Total First World Problem

I'm sure I'm not the only one who sits and casually daydreams about the places she'd like to go if given the opportunity. I would love to go to the British Isles, New Zealand, and Alaska. Those three destinations have always held a place in my travel dreams; Iceland has been sneaking onto the list lately, too. One place I never really saw myself going or even considered in the running really was Japan. I have nothing against Japan, but it wasn't on my radar at all. Until recently that is.

Whoa there, Goat! Don't pack your bags yet.

My brother in law and his family are stationed at Okinawa. It looks like they might stay there indefinitely. About a year ago, my brother in law asked my husband when we were going to visit. I thought he was joking. He clearly didn't understand how little a teacher in Montana makes if he thought we could just pop off and skip over the Pacific. But he's not joking. In the last month, it came up a third time. I'm feeling pressured a bit to say yes even though I know the money isn't really there. While I have my list of destinations, so does my husband. Japan is on his list.

Yes, Kermit. That's a darn good imitation of my husband's reaction if we went.

You see, his father was in the military, Air Force to be exact. My husband lived several years in Spain growing up before the family got transferred stateside. When his dad eventually got orders for Japan, he said he'd take my husband, too. Instead, he divorced my mother in law and left for Japan alone. My husband was about 12 at the time. Old enough to remember the heartbreak of being cast off. Believe it or not, this isn't the only pressure to make the trip although it is the most emotionally persuasive.

Apparently the sushi are excited at this possibility. 

They won't be after I gobble them up!

My instinct was to say no, and I did. More than once I repeated that we simply couldn't swing $4-4500 dollars just for tickets. Then there's the cost of touristy things and meals out and souvenirs...we just don't have that kind of moolah to spend especially when we just bought a new car and have renovations to finish on our house. That's when my in law started offering to pay for our tickets.

That's right, NPH. He made that offer.

This seemed overwhelmingly generous and honestly, very tempting. If he pays the ticket and we stay with him, it's a no brainer, right? Not really. I'm socially awkward anyway, and I think this would be the most socially awkward trip I've ever taken. I just don't know this in law and his wife that well. I do know that we have opposing views on religion, politics, and education. Does my insurance cover overseas emergency care for when I bite my tongue too many times and it just gives up and leaps from my mouth in surrender?

WTH is this? 

I suppose this could be my tongue asking someone to have mercy on it.

When the topic of a visit came up again, I looked into prices for tickets. I just feel really uncomfortable accepting such an enormous gift from people I don't really know even if they are family. Tickets had come down some. Lowest I found was $1900. My brother in law thought he could find tickets for about $800. Say what? Do Marines have access to a flight list other than a C-130 that offers huge discounts overseas? I still do not have confirmation on this price, but I did see tickets at $1500 last night.

That's right, Fugu. I would totally eat you at that price.

As I run over all the pros and cons in my head, I of course started to ask friends what they would do. One of the primary reactions is the YOLO response. Her exact words were, "Only one precious life, right?" Another friend said that the location alone bears a lot of consideration as we'd likely never consider it otherwise. OK, so let's say we seize the day and go. What does that look like?

Fine, Buffy. You're the wise Slayer after all.

We'd get to see the family including two nephews I don't know well. My husband would get to fulfill an item on his bucket list; me, too actually. My bucket list does have "Get off the North American continent at least once".  Experiencing another culture including museums, beaches, restaurants, the Peace Memorial, singing karaoke in an actual Japanese bar...I could go on I suppose. My sister's kids would be intensely jealous as well. They are quite into Japanese snacks and entertainment. It could be the YOLO trip of our lives.

Thanks, Dumbledore. I'll keep that in mind. Also, wet blanket much?

