If the person is in more physical or psychological pain than is worth it, then imo keeping that person alive against their will is immoral. Access to euthanasia should be available for those who are of sane mind and have decided to end their lives.
If they are dissociated then you should definitely try your best to keep them alive, and they should be able to access the help needed to remove the dissociated state and decide rationally about whether they want to live or not.
But if you're keeping someone alive who doesn't want to be alive just because you'd miss them, that is definitely immoral to me.
A good book on the subject is Every Cradle is a Grave by Sarah Perry. It tackles a lot of controversial aspects of the social side of suicide in a methodical and rational way. Suicide is a topic that almost nobody approaches logically or rationally, instead being 100% driven by life-affirming reactionary emotional impulses (which I believe is likely mostly because nobody wants to be 'responsible' for anyone's suicide by endorsing the idea).
"By any means", no, as that's too broad a spectrum. But by most, yes.
But in cases where someone is of lucid mind and they have a solid reason to commit suicide (eg they're slowly dying of some shit painful disease), these people should not be stopped, but assisted if possible. People of stable minds should have the right to die when they wish.
Idk if I agree. I guess if they're old, but if they're young and have all the reasons in the world to live, no health problems.
I believe a person has certain responsibilities, especially if they have a family, or just people to look after, if they killed themselves would it influence others?
This is the reason trying to commit suicide is a very selfish act. Do the benefits of trying to force this person to stay alive outweigh the consequences of their death? Is it an act depression?
I definitely think you should stop them if it's an act of depression for sure, especially if they're young. They're so concerned that nothing will get any better.
Do I think you should put someone in a full-nelson the first chance you get if you find them trying to cut their throat open with a knife? I mean, yeah, absolutely.
Admittedly, the act of suicide is an immoral act, especially if you're doing it because you are sad.
Since I have spent time studying suicide, more than most (and certainly more than anyone I know), I will allow myself to go on a bit here, because I might be able to clear a few things up.
You are right to bring up families. I definitely think if you have children or other people that you are an active caregiver for, then you have a responsibility to stay alive, even if life is painful or difficult, until your dependents are no longer dependent upon you.
Otherwise, people have the right to choose when they die, and they should have access to that, safely and painlessly.
Life is not good for a lot of people. No employment prospects, socially incapable, riddled with neuroses and pain. Some combination thereof, or all of them, as well as plenty other circumstances that make life a constant form of torture.
Sure, it will be hard on their loved ones if they die, but it's not their loved ones' choice. It's the individual's life. Their parents brought them into the world, they made the choice to have and raise a child, they don't get to choose when the person dies, too. It's ultimately selfish for parents to want their child to keep living if their child has eventually found themselves tired of life or simply unable to continue with any happiness, or if their child is in great pain.
Part of the reason suicide is so taboo is because there is no access to safe and painless ways to opt out of life. This results in several issues, which I won't go into too much detail about (it's an enormous topic, in the same way that death towers over life), but I'll outline some of the important ones briefly.
One: It means that society innately sees suicide as a bad thing. If it is illegal, most people will just assume this means it is a bad thing. Also, most healthy, happy people assume that everyone has the lust for life that they do, and can't comprehend the mind of someone who sees life as a boring, painful drag that isn't worth it.
Two: Because it is not legal and accessible, as well as socially shunned, it usually happens suddenly. People do not get the chance to say goodbye, and the suicide never gets to express their intentions because they are worried that people will try to stop them, locking them up if need be. Thus suicide is generally lonely for the one doing it, and sudden for those around them. With access to opt-out-of-life methods of euthanasia, the suicide is able to make their peace with their loved ones and leave having said goodbye.
Three: 'Illegal' methods of suicide are painful and scary. Most suicide methods are incredibly painful, as well as usually not guaranteed to work. Suicide by cutting is rarely lethal and is very painful, hanging often results in brain damage (making life even worse for the survivor), poison is incredibly painful, drowning requires excess dedication due to how hard it is to make it work, setting oneself on fire is effective but the most painful of all (and the worst case for survivors, left with extreme burns). Jumping from a height isn't even guaranteed to work, and often requires too much gumption to pull off, as well as leaving the suicide's final moments those of absolute terror. Suicide by opiate overdose is generally the best method, but such drugs are generally illegal and hard to come by, and it takes long enough to be fatal that it can be interrupted. If safe, legal euthanasia via opiate overdose was available, the suicide will pass over peacefully and calmly, in physical pleasure; perhaps, even, surrounded by their family and friends. I can think of no better way to go.
