In palliative care, I often see that patients and families have a very fine sense of when something becomes too heavy. Sometimes they literally say: "Lets not talk about this right now." That is not unwillingness, but a form of self-care. What strikes me is how closely this resembles conversations about eating meat and animal suffering. There too, people quickly react: "this is getting to close."

Psychologists have long noted striking similarities in the defense mechanisms humans use when confronted with terrifying realities (Terror Management Theory), whether it is our mortality or the suffering of animals we consume.

How do we cope with death, and how do we cope with the meat paradox?

• Mind Denial: when faced with the idea of their own death, humans distance themselves to avoid their fear of their biological decay. Meat-eaters subconsciously strip farmed animals of their ability to suffer so they can consume them without guilt.
• Avoidance and Distancing to stave off anxiety, also relying on euphemisms.
• Projection and Rationalization: dismissing the reality of others to protect our own worldview.

When we look at the core of human and animal suffering, they are asking for fundamentally similar responses. They do not demand grand, complex solutions. Instead, they ask for basic relational needs, like Presence. Both dying humans and vulnerable animals ask us to stay with them and bear witness to their experience. They want safety and comfort. They ask for a reduction of suffering. Whether it is alleviating physical pain in a hospice setting or eliminating cruelty in farming. The request is for an environment free from unnecessary torment. And further: Dignity and Respect. Dying people want to be remembered for their life's meaning, not reduced to a medical condition. Farmed animals ask to be recognized as sentient beings whose lives have intrinsic value.

Exploring these parallels allows us to confront our deepest fears and align our actions with our core values of compassion and empathy.