Suicide becoming socially acceptable

Strata

Suicide is often considered a selfish act by a person. Friends and loved ones feel guilty and wonder what they could have done to prevent the person from feeling so desperate that they wanted to end their life.

There is often a lot of anger at the suicide victim for leaving their loved ones behind.

I believe that in some instances, people commit suicide because they're depressed and if they sought medical help then they wouldn't feel suicidal.

But I also think that there are some people who commit suicide who just don't want to live anymore - they're not depressed, they just don't enjoy life and don't want to continue living and no amount of medication/treatment will make them feel any different.

Nobody asked to be born so surely people should be able to choose to die without having to worry about leaving behind loved ones full of grief and anger.

I suppose what I'm really wondering is: do you think it will it ever be socially acceptable to end your own life?

r3nu4l

Strata wrote: »

I suppose what I'm really wondering is: do you think it will it ever be socially acceptable to end your own life?

Socially acceptable in the wider context of society or with reference to family, friends and loved ones?

I think the latter is far more likely to be acceptable as when loved ones see the suffering an individual has gone through they may in time come to accept that the suicide (such as that done through registered clinics) is acceptable.

In time, as this practice continues I think it will become more widely accepted but will probably always be as hotly debated as abortion (at the other end of life).

Will suicide by a person who leaves their house one evening without saying a word to anybody and then hangs themselves, or throws themselves in front of a train ever be acceptable? I doubt it.

Ickle Magoo

Strata wrote: »

I suppose what I'm really wondering is: do you think it will it ever be socially acceptable to end your own life?

Not as a general rule, no. I don't think committing suicide due to teenage angst or a fit of depression is ever going to be socially acceptable - especially when the decision to end one's life is made alone and is rash - and horribly affects the people who find the body or the poor train driver.

I think it will always depend on circumstance but as attitudes to assisted suicide and Dignitas are testament, I think there will be a broader area of circumstances under which choosing to end one's own life will become acceptable.

Strata

r3nu4l wrote: »

Socially acceptable in the wider context of society or with reference to family, friends and loved ones?

I think the latter is far more likely to be acceptable as when loved ones see the suffering an individual has gone through they may in time come to accept that the suicide (such as that done through registered clinics) is acceptable.

In time, as this practice continues I think it will become more widely accepted but will probably always be as hotly debated as abortion (at the other end of life).

Will suicide by a person who leaves their house one evening without saying a word to anybody and then hangs themselves, or throws themselves in front of a train ever be acceptable? I doubt it.

I suppose I mean socially acceptable as in: will it ever be understood or accepted by people who don't want to end their life or will the suicidal person always be advised that they are suffering an illness which can be treated.

I'm referring specifically to people who are in full health and don't have a terminal illness or whose quality of life, from an outsiders perspective, doesn't seem to be impaired. I don't know much about euthanasia clinics to be honest - do these clinics accept people who want to end their own life for no reason other than that they don't want to keep on living?

r3nu4l wrote: »

Will suicide by a person who leaves their house one evening without saying a word to anybody and then hangs themselves, or throws themselves in front of a train ever be acceptable? I doubt it.

Do people commit suicide in this way though because to tell someone will mean they'll be guilted out of carrying it out?

Bottle_of_Smoke

But I also think that there are some people who commit suicide who just don't want to live anymore - they're not depressed, they just don't enjoy life and don't want to continue living and no amount of medication/treatment will make them feel any different.

I don't think this is a likely scenario. Reckon we're hard-wired to strive to make our lives better, and of course we have a survival instinct, so takes something big to consider suicide

seamus

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I don't think this is a likely scenario. Reckon we're hard-wired to strive to make our lives better, and of course we have a survival instinct, so takes something big to consider suicide

My argument in regards to someone who just "doesn't want to live anymore" is that it means that there is something functionally wrong with them.

If someone says, "I don't enjoy life any more", then the obvious solution is to change your life into a format that you do enjoy. Making it a reasonable thing for someone to "opt-out" of life because they're bored is ignoring the simple fact that boredom can be alleviated.