What's holding me back from going full gusto besides my socially awkward and deeply cynical nature? I don't like accepting a gift of that monetary amount from anyone. I'd be uncomfortable taking that from my own parents even especially since I know they can't afford it. One friend suggested that we make an agreement to pay back the tickets in a specified time frame. I don't know if that'd fly with this fellow (again with the not knowing him thing), but it's a thought. We could split the cost--we pay one way, they pay the other. Even that is a chunk we could put toward the house renovation though. I manage our finances and I know that we barely get by as it is, so forking over any money for a luxury trip like this is a daunting ask. Of course, we do have an additional tax refund that should show up sometime in the near future. It would cover our tickets, but we had earmarked that for other things like Alaska and continuing ed credits and house repairs. Besides, it's not a good idea to spend the money before you have the money. *sigh* No easy answers there.

Yes, Mr. Maguire. On this we agree.

We also need to settle on when we'd go. June-November is monsoon/tsunami season. I know--I went to Nebraska and Kansas during the tornado season more than once and survived. Millions of Japanese have survived countless monsoons and even tsunamis. We probably could, too. I really want to visit beaches and try out snorkeling; these are things that are not companionable with the storm season. If you don't know, Jun-August would be right when it's most convenient for both of us to take a trek over the ocean. During the school year is tough, and I don't relish the thought of travel at Christmas. I don't think we could save up enough by then anyway. If we played it smart, we could get our passports back from expired and probably save some walking around money. But why won't this knot in my gut go away?

Looks about right.

It's simple. In this relationship, I'm not the risk-taker. I'm the have-a-plan-and-be-responsible-with-your-choices one. If you believe astrology, that is exactly opposite of what we should be. He's a taurus and I'm a gemini. More evidence against astrology.

Cat on a PB&J in space still more believable than the zodiac.

Despite my misgivings, I've already started a plan: sell the truck, sell that beast of a camper, sell some clothes on the garage sale app, stop eating out, stop spending so much on alcohol (it's not much, but it adds up), and ask family and friends for prepaid VISA cards or deposits to a trip savings account instead of presents for anniversary, birthdays, and Christmas. Shit. It's becoming possible. Now I just need to find a class to work on that social awkwardness issue.

 Got any advice on that one, Moose?

Don't Say a Little Prayer for Me

I've written about prayer before. Then, I was still of the mindset that prayer filled a role in people's lives and perhaps even my own. However, I no longer see a purpose for it in my life. I don't have evidence of it ever working for me no matter who I prayed to. Furthermore, if circumstances changed after I prayed, I could see another logical explanation completely unrelated to my prayer. Honestly, I'd really like it everyone who prays for me would stop.

That's not what I meant, Goat. Get out of the road. Seriously, don't stop. Keep moving.

Last week I was discussing matters of the spiritual with my long time friends over what one of them deemed a "Friendcation". I brought up the story of my godfather and the "Your grandmother prayed every day for you to return to the church" and his assurance that he too hopes I will return one day. I stated that I'd much rather look at the situation as love me as I am or pray for me. I do see this as a choice between the two. One of my friends felt that permission was something her mother felt was important for prayer. The other thought that loving the way I am and praying for me don't have to be completely separate. In this case, I do.

Separation: Not just for eggs anymore.

One reason is because it's a bit like the addage "love the sinner, not the sin". Either way, the person is telling the other that he/she is a sinner. In this case, it's an "I love you, but not this part of you. Could you maybe change that?" Not really unconditional love there. Furthermore, prayer is usually to alleviate someone's suffering. So if someone prays for an alleviation of my lupus symptoms, OK. Can't stop you, but it's really pointless because proper management is the only way to alleviate that suffering. However, to pray for me to return to the church is not praying for an end to my suffering because trust me--not suffering over that choice. It's really praying to change who I am. That's not real good prayer in my view. Not only that, people who pray this way are not really praying to alleviate someone else's suffering, they are praying to alleviate their own suffering over someone else's life choice. Perhaps instead they should be praying for the understanding and acceptance rather than trying to change me or whoever they are praying for.

Thanks, RDJ. That means a lot.