Most people do not commit suicide because they are 'sad'. Sad doesn't even begin to cut it when it comes to the agonising psychological pain that makes suicide an appealing and often rational solution. Some say that "suicide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem", but to the suicide or suicidal ideator, life is the temporary problem, and suicide is the only fit solution. It's hard to get into the mind of a suicidal person if you haven't experienced it yourself, for sure; but to dismiss it as something that someone would do just because they're "sad" is naive. Life is full of pain of all stripes, and for many people it is simply too much to bear, especially when they find life boring, useless, pointless, painful, unpleasant, uncomfortable or angering, or a combination thereof.
To keep such a person alive because you think there is "so much to live for" is immoral. To many people, life is not so full of opportunity and beauty, and fairly so. This is an ugly, unpleasant world, limited in scope and dull in its repetition.
Personal perspective: I was depressed from an early age. I didn't fit in, I found social life unbearable and irritating. As I reached mid-teens, I was beset by further mental issues that decreased my quality of life. I wanted to die, and with good reason: I saw no hope for things to get better. But I didn't commit suicide, because maybe, just maybe, the cult of grinning martyrs around me were correct, and that life is good, and it does get better... if you try to make it better. You have to try, right? Try your best and you will succeed. Smash cut to me, right now: after having tried my best again and again, all I have learned is that life is boring, pointless, painful and not worth living, and that life will never get better. I was right all along. If I had been allowed to commit suicide earlier, I wouldn't have had to suffer to such a silly and unnecessary degree, just to appease others. Yet even now, a lucid and rational adult, I am not allowed to opt out of life in any safe way. It is immoral.
I am but one person with this experience. Many also share it, but many just grit their teeth and keep living because they have no other choice but to do just that. All because do-gooders think that 'one day things will get better', or that 'people will miss you', or whatever. The truth: most people's lives throughout human history have been unpleasant and painful. We continue to exist because our infantile biology commands us to, not because 'life is worth living' or what have you. For a long time, the only reason many people didn't kill themselves is because they thought they'd go to Hell for it. This idea of a 'better life' is mostly a bourgeois modern construct, based in nothing but material pleasure or some misplaced spiritual fantasy. For those born to meagre means and afflicted with physical and/or psychological pain, as well as other forms of degeneration or displeasure, the 'better life' they strive for is simply not possible. Many such people come to realise this, or perhaps they knew it all along. Life does not have the capability to be 'good' or even bearable for all people. That is a wishful myth, and a dangerous and foolish one to boot, founded in empty lies, conjured from nothing. In fact, there is no evidence to say that life is good at all.
The position that those who wish to die are placed in within modern society is a cruel and callous prison; they are made to feel ashamed of or irresponsible for their desires because of the selfish people around them who think they know better. If suicide is selfish, then so are those who keep the suicides from achieving peace. The unshackled, rational individual has a right to choose when they die, and it should be legal, safe and painless.
Edit: If you want to read further on the subject then I really do recommend the Sarah Perry book I mentioned before, "Every Cradle is a Grave." It covers a lot of this stuff, but in more detail, and with academic and scientific data referenced. Thomas Ligotti's "The Conspiracy Against the Human Race" also contains some similar observations, albeit in a highly dark and blackly comic fashion. Both also cover the topic of antinatalism, another incredibly controversial topic. They're both entertaining and informative works.
__________________
Last edited by Scribble on Jan 14th, 2021 at 12:14 PM
Well thought out and written Scribble. I'm going to add that book suggestion to my goodreads and get to it down the line for sure.
The idea of suicide is already inherently complicated. I voted "yes" in the poll, but I don't feel that it's such a black and white issue to be such simply answered.
That's a lot to read, there's a few things I wanna bring up:
1. You don't think it's selfish to cause that much immense pain to literally every person that loves and has ever loved them? You could argue "they're just choosing to die instead of waiting decades through a quite possibly miserable existence", which is true, but to me, committing suicide is saying: "My desire to die is more important then your love for me." Which is very cruel and heartless and a very horrible thing for a family to think about.
Then there's the amount of blaming and such: "What caused my child/boyfriend/husband to think this way? Who did this, why, what makes life so hard for them?"