In all other cases, a desire to end ones life is likely down to some kind of chemical imbalance in the body, causing emotional stress to override the innate desire for self-preservation.

Or to put it more simply, there is no reasoning that an otherwise healthy person can give for suicide which does not have a non-lethal solution.

Philosophical thought can make everything seem futile, but the ultimate futility of life doesn't logically link with ending it. If life is futile, then why not just do your best to enjoy yourself? What can ending one's life solve that living it can't?

I do think that with the general erosion of religious authority in the west, assisted suicide will become more and more acceptable in cases of terminal illness or exceptional suffering. I have yet to speak to anyone who objects to euthanisia on humanitarian grounds (at least from a general moral level), yet it's considered a political hot potato and a taboo subject because religious groups will continually voice their objection to it.

I think it's worth putting to referendum in this country, if not to allow AS in this country, but to prevent seeking or abetting AS in another country from being a criminal offence. It's only when put to the entire country will we know what the real opinion is on the ground, rather than the screaming and wailing from religious zealots.

r3nu4l

Strata wrote: »

I suppose I mean socially acceptable as in: will it ever be understood or accepted by people who don't want to end their life or will the suicidal person always be advised that they are suffering an illness which can be treated.

Well if there are people who just don't want to carry on living and are in full health and not depressed then I would suggest that they are in a huge minority and probably account for an absolutely minuscule amount of suicides.

[/QUOTE]
I'm referring specifically to people who are in full health and don't have a terminal illness or whose quality of life, from an outsiders perspective, doesn't seem to be impaired.[/QUOTE]

More often than not, in the case of suicides we hear that the person was in debt, or had suffered from bullying at school/work or had been suffering from depression. Other times they have recently lost a loved one, become divorced, lost access to children or may be facing a jail sentence. Sometimes it's only later that a large debt or other life problem is discovered.

The worry and stresses that these people have do lead to mental problems such as depression so in these cases even if the person felt that they had no mental illness, I'm pretty sure that a medical evaluation would say otherwise.

I don't know much about euthanasia clinics to be honest - do these clinics accept people who want to end their own life for no reason other than that they don't want to keep on living?

Not as yet. I believe that to undergo assisted suicide you must first receive counselling from the clinic.

Do people commit suicide in this way though because to tell someone will mean they'll be guilted out of carrying it out?

I honestly don't know. I can't speculate but I can say that many of those who are talked out of suicide later go on to lead happy lives, others later commit suicide anyway. It's less to do with 'guilting' someone I believe than making them realise that there are reasons why they should consider staying alive. Is that 'guilting' or is that highlighting the fact that life doesn't have to be the way it is.

I don't believe anyone ever wakes up and says

'Ah, great night's sleep, I feel so refreshed. D'ya know what? I might just kill myself today, better have some coffee and read the paper first though.'

With the obvious 'happy' tone of that quote you can see how it just doesn't go with the act of 'suicide'

Suicide is always a desperate and often lonely act driven by incredible sadness and quite often depression (diagnosed or not). The thought that someone would just decide to kill themselves without them carrying any emotional pain just doesn't make sense.

r3nu4l

r3nu4l wrote: »

I honestly don't know. I can't speculate but I can say that many of those who are talked out of suicide later go on to lead happy lives, others later commit suicide anyway. It's less to do with 'guilting' someone I believe than making them realise that there are reasons why they should consider staying alive. Is that 'guilting' or is that highlighting the fact that life doesn't have to be the way it is.

The problem is when you get people reacting with "but what about how I'd feel if you killed yourself". That is guilting, and it comes up far too often in suicide discussions. It's completely counterproductive and I hate hearing it.

Talking someone out of suicide by presenting them with different options or giving them a reason to live is a different matter altogether.

ntlbell

seamus wrote: »

My argument in regards to someone who just "doesn't want to live anymore" is that it means that there is something functionally wrong with them.
.

It's a bit like suggesting people who don't want to have kids have something functionally wrong with them.

If having a different perception of "life" or "living" to you doesn't mean there's something wrong with them.

Everyone is too quick to try and find out what's "wrong" when anyone views something different to the norm.

