Here author Ari Diaconis chooses NOT to marry Dunia Rkein due to his illness, uncertain survival prospect, and not wanting to burden her with his long-term care (if he survived)
Compare to Feynman, who married Arline Greenbaum despite the fact that she had severe tuberculosis and only a slim chance to survive.
Similar, but different. (Of course)
I wonder, is it better to never marry, or to lose the spouse shortly afterward? Is it easier or harder depending on the gender of the survivor (in our era, not the 1940s)?
If you love someone and they're dying, being married to them especially in the 40s makes things a lot easier for handling their affairs both before and after they die.
There's so many laws even now that aren't fixed to handle when people aren't married.
But it haunts me in every relationship I have, even if it's irrational.
Life is short.
I know a distant relative in the Midwest who's wife had a stroke. After about a year they made the difficult decision to get divorced because the aftercare was ruining them financially (she couldn't live at home). By divorcing, she became eligible for federal assistance, allowing her husband to keep a house over their children's heads.
This is the reality of healthcare in the US.
> We would be married but for my condition, which has placed a question mark at the end of nearly everything. Will experimental treatments eventually fix me? Can I contribute to a family? Is it fair to ask that Dunia sustain a lifetime of my poor health?