Another thing is; How exactly do you know if suicide is the answer? What if you DO die, but, shockingly, some form of afterlife exists, regardless of what you believed in in life? What if this hypothetical afterlife is 100000x worse then what you dealt with in your living life? What if this hypothetical afterlife tortures you emotionally, physically every waking second of your soul's existence? Literally forces your mind to think about every sad, horrible, depressing moment, shows your family crying at your funeral, and having you helpless to do anything about it?
2. Honestly, Scribs, you can say all you want that "you know" things won't get better, but to be honest you need to fight like ****ing HELL to be happy, regardless of your background, the amount of money you have in your pocket, and the people you surround yourself with. You can have the most loving and supportive friends and family, but it's still gonna be an uphill battle. No one is "given" happiness, it is earned.
You, or anyone else, does not know whether they'll be happy in 5+ years. You don't know if you'll be happy or sad at all, realistically. Thinking that there's not a chance of it is just irrational and illogical, and makes no sense.
Unless the thing you want is for the world to literally be made in your own image, and that since it isn't, you need to die because of it. That or things you could never have any hope of changing, which is NOT your own life. You can turn things around, I can turn things around, anyone can do so if they put their mind to it. I realize people thinking of committing suicide aren't having this thought process, their thought process is that it's literally impossible... But is it really? Can you guarantee that you will never be TRULY happy, light at the end of the tunnel kind of happy? Where your default setting IS happiness? You can't.
That's just the way I see it. If I can't convince myself that happiness is an outright impossibility for me, then suicide should be an option, but thats just unrealistic, and because of that I've never been able to actual "pull the trigger" on something resembling suicide. I think about it a lot, but when in doubt, when I can think of literally no reasons NOT to do it? I think "Yeah but, it'll cause so much pain and how do I know I won't be okay 3-5+ years from now?
In this case I don't know your whole story, but I ask you, what is convincing you that happiness IN LIFE is an impossibility, and then I ask you, what if everyone of those crackpot theories about some afterlife ended up being true and you're in for something worse if you DO do it.
When you truly think about it, suicide exists only as a way of escaping pain, and yes, unless you're guaranteed that it isn't temporary, then suicide IS a permanent solution to a temporary problem.
Saying "no" to help when you're suicidal is definitely selfish though, because you're giving up every chance just because you don't wanna be convinced, why is someone's urge so strong to the point that they wouldn't at least wanna try it? What is stopping them from doing it if it doesn't work?
If you're in permanent, never-ending pain, either physical or emotional, and there will never ever be any relief to it, then yes, suicide looks humane. If you're going through an absolutely horrid time in life, and you FEEL like it's the only way out, the only thing I can say is, I think you'd be better off trying to seek help or turning towards those who love you to help with that instead of relying on this permanent, devastating solution.
3. How do you know your death won't heavily influence another? What if your suicide causes your brother/sister to get into drugs to numb the pain? What if they go on an unhealthy binge, what if they start behaving recklessly, endangering their OWN lives? Finally...
What do you do when YOUR death causes someone else to kill themselves? What if they cared about you so much that death seemed better to them then life?
I have to wonder how many children killed themselves after parents passed.
Suicide can always be a selfish thing, if you have serious influence, if you feel your death would massively affect the people around you beyond just being depressed/sad for a long time, then yes, it's absolutely selfish.
To say "that's not necessarily my problem" is also selfish, because YOUR actions made them turn to that. Your death that they couldn't stop pushed them to that edge, if you were still alive then maybe they wouldn't have killed themselves or turned to drugs, or became a horrible human being. I'm not sure if that's victim-blaming or not, I don't consider it so.
I just think it's unfair to think that ending your own life has more benefits that consequences.
To speak personally about it for a moment, I know there's several people in my own life who'd be affected. My mother would absolutely attempt suicide, my brother would likely step into the world of hard drugs and I could never ever put my nephews through that. (and yes I think one of our immediate family deaths would cause this, my family is pretty dysfunctional as is, a death like me, my sister, or brother, would cause absolute anarchy.)
My best friend might literally go insane, considering we've known each other since grade school, his girlfriend, my other best friend, wouldn't have quite the same reaction, she'd be very depressed, but me committing suicide would almost certainly cause him to start going off the deep-end mentally.