Maybe the only thing that's wrong is they're alive.

I'm convinced you can be perfectly "normal" with no mental "issues" or "imbalances" and just not want to live in this world.

Although from our cushy office chairs and fairly cushy lifestyle's we can condemn them.

The only thing keeping the suicide rate down in this country and has done for a long time is alcohol.

Strata

Taking on board Seamus and r3nu4l's posts perhaps my question really should be: do you think suicide will ever be socially acceptable for a person who is suffering chronic depression and who has exhausted every treatment option with no alleviation of the disease?

Thanks

seamus

ntlbell wrote: »

It's a bit like suggesting people who don't want to have kids have something functionally wrong with them.

Actually it's entirely different. From a base primal level, we are driven to mate. The instinct to mate is unrelated to the actual consequence of reproduction - that is, an animal doesn't understand that mating results in reproduction, all it knows is that it, really, really wants to get laid.

I wouldn't say that someone who doesn't want to have kids has something wrong them. However I would say that someone who absolutely zero sexual desire has something wrong with them. Whether it has genetic or chemical causal factors, being devoid of sexual desire is as abnormal as missing an arm.

Such is the same for the desire to live.

I'm convinced you can be perfectly "normal" with no mental "issues" or "imbalances" and just not want to live in this world.

But one would need a rationale, a reason why they don't want to live. There is only "this world", there is nothing else. It's this or decaying in the ground. What possible rationale is there to justify not wanting to exist, except unhappiness with existence?

The only thing keeping the suicide rate down in this country and has done for a long time is alcohol.

Alcohol keeps suicide rates down? Right....

Maybe do a little research on the link between alcohol abuse and suicide rates before you make such blatantly ill-informed statements.

do you think suicide will ever be socially acceptable for a person who is suffering chronic depression and who has exhausted every treatment option with no alleviation of the disease?

I don't think so. Because for as long as it's recognised as an illness, it will never be declared incurable. Although depression itself is nothing new - it's been around as long as human beings have been alive - recognising it de-stigmatising it is a very new thing, so I can't see people being happy to give up the idea that its causes can be recognised and effective treatment discovered for it.

Certainly I don't accept the proposition that there's any kind of derpession that is incurable or untreatable, however I do accept that we're so early days in research on "mental" disease, that for many sufferers their condition remains effectively untreatable and uncurable for the time being. I wouldn't condemn any such individuals if they had taken the step of ending their lives.

prinz

Strata wrote: »

Nobody asked to be born so surely people should be able to choose to die without having to worry about leaving behind loved ones full of grief and anger.

So the people who loved them shouldn't feel grief? Or loss? Or sadness? Surely these are all natural reactions to any death?

Or difficulty understanding what drove a person to do it when on the surface they appeared perfectly happy? Isn't that natural again? A sense of anger and confusion? A lot of questions are left unanswered, particularly if nobody is aware of what caused it/no note etc.

Strata wrote: »

I suppose what I'm really wondering is: do you think it will it ever be socially acceptable to end your own life?

Social acceptance, and expecting people to be completely emotionless about it are two very different things.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

- and horribly affects the people who find the body or the poor train driver.

+1.

seamus wrote: »

... rather than the screaming and wailing from religious zealots.

It would be nice to have a discussion on an issue like this without assuming everyone with a different viewpoint to yours is automatically a "religious zealot".

http://www.dredf.org/assisted_suicide/Key-Objections-to-the-Legalization-of-Assisted-Suicide.pdf

By people raising these concerns and putting forward differing viewpoints perhaps a better result will emerge. Rather than people staying quiet and saying nothing for fear of being branded a zealot.

When it comes to terminally ill people what safeguards are in place to confirm that they are of sound mind in making the decision? What illnesses qualify? Do you only ever carry out the procedure if the person is comletely aware of what's going on? Do you foresee a circumstance where relatives are essentially making the decision on behalf of someone else? How do we ensure that assisted suicide never progresses to euthanasia?

Here's a man whose wife had assisted suicide at Dignitas in Switzerland, and his opinion of what should happen differs to others..

