When we flame
Betweens are fire
We become real
When we flame
:- Doug.

Our atmosphere, G*d is
Fog & oxygen
Welcome & iciness
Expanses electrons fly through
Living spaces all about
We are—only—our betweens
:- Doug.
Betweens are the locus of being. We get our being from meeting, which creates many betweens. With two people one between, with three, four, with four, eleven, and so forth. The possibilities expand beyond exponentially.
:- Doug.
Start the change before the presentation: state the title as question.
:- Doug.
Only I can do me
You and only you can do you
Together, irreplaceable under the sun
:- Doug.
There is another image coming for me today: retirement, our own later years, turning them purposely toward bringing family closer together. We work and play with these our family members, children, grandchildren, sister, brother, individually and together. With renewed intention we move toward interweaving our lives with one another. This certainly starts bringing my practice into my life and my life into my practice.
:- Doug.
There is something we have in common in our professional practices—every one we meet—without exception—is growing older—closer to death—and we notice. And we can help. Is death a negative experience? It can be. But mainly it just is.
:- Doug.
I am not the expert. I am not here to teach you anything. You are the experts. You will teach—and invent me and each other.
:- Doug.
There are at least two ways to get from here to there—we can slog through the slough—or we can jump from stone to stone.
:- Doug.
Much financial planning these days is grounded in an unstated end game of self sufficiency. It’s all about me. We will not rely upon our children in our retirement, we will do what we want. We will not even involve our children. This is moving counter to the direction of humanity which is itself coming together, toward community from lone stranger among us. Do we really want to be the me generation? Is it our highest and best?
:- Doug.
Met a medical resident who seemed wise beyond his years. He said the conversation is difficult because sometimes the patient rejects the conversation. Is it done as simply as to say, He wouldn’t go any further? Does it absolve your professional and personal responsibility? Or simply apply a salve?
:- Doug.
Who as the responsibility to call this conversation about end of life? Parent or child? Lawyer or client? Doctor or patient? How do we decide? Whoever has the larger view? Whoever can see the harm from not having the conversation? Whoever is most willing? Whoever is most scared of it? This is humanity—whoever has the most love?
:- Doug.
Conversation asks these questions: 1. What information can we exchange? 2. What fellow feeling can we exchange? These are the simplest levels where we tend to stop. But there are more: 3. How can we respond? What more is possible now? What can we dream? 4. Who can we invent us to be together? 5. Who can we find and invent our very selves to be?
:- Doug.
Have you ever met anyone else whose work is elder conversations? These conversations run the range from how to live well within the budget and family we have, to how to live the last chapter of our lives. They often get profound. For instance, when it comes your turn to die, where would you want to be, and with whom?
:- Doug.
When we have very little to say, each word becomes both more important and less. More because we have to make each count. Less because the precise words are not important, only the heart of them.
:- Doug.