In studying Wicca, it was important to obtain someone's permission before doing any spellwork for them. I see spellwork as an elaborate and full of intention type of prayer. Before I performed spellwork for someone, I asked. I thought it was polite and I respected if the other person declined. I would appreciate if others showed me the same respect. I suppose there's some of the ignorance is bliss in this notion. If they pray and don't tell me, how am I to know? I won't. I'd prefer they not do it at all, but if they must, just don't tell me. It won't impress me, make me feel better, or in anyway incur a sincere thank you. Just stop please.

By Jove! I hadn't thought of offering them cake! Well done, Doctor.

Over the years, I have prayed for others without permission. As a Catholic and then Methodist, I thought it was just something you did either to improve yourself or to improve the state of something/someone else. It was expected and accepted and respected, or so I thought. Now though, the point is lost on me and I do feel remorse for the prayers I ever said that were to change someone or were against their choice.

Oh, Hiddles. I'd forgive you just about anything.

 As we move forward, learn more, and become seekers of a path through this life, views and perceptions change. I've grown farther away from Christianity, others grow closer over time. You want to be a believer, I won't pray for you not to be and I won't interfere with your practice of your faith so long as it doesn't interfere with my rights. If only we could let those we love change and grow without trying to hide shame and judgement as prayer. Maybe we'll get there, but probably not in my lifetime.

You're right, Moose. The tough part is looking at myself and being sure to love them for who they are, too.

Prepare to be Unprepared

Chronic illnesses bring a host of changes and adjustments. Many of them seem reasonable and predictable: medications, therapies, lousy days, good days, remitting and relapsing flares. The list goes on. Some changes are not so predictable. Some of them you just shake your head and say, "Oh well." I've been pondering some of those changes that I was not (and you might not be) prepared for.

That's right, Goat. Just sit back for this list. Nice beard by the way.

Admitting it's time for a pill organizer
I must say, this is one I really wanted to avoid. However, in the last year, so many medications have been added, it's just easier to fill an organizer than to open each pill bottle individually every morning and every night. Of course, sometimes the organizer is too small, so you have to adjust which meds go in AM and which in PM. I had to move my dairy supplement and B vitamin to PM because with the over-sized alpha lipoic acid capsule, the AM wouldn't close. Moments like that you just get this sinking feeling of being officially sick. Gone are the days when I had a short list that was simple to manage.

 I do find taking them all in one swallow to be useful. 

Just get them all down without any sticking to your tongue is the goal.

Forgetting which side effect goes with which medication
You read the inserts the pharmacy gives you. You read about the medication online. You know what emergency side effect to look for until, you forget which is which. Sometimes you have so many prescription medications and have so many switches all at once, you get mixed up on which med causes what. Once in a while, you know that more than one med causes the same side effect. Your mind gets overwhelmed so that when you sit in one doctor's office and report a current malady, all you can say is, "One of my meds causes that." It's easy to lose track.

That's OK, Jay. I don't need that flashy thing to forget.

Speaking of side effects, weird ones happen
Migraine medications often come from classes of drugs used for seizures, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia. With these meds, you need to titrate to the correct level. Some even require titrate down before making a switch. Take my switch from Topamax to Lamictal. Topamax was awful and required gradual steps up and steps back down to avoid seizures. Lamictal requires a step up as well. What I wasn't prepared for when stepping up on the Lamictal was the nightmares and sleep paralysis. Holy crap! I've always had vivid dreams, but these nightmares scared the bejeezus out of me. Many of them required me to tell myself it was not real and to wake the fuck up. Lamictal also causes tremors or jerky movements that make you drop things, unexpectedly toss things, or flop your limbs around without meaning to.The Benlysta I'm on causes night sweats. Gee, thanks for that. I love soaking my sheets in the middle of the night while also being terrified of the girl whose face distorts into some sort of ghoul as she reaches to grab my hand. Good times.

Yup. Weirder than even whatever the hell is going on in this GIF.