Unlike Sir Edward, however, David Witt, who has seen the work that Dignitas does first-hand, rating them “such a small, but impressive organisation”, is adamant that a legal ban must be enforced on assisted suicide for cases not involving terminal illness.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/5859234/Why-I-took-my-wife-to-die-at-Dignitas.html

So do you think he'd supposed AS for everyone and anyone? It's far too simplistic to say the entire issue is a hot potato because of religious zealots. Everyone will have a different opinion on what should be legal what shouldn't, if it is legal how it should be run, what checks and balances there etc etc. That's why it's a hot potato.

r3nu4l wrote: »

In time, as this practice continues I think it will become more widely accepted but will probably always be as hotly debated as abortion (at the other end of life)..

An interesting comparison. It brings to my mind a sticky that was on some of the boards on this site (it seems to be gone again) IIRC the title of the sticky was 'Suicide should never be an option'. Which in itself is highly ironic when you note that if you say abortion should never be an option you'd be very quickly labelled as a religious zealot for example, I don't think this site would ever have a sticky about how abortion should never be an option.

seamus

prinz wrote: »

It would be nice to have a discussion on an issue like this without assuming everyone with a different viewpoint to yours is automatically a "religious zealot".

http://www.dredf.org/assisted_suicide/Key-Objections-to-the-Legalization-of-Assisted-Suicide.pdf

Well, I wouldn't do that, however the document you link to appears to list problems with the implementation of assisted suicide, rather than a specific document arguing why AS should not be allowed.

I do agree that the touchiness about the subject is partially related to the obvious question arising around safeguards and proper implementation, but in most cases, we're not even at that stage yet. First off we have to get to the point where we agree that AS is OK in some circumstances. From what I can see, the only people arguing that AS is always wrong regardless of circumstance, are the religious ones.

An interesting comparison. It brings to my mind a sticky that was on some of the boards on this site (it seems to be gone again) IIRC the title of the sticky was 'Suicide should never be an option'. Which in itself is highly ironic when you note that if you say abortion should never be an option you'd be very quickly labelled as a religious zealot for example, I don't think this site would ever have a sticky about how abortion should never be an option.

To be fair, I don't believe he was saying that the moral arguments underpinning both debates are equivalent, rather that the level of heat generated in both arguments is similar.

prinz

seamus wrote: »

First off we have to get to the point where we agree that AS is OK in some circumstances. From what I can see, the only people arguing that AS is always wrong regardless of circumstance, are the religious ones..

We don't have to agree... and if people want to argue that it is always wrong should their views not be respected. Are we getting to the stage where we say 'Oh let's have a discussion on the topic... but only after we have silenced the opposition'? Assisted suicides by medical staff is legal in some countries with a high religious affiliation and illegal in those with (allegedly) very little such as China.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8268126.stm

seamus wrote: »

To be fair, I don't believe he was saying that the moral arguments underpinning both debates are equivalent, rather that the level of heat generated in both arguments is similar.

That's what I meant, that you'll have people against assisted suicide (if they argue that suicide is never an option), but supporting the option of abortion, perhaps vice versa. There are going to be many, many, many individual varied opinions across the area. Bit of a minefield. I don't think we'll ever get to a stage when everyone is of the one (or even largely similar) opinion.

prinz

prinz wrote: »

We don't have to agree... and if people want to argue that it is always wrong should their views not be respected. .

He said we have to agree first before we can even get to the stage of safeguards, not that we all have to agree in general

prinz

bluewolf wrote: »

He said we have to agree first before we can even get to the stage of safeguards, not that we all have to agree in general

What I mean is, we might never get to that stage, we don't have referenda on agreeing or disagreeing with something in theory. So I don't understand how we'd judge that we have reached the time when we agree with AS is OK in some circumstances.

Personally I think it would be foolish to legalise AS and then turn around and try to work out a way of instituting safeguards etc. It all has to be worked out together IMO.

seamus

prinz wrote: »

We don't have to agree

No we don't. I didn't say that we did. But in order to even discuss issues around implementation, society in general needs to be in support of AS. The first logical step (in this country anyway) is a referendum to decide if travel to another country to obtain AS should remain criminalised.

and if people want to argue that it is always wrong should their views not be respected.

