A Tolkien poem helps a nurse understand the ravages of dementia

'Not all who wander are lost.'

Helen Cowan

Helen is a registered nurse and freelance writer, writing for audiences ranging from the general public to practitioners and scientists.

An elderly woman wearing headphone looks up and to the side with a big smile.

Playlist for Life

Not all who wander are lost.

Often written on a care home wall, on an inspirational poster, these words are usually set against a forest background, or compass, for added effect. They have also been used as the title of a conference paper discussing so-called smart trackers for people with dementia, whilst, Not all who wander need be lost is the title of a concise guide to navigating the heartbreaking challenges when a loved one is diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease or other dementia.

As a care home nurse for more than ten years, I have seen residents wander - not lost but “walking with purpose”, as it is sometimes known in the caring community. “Nobody gets up and walks without a reason,” says Suzanne Mumford, Care UK's Head of Nursing, Care and Dementia; perhaps they are easing pain, or boredom, or looking for something that they can’t describe. I remember residents exploring, enquiring into self-made mysteries solvable only by themselves, examining everything from door handles to another resident’s buttons, even escaping with surprising speed. Walking with them, often in silence, can bring a sense of relief, comfort and companionship.

What I didn’t know was that this is a quotation from a poem by JRR Tolkien, published in The Fellowship of the Ring seventy years ago. The actual line is - “Not all those who wander are lost”.

All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost;
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by the frost.

From the ashes a fire shall be woken,
A light from the shadows shall spring;
Renewed shall be blade that was broken,
The crownless again shall be king.”

We first hear this poem in Chapter Ten of Book One, as Frodo reads it in the postscript of a letter from Gandalf. As I read it, the imagery of being lost, withered, frost-bitten, in darkness, burned and broken, speaks something, in poetic picture language, of the ravages of dementia, the harrowing losses, the valley of tears. It brings to mind residents unaware of familiar objects or surroundings, looking straight through loved ones without a flicker of recognition, losing also language, continence, mobility and the ability to swallow.

The TV presenter Fiona Philips recalled an agonising decline in her mother as she succumbed to Alzheimer’s, describing how, in the final stages, her mother “spent whole chunks of time just sitting and staring ahead, only able to give out a series of sounds”. Fiona herself now lives with dementia. “'It’s devastated my family and it’s the biggest health and social care challenge we face as a country,” she says.

I once interviewed retired doctor Jennifer Bute, who lives with dementia. She talked of time travel (perceiving herself as living in a time from her past); disorientation to place and person; frightening hallucinations when old memories are seemingly ‘unlocked’; and ‘emotional unzipping’ when agitation and anxiety increase, often in the late afternoon or evening in something poorly understood as a symptom, known as ‘sundowning’.

Yet there is something more to this poem – each of the pains has a promise – not all who wander are lost; the old that is strong does not wither; and, most poignantly, deep roots are not touched by the frost. In dementia, it is true that deep roots are untouched, that an enduring aspect of a person’s identity never truly withers, though it may be mostly unseen. Something remains. Oliver Sacks the famous neurologist emphasised that, even in the late stages of Alzheimer’s, the person is still ‘alive inside’ (the inspiring documentary with this title is recommended). In stunning real-life stories, he has shown how music appears to ‘call back the self’, awakening moods, memories and thoughts that had seemingly been lost. He refers to music’s extraordinary ‘neural robustness’ and describes one man, unable to tie his tie or find his way to the stage, yet able to perform a perfect piano solo. In one life-affirming, must-watch, tear-jerking video, gospel music was shown to enliven, calm, focus and engage a man simply known as Henry.

Watch Henry

Singing can “provide islands of arousal and awareness like nothing else can”, according to Alicia Clair, Professor of Music Therapy. I’ve seen singing bring the person into the present for a passing moment, illuminating a face that seemed far away. One otherwise-silent lady completed the chorus of ‘Daisy, Daisy’ before descending into dementia again. Others have laughed, clapped, danced, embraced and even shed a silent tear during music therapy sessions, when music elicits memory. Doll therapy meanwhile has sometimes restored and revealed a sense of nurture, purpose, care and pride, with residents feeding their new friend before accepting their own food, folding its clothes and taking care of it cradled in their arms. Though it divides opinion, a doll can preserve dignity if it de-escalates agitation or engagement in physical or verbal abuse; a sense of dignity also comes from the person being able momentarily to give care rather than receive it.