This is not to put so much stock into my life like I'm this big important person affecting everyone, but I know the people around me, I have lived with these people all my life and I know how a majority would react to my hypothetical suicide.
This is just to show that suicide has some massive repercussions after you're gone that you can't do a thing about. It's not just "everyone's sad, but I don't want you to be sad, just know I'm not in pain anymore."
It's, "I didn't want this, all these people dead, lives ruined because of me." It's not necessarily because they are angry or that they feel wronged, this is just what grief can do to people, and I think a lot of people who commit suicide don't think of that.
Sorry for making the post so long, I hope I got my point across though.
I once stood on the edge of a bridge and had I let go off the rails I wpu;d have fallen head first on a motorway.... my reason for not doing it was, I didn't want to upset my loved ones.
__________________ Sig by Nuke Nixon Last Edited by Blakemore on Jan 1st, 2000, at 00:00 AM
To reply to your first point, I think I can refer mostly to my prior post. For starters, a lot of what you're saying would be alleviated by access to safe and legal euthanasia. The suicide scenario you're running here is based upon the current model of 'sudden & illegal' suicide; if an individual could choose to die at a clinic, they'd have plenty of time to talk it through with family members, loved ones, etc. This kind of dialogue doesn't happen much in the world, because the would-be suicide might be worried that if they spoke to their family about it, their family might lock them up because they're a 'danger to themselves', and the like. Perhaps these would-be suicides, after being able to speak to loved ones in an environment where they aren't at risk of being sectioned & imprisoned, would get to hear how their death would affect their loved ones, and they'd choose not to commit suicide. There wouldn't be that whole "what was the person thinking" thing because if suicide via opiate OD at a clinic was an option, the person would go through a process in deciding to die. It wouldn't be the sudden shock that it is now, or at least not in most cases. People would have the opportunity to fully process what they are doing and what it means to the world at large, and their own 'world', their network of friends and family.
Whether afterlife exists or not has no bearing on the argument in general. That is part of an individual's process. We can't know if that afterlife exists, so the idea that it does isn't of use in deciding whether suicidal euthanasia should be legal and available or not. What if avoiding your own death via medical treatment is against this god's rules, and you go to Hell if you receive chemo? Who cares? It doesn't have any bearing on the fact that people should be able to receive chemotherapy.
To reply to your second point: Plenty of people fight like hell to be happy. It's simply not guaranteed to work. In my case, you don't think I haven't done as such? What do you know of me, other than scraps of personality I've scribbled on some forum? The depressed pessimist fights every day just to survive, let alone be 'happy'. Not everyone has that energy, that force of will. Not everyone can be happy. Some people are afflicted with anhedonia, which means they are unable to feel any pleasure. This concept of happiness is often a Will-o'-Wisp. It's a matter of brain chemistry, not an immutable mystical reality. Optimism is opium; nice to experience, but the feeling isn't based in any truth. The fact of the matter is just that many people will never be happy, try as they might, fight as they might, strive as they might.
Sure, I don't know whether I'll be happy in 5+ years, but I've literally never been happy, so why assume I will be? It's absurd. The trajectory of my life (and of many others) is one of decline, and if the signs point to things continuing to get worse, why assume otherwise? Again: optimism is opium. Maybe it works for some, but not for all. Not when it's pretty clear what life is, and where it goes. We're all thrown headlong towards our deaths. So some want to get off early; let them. We're all dead in the long run anyway. In 100 years, everyone you know right now will be dead. Nobody will be left to remember who died early and who died later.
Can I say, 100%, that there isn't some fabled, cliche "light at the end of the tunnel", and that, in fact, "life could get better"? No, obviously not. Causality is too complicated to allow for such absolutes. I also couldn't say with 100% certainty that I wouldn't beat Mike Tyson in a fist fight. But the odds are clearly stacked to one particular extreme.
For many people (myself included) the pain is constant, not temporary. Life is the temporary problem. Suicide is an entirely defensible solution, and, again, should be legal, safe, and accessible.
Third point: These are all things the individual has to take into account. It's up to the individual to decide whether it is worth it, and what effects it may cause.