Only if those views are based on some sort of evidence or rational reasoning. I respect their right to base an opinion on gut feelings or religious doctrine, but that doesn't I mean I have to respect that opinion.

Personally I think it would be foolish to legalise AS and then turn around and try to work out a way of instituting safeguards etc. It all has to be worked out together IMO.

Agreed.

prinz

seamus wrote: »

I respect their right to base an opinion on gut feelings or religious doctrine, but that doesn't I mean I have to respect that opinion.

Fair enough, but from your earlier post it seemed as if you were of the opinion that certain groups should effectively be silenced from (or before) any debate on the issue thereby removing it's hot potato status. When you take in, especially the most vocal and 'committed' groups, they usually do more damage to themselves and their arguments than excluding them ever would have.

seamus

prinz wrote: »

Fair enough, but from your earlier post it seemed as if you were of the opinion that certain groups should effectively be silenced from (or before) any debate on the issue thereby removing it's hot potato status.

What I meant by that statement is that I lament the fact that politicians are afraid of putting the question to the majority because of a vocal minority with baseless objections.
This gives the impression that the question is more taboo than personal experience tells me.

wolfpawnat

I do not believe it is socially accepted, more like sadly an everyday occurance.

People still see it as a selfish act and one that leaves the rest of the family in shock and without answers.

But as it is occurring more often now, the general consensus is more "oh God, another poor person, isn't it terrible" rather than the older belief that you are straight to hell and you family should be ashamed.

prinz

seamus wrote: »

What I meant by that statement is that I lament the fact that politicians are afraid of putting the question to the majority because of a vocal minority with baseless objections..

How would you define what is a baseless objection though. Would campaigns against 'regular' suicide not be based on similar baseless objections? The HSE has a focus group on suicide prevention, should they acknowledge that some people just really want to commit suicide, and therefore any objections to this are baseless?

Rubik.

Strata wrote: »

Taking on board Seamus and r3nu4l's posts perhaps my question really should be: do you think suicide will ever be socially acceptable for a person who is suffering chronic depression and who has exhausted every treatment option with no alleviation of the disease?

Thanks

I'm sure there are cases like this, but I would have thought(maybe incorrectly) that most people who commit suicide have never sought professional help. If they had done so the outcome might well have been different.

seamus

prinz wrote: »

should they acknowledge that some people just really want to commit suicide

Is this a fact? That some people just want to die for no reason? I would argue that all desires are fuelled by something. Therefore a desire to die has a trigger, a reason.

True apathy would mean that someone really doesn't care either way with no desire to either live or die. This would likely lead to recklessness with one's life, but wouldn't cause them to seek out death.

hinault

Strata wrote: »

Suicide is often considered a selfish act by a person. Friends and loved ones feel guilty and wonder what they could have done to prevent the person from feeling so desperate that they wanted to end their life.

There is often a lot of anger at the suicide victim for leaving their loved ones behind.

I believe that in some instances, people commit suicide because they're depressed and if they sought medical help then they wouldn't feel suicidal.

But I also think that there are some people who commit suicide who just don't want to live anymore - they're not depressed, they just don't enjoy life and don't want to continue living and no amount of medication/treatment will make them feel any different.

Nobody asked to be born so surely people should be able to choose to die without having to worry about leaving behind loved ones full of grief and anger.

I suppose what I'm really wondering is: do you think it will it ever be socially acceptable to end your own life?

Socially acceptable?
Are you being deliberately glib?

The fact of the matter is that you've got to be in pretty bad psychological shape to even consider taking your own life.
I don't condemn people for taking their own lives BUT I don't condone anyone for taking their own life either.

Suicide goes against every human instinct.

prinz

seamus wrote: »

Is this a fact? That some people just want to die for no reason? I would argue that all desires are fuelled by something. Therefore a desire to die has a trigger, a reason..