“From the ashes a fire shall be woken, A light from the shadows shall spring; Renewed shall be blade that was broken,” continues Tolkien's poem, and, though not the original intention, these powerful images of renewal and restoration paint a picture of something known as “paradoxical lucidity”, or unexpected cognitive lucidity and communication in some patients with severe dementia, especially around the time of death (though sometimes long before).

Anecdotes are recorded of “unexpected, spontaneous, meaningful, and relevant communication or connectedness in a patient who is assumed to have permanently lost the capacity for coherent verbal or behavioral interaction due to a progressive and pathophysiologic dementing process”. Some scientists are seeing them as a paradigm shift in the understanding and perhaps even treatment of dementia. I will never forget when a woman in the late stages of dementia, with little spoken language, was brought back to the nursing home weeks after hospital admission; she had been perilously ill. With bright eyes, she took my arm and, as if the mist had cleared for a moment, spoke warmest words of thanks to me for helping her on the day she collapsed. In another fleeting and irreproducible moment, a lady wished me happy birthday, before continuing her silent walk around the home. Witnessing such an event is ethically and emotionally transformative.

The concept of remaining ‘alive inside’ even when abilities, language and memory are eroded by dementia is taken to the next level in Christianity, which teaches that life continues even after death itself. The Bible speaks of new life beyond the grave; the fire shall be woken, a light shall spring. And there will be a crown (and the gold will glitter). The Crown of Life is referred to, being bestowed upon "those who persevere under trials." Dementia is one of life’s severest trials; a cross to bear. In the 1912 hymn “The Old Rugged Cross”, another cross is spoken of, being the cross of Christ at his crucifixion. Clinging to that cross, living out a Christian life, the hymnwriter wrote of “exchanging the cross for a crown” at life’s end. After ashes, hope awaits the Christian.

Playlist for Life is a charity encouraging people to create playlists for people living with dementia.

Playlist for Life

Article

Assisted dying

Comment

Life & Death

23 May 2024

5 min read

The careless conflation of independence, autonomy and dignity

As Jersey begins to legalise assisted dying, there’s keyword confusion.

Henna Cundill

Henna is a researcher with the Centre for Autism and Theology at the University of Aberdeen.

A elderly women in a care home stands and places her hands on the shoulders of a seated woman.

Eberhard Grossgasteiger on Unsplash.

Reviewing Canada’s legislation on assisted dying, one anonymously authored article raises the concern: “Does it make dying with dignity easier than living with dignity?” This insightful question cuts to the centre of the debate: dignity. Or more particularly, the unwitting conflation of dignity with independence, and of independence with autonomy.

As Jersey becomes the first place in the British Isles to begin the process of legalising assisted dying, I feel that we should listen carefully as to how and where these terms are being used, both in the formal debate, and in the commentary that surrounds it. The States Assembly in Jersey voted to allow the development of assisted dying legislation for those with six months to live (or twelve months if their condition is neurodegenerative). A second vote to make assisted dying available more broadly to those who experience conditions that entail “unbearable suffering” was defeated by a narrower margin. Reading the flurry of press releases that followed the vote, these keywords, autonomy, independence, and dignity, are everywhere. But are we really thinking about what these words communicate?

People in positions of wealth and power have more independence and autonomy, more choices and freedoms, but it is we who ascribe dignity to those in that position.

The word dignity comes from the Latin word dignus, meaning ‘worthy’, and this is still the primary definition given to the English word dignity today. The OED has it as “the quality of being worthy or honourable”, immediately followed by reference to “honourable or high estate”. If this is so, then dignity is not something that can be bought, nor assumed – it is a status conferred upon someone by the esteem in which other people hold them. The haughtiest person in the world can still be esteemed undignified, as can the richest. Moreover, the opposite is also true: we are never prevented from conferring dignity upon, and esteeming the worthiness of, those who live the humblest of lives.