But you're still just talking about suicide as it is now, like I said: sudden, shocking, instantly traumatic. In a world where it is available and legal, many of these issues may be negated. The idea can be processed, people can share the reasons for what they're doing. I believe many people who would commit suicide in the current system would not commit suicide if it were legal and accessible, because they'd be able to make the 'decision' and then walk back on it any time they like, up to and including the moment the needle enters their arm to give them that lethal dose of morphine. It would change the very fabric of the idea of suicide on a social level. I actually believe that the amount of suicides would go down, in this projected world, because the dialogue around it would be healthier and more rational, as opposed to based on emotion and trauma.
People could discuss whether they truly want to die or not, without the fear of the lengths that those around them might go to just to keep them trapped in this world.
It's all about perspective. If I just offed myself now, it would hurt a lot of people, who wouldn't understand why it'd happened. If I had access to a suicide clinic, I would have a few weeks to speak to everyone I wanted to say goodbye to, explain to them the pain that I'm in, and assure them that this is what I want. I could make peace with people I'd hurt, and who hurt me; I could write my final words for those left behind; I could reconcile with my mind. And if I realised I wanted to live, I could cancel the appointment. But if not, then I'd get to go to the clinic, perhaps alone or with anyone who could handle being there, and pass over blissfully, out of the constant pain of this life.
You don't understand how many people would prefer this kind of exit to life, rather than being forced by their pain to die, arms cut to shreds or lank rope around their neck, in some dingy apartment. Accessible and legal euthanasia gives dignity to the suicide. It gives them what they deserve, not what is thrust upon them. It gives them a genuine choice.
You do know that suicide is rarely a choice, right? Look it up, watch some interviews with suicide survivors. They regularly instantly regret it the moment they go past the point of no return. It's an impulse, usually. A spur of the moment 'decision' driven by their brain. Not always, but a great deal of the time. What if these people knew they could actually end it if they wanted to? That they could reach out to people safely and comfortably? Knowing that there was a way out, a free exit...
Do you not think many people would actually end up [i]not[i/] committing suicide?
And for those who still want to, then that is their decision, and their right as a human being.
Suicidal euthanasia should be legal, safe and accessible to all unshackled, rational individuals.
Not gonna write much for right now, I disagree that the outcome would be any different just because they'd schedule and die in a more humane way.
People begging at their side not to kill themselves, but they made their decision. They go through it, mass hysteria still happens, people start doing hard drugs once again, to numb the pain.
People who love that person so much realize they can't live without them, and schedule another appointment, then a chain reaction of suicide scheduling's start.
Why is it more acceptable just because it's done in a more humane way? I guess it'd be similar to finding out someone has a life-threatening disease like cancer?
I agree though that it should be a legal option for people.
I read back, yeah, didn't make myself clear enough, my bad. I don't think healthy people should be allowed to commit suicide if possible. eg if you see some healthy 25yo trying to down a bottle of pills, you should try and stop them.
If someone is physically healthy and wants to die, it's likely a mental issue and those can often be overcome with medication, therapy or sometimes even just kindness. eg I have a suicidal family member, he takes meds for it. Though I suspect his attempts were more attention seeking than a real attempts, but I ultimately don't know for sure. Either way, he's got a mental issue and the meds help him.
The grey area is where someone is physically healthy, wants to die and no amount of meds, therapy or what have you will help them. Then I really don't know, seems cruel to let them die, but it also seems cruel to not allow them to end their mental suffering. I really don't know what the correct answer is here in these scenarios. I'd probably try and save them still, cos death is final.
Again, I suggest reading Every Cradle is a Grave if you're interested in the research done into the topic of suicide and euthanasia, as well as Why People Die by Suicide, by Thomas Joiner. A lot of what I'm saying here isn't just my 'opinion' (although some certainly is), it's based on prior research done by the authors of various books.
Sarah Perry's book in particular really gets into the meat of the topic and weighs up many scenarios and concepts related to the modern conception of suicide.
For the idea of people turning to hard drugs, I also think drugs should be decriminalised, so if people did turn to them, they'd at least be using clean, medical-grade stuff, and would have support networks to turn to.
I think you'd have to have grief counselling tied in with suicide / euthanasia clinics. If what we're aiming for as a society is quality of life, then that would be essential.
I think generally as a culture we are too afraid of death, just as we venerate life too much. Humans are dead for infinitely longer than they are alive, after all. Death towers over life, and all we can do is come to terms with it in our own ways.
KMC Community Forums
Thanks Scribble!
Jan 13th, 2021 11:09 AM
