Life After: In-Depth Review and Summary of the 2025 Film | Roger Ebert’s Insights

Reid Davenport is a talented filmmaker living with cerebral palsy. He uses a wheelchair and is part of what he calls the Disability New Wave in filmmaking. His films explore what it means to be disabled, focusing on how society often views those with disabilities—often through lenses of pity, discrimination, and misunderstanding.

His latest documentary, “Life After,” takes a deeper look at these themes, building on the personal storytelling found in his previous work, “I Didn’t See You There.” “Life After” mixes traditional documentary techniques with storytelling, even incorporating a mystery about Elizabeth Bouvia, a notable figure with disabilities. While some techniques may feel distracting, the film remains impactful, shedding light on the political and social issues that surround people with disabilities.

The film opens with historical footage from the 1980s showing Bouvia in a Riverside, California courtroom. She spent years in a psychiatric facility, enduring severe pain from cerebral palsy and arthritis. Bouvia wanted the right to refuse life-sustaining treatment, arguing in court that only she should decide if she lives or dies.

Davenport weaves in the stories of other disabled individuals and their families, many of whom grapple with issues surrounding assisted suicide. The focus centers on Canada’s Bill C-7, also known as Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID), which passed in 2016. This legislation allows individuals with terminal conditions to end their lives to avoid further suffering. A controversial amendment in 2020 raised questions about its implications for those with disabilities, as it broadened eligibility.

Bouvia poignantly states, “I don’t think it’s gonna be a happy ending [for me] unless I control it myself.” This statement opens up a discussion about who gets to define a “quality of life.” Critics ask whether such laws encourage vulnerable individuals to choose death over support and care.

Davenport argues that promoting assisted suicide can shift the focus away from the societal changes needed to genuinely support disabled people. He emphasizes that addressing the systemic challenges of disability is crucial. As care can be complicated and costly, some people might view assisted suicide as a more straightforward solution. A disability rights advocate in the film underscores this point, asserting, “You can’t address human suffering by killing people.”

An impactful story featured in the film is that of Michael Hixon, who suffered an anoxic brain injury in 2017. When his hospital sought to end his life support, a tense exchange between him and his wife, Melissa, revealed how institutions can undervalue the lives of those with disabilities. The doctor’s mindset reflected a belief that caring for Hixon might not be “worth it.”

Davenport’s thoughtful narration guides us through these complex issues. By the end, while his perspective is clear, the film allows space for viewers to form their own opinions. “Life After” is not just a documentary; it’s part of a larger conversation about the value of life and the societal responsibilities we share.

With increasing discussions about assisted suicide and disability rights around the world, Davenport’s work is essential for highlighting the urgent need for empathy, understanding, and systemic change. The film serves as a reminder that every life has worth and that conversations about care should focus on support, not surrender.

For more information about these important discussions, you can explore resources from the World Health Organization, which provides insights into global health and disability issues.

Source link