on this specific case – whatever, it is certain ‘professionalism’ has meant we live in a far safer world than we did even a few decades ago.
What I find particularly interesting about this post is that two incidents are used as a basis for having a ‘dig’ at the modern world; a world that has made our chances of surviving an accident far greater or suffering violence far less than a century ago. It is curious because the focus of the blame is humanity and its structures. God gets off scot free! Perhaps that is the real purpose of much of the modern day preoccupation (particularly among the religiously inclined) with scoffing at modern society? It is a peculiar state of affairs, that the better our lives get, the more some folk moan!
Peter Denshaw
London
Brilliant post Peter - thanks for such clear and well put wisdom.
ReplyDeleteAndrew Godsall, Exeter
Thank you for your detailed post, Peter. There is much I agree with though there are one are two points I'd like to raise.
ReplyDeleteOne thing is that personally I would indeed be grateful for the human concern being expressed if a Muslim/Hindu etc ambulance crew member prayed over me while waiting for help though I have radically different views about who God is and how we relate to Him. Similarly I would be grateful for the concern of an unbelieving crew member telling me I was going to be ok in an effort to comfort me despite my feeling that I was dying and would like someone to pray with me! It would be entirely professional of them to administer pain relief, make me as comfortable as possible and then simply sit back on their heels beside me waiting for help. I find people doing their best to go that extra mile to be kind to be just that - kind.
I appreciate your concern about people praying out loud more for their own benefit that anyone elses but assuming genuine motivation I find it hard to understand why praying over someone who is incapacitated without explicit consent is any more abusive than patting their hand and saying 'there, there'.
I quite agree that there is nothing wrong with praying silently and that prayer does not have to be out loud - the point is well made. Clearly if the person praying has reason to believe it will cause offense then he/she should emphatically not pray out loud. There can be benefit in praying out loud, however, in that the person prayed for can know that you are there and are praying. If it was me being prayed for I would be grateful for the sentiment in any case but, of course, would be especially comforted if the prayers were in line with my own faith.
I work in healthcare myself and I entirely agree that the primary role of the healthcare worker is the delivery of the care they are being paid to deliver. Indeed I would see it as part of Christian discipleship to have integrity in my use of my employer's time. We all take our whole selves with us into work, however, and I think there is a legitimate place for expressing your spirituality - whatever that is - within the workplace without abusing your position. Exactly how that tranlates into what is and isn't acceptable can sometimes be pretty obvious but isn't always.
Elizabeth Bridcut
Wirral
Elizabeth
ReplyDeleteThanks for this... Obviously a comment on someone’s blog is not really the vehicle to fully state one’s views; even I was a little dubious about some of my comment because there wasn’t really the space to develop ideas. I have spent a good portion of my working life in social care. I am certain a good deal of the tutting and clucking of those who believe religion, belief and spirituality are pushed out of public services is made by those who have little firsthand experience of daily life in a hospital or similar environment. Similarly faiths are not hermetically sealed from each other. There is dialogue and many people of faith realise they have more in common with someone of a different faith than someone with no faith.
I remember a case where I was desperately trying to get a man home to die. He was a young Muslim (32) man who had an advanced astrocytoma, but lived in a small flat with his wife and three children. There was no lift and conditions were cramped. In the end the only real option for discharge from hospital was the local hospice. After he died I met with his wife and apologised that there wasn’t a specifically Muslim palliative care unit in the area (which is surprising, given they lived in Tower Hamlets!). The hospice where he died had once been run by RC nuns and although now a ‘regular’ hospice, still had good deal of RC trappings (statues, the Angelus rung at noon, daily mass etc.) and a few of the remaining nuns still pottered about the place. The man’s wife said that she was just pleased that her husband had been cared for in a place where there was ‘faith’, because at least this meant others knew how important their faith was to the dying man and his family. This conversation really changed the way I looked on the rather partisan and paternalistic way in which ‘spirituality’ and religion can be understood by social care professionals.
I have written and presented several training seminars for social work and nursing staff around religion. I noted that it was ironic that so many social care professionals find it easy to talk to patients and clients about personal and intimate matters and yet rarely talked about a person’s spiritual needs, even though all care plans have space for such a discussion. e.g. in a care plan you might find a whole page on someone’s personal hygiene or dietary needs and then ‘RC’ or ‘CofE’ or ‘Muslim’ or ‘Jewish’ being the only thing written in the ‘religious needs’ section. You and I both know that it is a myth (and sadly a myth reinforced and perpetuated in some Christian circles – particularly those who enjoy the conceit of petty martyrdom) that religion and belief is expunged from public services and their provision. Alas, one of the main hurdles for its inclusion is the inability of staff to adequately discuss faith in assessments.
Yet as professionals the emphasis should be on advocating for people’s needs rather wading in with one’s own beliefs. Or worse using religion as a means of avoiding obligations (I was once visiting a nursing home and came across a resident who had had a grand mal seizure, had come out of her wheelchair and was on the floor – beside her was an African care worker knelt in prayer at her side... Fine some might say, but no attempt had been made to make the woman safe; such prayer, without fulfilling common sense obligations could have easily resulted in the resident’s injury or even death. The care worker was soundly chastised by her manager – and rightly so!). I think the real issue is ‘for whom are you doing this?’ i.e. whose needs are being fulfilled by the desire to make displays of religion in the workplace? As you note there is nothing wrong with silent prayer – but I think that is as far as it can go, particularly when working with vulnerable people or people who aren’t always in the position (thro’ incapacity or power differences) to say ‘no’...
Peter Denshaw
London