And yet, if we are honest with ourselves – do many of us not quietly associate the idea of becoming rich and powerful with becoming dignified? Do we not tend to assume the worthiness of those in high office – at least until we meet them and realise pretty quickly that they all put their trousers on one leg at a time, the same as the rest of us. This association happens because we have such a tendency to conflate dignity with independence (the ability to live without assistance from others) and autonomy (the ability to make one’s own decisions, and not have those decisions limited or interfered with). People in positions of wealth and power have more independence and autonomy, more choices and freedoms, but it is we who ascribe dignity to those in that position. It is society who sees the autonomy of those in high status, and esteems it as dignified.

Does this not unwittingly suggest that choosing to live in a state of extreme dependence on palliative care is, by implication, undignified?

Repeatedly ancient wisdom, in the bible, warns us not to assume that dignity comes with the freedom of wealth or power. All the great ‘heroes’ of that book suffer their indignities. Fresh from the success of his Ark project, Noah gets drunk and exposes himself. Elated from a victory against an enemy, King David dances half-naked through the streets. These are just two examples of the catalogue of embarrassments and mishaps that beset nearly all the kings and leaders whose stories are told as part of the Christian story. One after another, they stumble and struggle with life and leadership. The apostle Paul explains that this is because God uses the foolish things of this world to shame human pride, “for even the foolishness of God is still wiser than human wisdom.” Therefore, Paul argues, God chooses to speak to us through the weak and the lowly things and people of this world. Never was this demonstrated so clearly as when Jesus was born in a draughty stable, lived a life of poverty, and died a criminal’s death on a cross.

But what has all this to do with the debate over assisted dying? Well, I am struck by how often the idea of losing one’s independence (through disabling or terminal illness) is conflated with losing one’s dignity, and so dying through personal choice (autonomy) is presented as regaining it. One campaign group that speaks to this debate even calls itself ‘Dignity in Dying’ – but does this not unwittingly suggest that choosing to live in a state of extreme dependence on palliative care is, by implication, undignified?

Independence is not possible for everybody, or not possible to the same degree. And dignity? Well, dignity is possible for anyone.

The Dean of Jersey, the Very Reverend Mike Keirle, has spoken of his concern that the change in legislation will make vulnerable people feel pressured to end their lives. Examples from Canada, where physician assisted dying is already available, show that his concern is not unfounded. In 2022, Canadian veteran and Paralympian Christine Gauthier phoned her caseworker to chase up the over-due installation of her new wheelchair ramp. She then describes how she was horrified to find herself being advised to consider assisted dying instead.

"It is remotely just what they're doing,” says Gauthier, “exhausting us to the point of no return. […] I was like, 'Are you serious?' Like that easy, you're going to be helping me to die but you won't help me to live?"

Gauthier is not alone – she spoke out when she learned that four other Canadian veterans had reported similar experiences. In these unhappy moments, one can see how dangerous the assumption can be – the assumption that no one would want to live a life of needing help. Here are disabled people who do want to live, and this assumption, this careless conflation of independence, autonomy, and dignity, leaves them fighting for their right to do so. Why should anyone have to fight or even speak for their right not to commit suicide? It is little wonder that disabled actress, Liz Carr, describes assisted dying legislation as “terrifying” for disabled people.

I respect that there are terminally ill people, and those who love them, who speak from a desire to end their suffering; it is clear that people on all sides of the debate need to have this difficult and emotionally charged conversation. But whatever the eventual outcome in terms of legislation, we must be careful that it is not based on careless assumptions, or on the conflation of one thing with an entirely different other. Independence is not possible for everybody, or not possible to the same degree. And dignity? Well, dignity is possible for anyone – it is a state that can be conferred whenever, and upon whomever society chooses to confer it. Autonomy is the matter in question – we are talking about autonomy in dying. And whatever happens, we should by no means legislate in a way that leaves disabled people esteemed unworthy, left open to the indignity of fighting for their right to live.