Uly,
I'm sorry for the obvious pain you're experiencing. It was my good fortune to have gotten to know a man I think was one of the greatest healers of the modern world. He was a holy man of the Lakota Sioux nation named Frank Fools Crow. I literally watched Frank perform what can only be described as miracles in healing and he did such things regularly throughout his life.
One thing he used to say is "Not everyone can be cured, but everyone can be healed." He made a distinction between "healing" and "curing". As best I could understand it, when he spoke of curing he was referring only to the physical body. He was able to effect such cures with astonishing regularity but he admitted that first, it was not he who cured, but the power that flowed through him. He referred to himself as a "hollow bone" like a drinking straw through which power flowed. I always found this to be astonishing similar to the concept held by practitioners of Qigong who engage in healing work. Frank went so far as to say that if he was ever arrogant enough to presume he was anything more than just that "hollow bone" through which the power to heal and cure flowed, that this power itself would refuse to use him any longer as its channel.
Despite his success at instigating cures he freely admitted there were instances in which a person simply could not be cured regardless of his efforts on their behalf, or the tools of modern medicine, or that person's own desires for a cure. Some things, at least as he saw it, simply followed a natural course. They are as they are meant to be and nothing he knew of could change that. I'm not a hundred percent certain when he said things like that what he meant, but the impression I got was that he ascribed this "things are as they are meant to be" to a higher intelligence of some sort and not to blind fate. But again, he never spelled out exactly what he meant in detail, at least not to me.
On the other hand he maintained that virtually everyone could be healed. When he spoke of healing he was referring to something that went beyond merely our physical body. A person who was sick in a way that could not be cured might experience the peace that comes with this inner healing even though their body remained subject to a physical sickness or even when the person suffered from a terminal condition. A person who arrives at the end of the life in this physical body and is at peace in the deepest sense has been healed as Frank defined it, even though they could not be cured. They might still have experienced pain but they were no longer the victims of suffering in the way the Buddhists define suffering. That sort of peace is a healing that no sickness, disease or injury can ever take away from that person.
If I might be so bold as to offer an observation, in losing your parent, and your watching the decline of your dog, I couldn't help but feel that while they may have been or still be in discomfort, the one truly anguished and suffering about it seems to be you more so than them. It's so difficult to watch those we love experience pain and feel helpless to comfort them. Perhaps the first healing you should focus on is your own. Your own physical ailments may or may not be curable, but that's not what I mean. I'm talking about your own healing, as Frank defined it. Maybe that's where your immediate efforts should be most focused. It could be that when you've reached that place of healing in yourself; when you're fully at peace within, then you will be in a position to better be able to offer healing and/or even curing to those around you who need it as well?