Some side effects actually cause the symptoms of another condition
This seems totally counter-intuitive. However, it's fairly common. Take anti-inflammatory drugs even though you have Von Willebrands Disease so that people constantly ask you what you did to get the awful bruises that decorate your legs. Take this muscle relaxant for your fibromyalgia despite it causing considerable dry mouth to exacerbate your Sjogrens. Take this Benlysta for your lupus, but be warned it causes migraines, which you already have and the medications for it give you nightmares. You just can't win sometimes.

Yes, Doctor. It totally earns a massive head smack.

Instead of one doctor, you have a host of them
I currently have five doctors who treat the various conditions I have not including my eye doctor and dentist who also need to be informed of things. It gets problematic to get test results to everyone. Sometimes it takes three or four calls to get something faxed from one to another.  That's annoying, but not as annoying as reviewing your meds every time you see a doctor. Bear in mind, some of these doctors you see two or three times a year. Some work in the same medical facility, which means they have access to your record already. Sometimes you just want to shout at them all just to look at the updated last notation on the file and trust that the med list and allergy list are correct as is. Believe me, if I have a med change, I will notify you. When you ask, "Are there any med changes?" and I say no. Accept that rather than review the damn things anyway.

At least this is not one of my doctors.

You will get patronizing questions even from the best doctors 
When I say I had blisters on my scalp, I mean I had blisters on my scalp. One doctor who I trust implicitly asked me if I was sure they were blisters and not pimples. I replied that as someone who has had acne since puberty, I can tell the difference between blisters and pimples or ingrown hairs. When I say I'm tired a lot, I am tired a lot. It does not mean I have depression. It means I have lupus and migraines and I take Benlysta and Lamictal, which can cause insomnia. And oh yeah, sometimes I have nightmares from the Lamictal, which makes it difficult to get a good night's sleep. Without a good night's rest, I am tired the next day. It's not hard to figure out and please don't try to add another med to the mix especially one that I know will make me lose my libido or want to kill myself. Been there; done that. No thanks.

 If even Captain Obvious is rolling his eyes, you know something's not right.

You get Vacation Hangover

It does not matter how fantastic your trip was. You will come home and need recovery time. You may be brain-fogged out. You may get a migraine that puts you in bed. You may just need oodles of rest before you even think about unpacking. It blows. Accept it. Take care of you.

It will still make you Clint Eastwood grumpy, but take your time anyway.

You get sick of hearing how wonderful yoga is for everything

Don't get me wrong. I love starting my day with yoga. When my hip flexors are tight, only yoga works them out. However, when you tell someone that you have a condition like lupus, migraines, or fibromyalgia, yoga is the first thing they suggest/ask you if you've tried. Yoga is not a cure all. It does help, but lordy! Stop already. It's been around and been popular long enough everyone knows about its benefits.

Even Owl is tired of hearing about it.

There you have it. I may need to add to this list later, but these are the ones that made the list so far. These are the things that make you crazy when you think about them and cause you to knit your brow. It's all just part of life with chronic conditions. 

OK, Moose. I'll try to remember that.

photo from Northwest Trek

Harm None

Under the study of the Wiccan Rede, those who follow the path shall "do what ye will so long as it harms none." When I first read that idea, I thought to myself that it was a type of Golden Rule. It also made it even clearer to me that we should live our lives according to our values, but if those values harm others, they were no longer moral. Depending on how far you extend this idea, you may be vegan or you may practice other dietary restrictions or you may use certain herbal medication in place of prescriptions because of unforeseen side effects of the traditional treatment. You may become a healer or psychologist to help others. The guiding rule: always endeavor to help, not harm.

I don't think that's what it means, Goat.

