Do not say this:
He is no longer suffering.
Suffer he did. Especially the past few months of his life every step was difficult. Every movement took all that he had to do. He went from this time last year to being able to fairly well do things, he could do most things on the boat, he did things in the yard and then 6 months later he was on oxygen a good deal of the time and taking a shower was a major event. Then the next 6 months a slow, miserable death. Every day more taken away from him.
It is just not fair that not only did he have to endure such misery and pain, but for that, for all of his suffering, he died anyway. If he had survived, it would have almost made sense - passage through fire and all that. But if he had to die, why did he have to suffer - what was the point if the outcome was his death? So yes he is no longer suffering, but why suffer in the first place?