The Rede has been knocking around in my noggin a lot this week as the Catholic Church set forth an edict that the communion host shall not be gluten free. My first instinct when I read that was, "What about my aunt and cousins?" and "How can they in good conscience withhold the host, which is a large part of the religious practice, due to a medical condition?" As it turns out, they did--thanks to some nuns and consulting physicians--develop a host that is really low gluten and safe for most people with celiac disease. The key word in that idea being most. I know that one of my cousins has such significant reactions, she gets hospitalized if she's exposed to gluten. When she was young, she had just been diagnosed and on a family vacation, she and her siblings were allowed to choose road snacks. She chose licorice. Well, in licorice, there happens to be wheat, which caused her to go into seizures and subsequently an emergency room. That makes me suspect that perhaps the "mostly" gluten free host would not be gluten free enough for her.

Me either, Indigo.

I posted an article about this ruling online and received some information from a college acquaintance who happens to be quite devout. She provided some really good information. I asked the question about accommodating the wine for people who are alcoholics, but not gluten free host. In the article she shared, "Why the Catholic Church Frowns Upon Gluten Free Communion Wafers" by Barbara Stepko, it told the story of how the low gluten host came to be and the reason behind it. While I knew the why (because Jesus' bread at the last supper was wheat, therefore the communion must also contain wheat), I was not aware that the alternate wine also contained some alcohol. She also posted from The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops "Celiac Disease, Alcohol Intolerance, And The Church's Pastoral Response"  about mustum (sounds a little too like sputum), the grape juice provided for alcoholics or the like. The fermentation has begun, but has been suspended so the alcohol content is less than 1%. 1% is far less than Nyquil (10%) or Listerine (26.9%). Honestly, I thought the alternate wine was just juice, no fermentation at all. I was wrong. So again, they accommodate, but only so far because of religious doctrine.

Do you think "a little bit" is enough, John?

This person I was discussing with said that the Catholic Church is a very old institution and it is slow to change. Yes, I agree. Apparently so slow to change that even in the face of potentially harming its followers, it will cling to formulas that they think Christ would have used. Formulas based on historical evidence I would imagine. To be honest, insisting on a certain amount to be valid just adds to the whole "magic" of transubstantiation. Transubstantiation is the belief that the host and wine actually become the body and blood of Christ. Can I get an "Ew!" Let's be clear: this belief says it must have this ingredient and stored in a certain way, the priest must say specific words while holding hands over the items, and then BAM! Body and blood. To a Wiccan, that sounds an awful lot like magic. Of course, I'm sure members of the church would be up in arms at that. But, let's be real. It's magic.

Only with less sparkle.

While this acquaintance of mine from college (a Catholic college btw) stuck to her guns that because the church is old, because it thoughtfully considered and made accommodations they didn't need to, and that most celiac or alcohol intolerant folks can take this offering or not, that was good enough. Personally, the church has exerted enough control of faithful followers. I think they should back off and stop interfering with people's autonomy and medical decisions that belong between patient and doctor. In the Stepko article, it does say that if you're concerned talk to your doctor. Ya think? Of course I'm gonna talk to my doctor rather than just take the church's doctors' word for it that it's safe. The church doesn't have a really good track record on safety when it comes to their followers in my opinion.

Yes, Sir Paul. Do I have to remind you of the abuse scandal, the refusal to report because of confessional, or the refusal to marry LGBTQ members? Gah!

For example, the American Civil Liberties Union has brought and continues to bring suits against the church on behalf of women who have been denied reproductive services. The church does not believe in things like birth control, abortion, sterilization, and some fertility treatments. Women have been harmed by Catholic doctrine at hospitals they might to have known were Catholic run or maybe because it was a medical emergency, had no choice as that hospital was where the ambulance went. I don't believe that the Catholic Church has the medical interest of their faithful or those in need at all. Consider the case of Tamesha Means, a woman from Michigan who was taken to a Catholic hospital because she was suffering a miscarriage, bleeding horribly, and an in agony. They denied her services to deliver the baby via an abortion procedure. They sent her home and she developed a life-threatening infection that they didn't inform her of. Does that sound like doctors who have a patient's best interest and health in mind? No! It's doctors and nurses having to follow Catholic doctrine even when the patient isn't Catholic and might die.

They must have, Saul.

Another case in Michigan had a woman who was told she needed a tubal ligation to prevent further pregnancy due to a brain tumor. Another pregnancy would kill her. The Catholic hospital refused because of doctrine. Tubal ligation at the time of delivery is recommended because it's easiest on the woman. She wouldn't have to undergo another round of anesthetic and she wouldn't have to go to another hospital that may be unfamiliar. Maybe she lives in a rural area and the Catholic hospital is the only one available. In Illinois, a woman fell and knocked her IUD out of place. If an IUD is dislodged, it can create a painful and deadly (although preventable if given proper care) infection if it is not removed. You'd think that if the church is against birth control, they'd allow removal of such a device, but nope! They refused. These stories are shared on the ACLU's web site under "Catholic Church Denied These Women Critical Care. Now They're Speaking Out". Again, these hospitals put dogma before health. They put lives at risk. Tell me why I should trust their judgement on gluten free hosts?

The answer is easy, Jack.

I shouldn't.

Of interesting note, an article from The Humanist "Where 'First Do No Harm' Is Secondary: The Threat of Catholic Hospitals to Women's Health," details that doctors at Catholic hospitals report to the National Women's Law Center that women denied abortions due to ectopic pregnancy developed life-threatening ruptured fallopian tubes that ultimately had to be removed. Huh. So that means that due to Catholic rules, the women endured more pain, more anguish, and even sterilization (psst! Isn't that forbidden, too? Refuse one procedure and cause another prohibited one to happen only under threat of death?) because the doctors could not provide the medically necessary abortion. The woman's life was in peril. The baby was not even remotely going to live and yet, doctrine written by men said this was how it had to be.  The Catholic creed imposed on women and practiced by doctors violates the creed of physicians. How in the hell does this make sense to people?

Oh crap! Even the Evil Queen doesn't get it.

Oh. That's right. It's about money and power and control for the church as they seek to merge with more secular hospitals. Isn't avarice named as one of the deadly sins? More truth than poetry in that one, eh? According to The Washington Post, 1 in 6 hospital beds in America are now Catholic run. That means more women will be put at risk. They put children at risk. They put the communities at risk. They put LGBTQ followers at risk. Why in the hell should they be allowed to continue to sacrifice lives under the misguided notion of religious freedom?

In its defense, Sloth does everything slowly. I'm sure it'll understand eventually.

The Catholic News Agency ran a story "Is this Really About Women's Health? The ACLU's Latest Tiff with Catholic Hospitals". In it, the writer draws the conclusion that this whole issue is really just about trying to impose the practice of abortion on Catholics. It contains  quotation that if directives are properly followed, "there should be no compromise of the well-being of human beings." This is from the public policy director of the National Catholic Bioethics Center. So does that mean the church is faulting the doctors and nurses or the women themselves? This sounds like either throwing your staff under the bus or victim blaming. The argument leads to if you're not wanting to play by the Catholic rules, go somewhere else. Funny, that was the response from my online college pal. If the person does not want to risk the host and the wine, they can opt out. Never mind that in cases of emergency, the Catholic hospital may be the only one. Never mind that the Eucharist is an important pert of faith for many. Our way or the highway as the saying goes.

Geez, Mr. Wonka. When you put it that way...

And ye harm none, do what ye will. How is the Catholic Church not choosing yet again to harm their faithful? How can the faithful remain so in the face of the systemic harm? It's an ongoing struggle to harm none as an individual; however, I don't think being a centuries old institution is defense enough. They cry that they can't be forced to violate their conscience by making communion truly for everyone, by providing health services that go against their dogma, by reporting on abusers and criminals because of the sanctity of confession, by denying LGBTQ marriages. I simply do not see how the Catholic Church does not do more harm than good.

Yeah, Moose. Glad I walked away from it, too.