..but if you are against suicide as an option why does that change when it comes to AS. Is terminal illness an OK reason to choose suicide but depression isn't? Where is the line drawn when you can have a base for your argument (against suicide for example because of what fuels it), as opposed to being against suicide including AS on the principle of the whole thing when your argument becomes baseless.

Strata

prinz wrote: »

So the people who loved them shouldn't feel grief? Or loss? Or sadness? Surely these are all natural reactions to any death?

Or difficulty understanding what drove a person to do it when on the surface they appeared perfectly happy? Isn't that natural again? A sense of anger and confusion? A lot of questions are left unanswered, particularly if nobody is aware of what caused it/no note etc.



Social acceptance, and expecting people to be completely emotionless about it are two very different things.

Of course the person will be grieved for as with any other death but there often is a real sense of anger at a person who commits suicide. A sense of 'how could they do this to me/leave me behind' that's not always there when dealing with a non suicide death.

seamus

prinz wrote: »

..but if you are against suicide as an option why does that change when it comes to AS. Is terminal illness an OK reason to choose suicide but depression isn't?

Depression isn't terminal or necessarily permanent.

The assisted suicide argument is actually surprisingly simple, IMO. Where a person has a permanent, currently incurable and untreatable illness or injury which will reduce their quality of life, for the rest of their natural life, then they should be legally allowed to end it.
That was a bit of furore a year or two back about a twenty-something paraplegic who took the decision, supported by his parents, to end his life. There was a media furore, but from what I can tell, most people supported it.

That's the easy part of the argument, the part that can be easily legalised and regulated. If it can be accepted by that a person is suffering intolerably and there is no chance of relief and a return to normality, then let them end it. We offer the same mercy to animals, why not to people?

The hard part is around whether we have the right to choose when to die in general. I don't actually have a specific problem with a perfectly healthy person killing themselves "just because". However I believe that's a logical paradox because someone who would choose to end their life for no reason is not someone of sound mind. Could chronic depression count as "suffering intolerably"? Perhaps. But how many people with depression remain completely unchanged, regardless of treatments?

This is, I believe, what the OP wants to debate.

prinz

Strata wrote: »

Of course the person will be grieved for as with any other death but there often is a real sense of anger at a person who commits suicide. A sense of 'how could they do this to me/leave me behind' that's not always there when dealing with a non suicide death.

I don't think the anger, although it seems like it is at times, is really directed at the person. I think it's more directed at the whole situation. It can be extremely hard for the family or friends to understand what made someone do it, and I think that anger at the person involved is a manifestation of the sense of bewilderment/inadequacy/sense of having failed the person in some way etc. People in traumatic situations will often lash at out what is perceived to be the easiest target... the parents of a sick/dead child will often take out their frustrations on each other for example even if neither had any role in what happened... I'd say in some suicide situations it may be easier for others to project their feelings onto the person who died and this comes across as anger as a way of channeling it out rather than dealing with it. Coping strategy in other words, which can seem mean spirited on the face of it.

Strata

hinault wrote: »

Socially acceptable?
Are you being deliberately glib?

The fact of the matter is that you've got to be in pretty bad psychological shape to even consider taking your own life.
I don't condemn people for taking their own lives BUT I don't condone anyone for taking their own life either.

Suicide goes against every human instinct.

I'm completely in earnest with my question Hinault and don't mean for the question to sound glib.

Would you prefer for someone to suffer through the pain of depression (after exhausting all available treatment options) just so their loved ones avoid the grief and loss if they choose to die?

prinz

seamus wrote: »

The assisted suicide argument is actually surprisingly simple, IMO. Where a person has a permanent, currently incurable and untreatable illness or injury which will reduce their quality of life, for the rest of their natural life, then they should be legally allowed to end it..

What about a missing limb? A facial scar?

beeftotheheels

Strata wrote: »

Would you prefer for someone to suffer through the pain of depression (after exhausting all available treatment options) just so their loved ones avoid the grief and loss if they choose to die?

The problem is that

1) it would be practically impossible to exhaust all treatment options given the number of different meds on the market, and
2) depression can lift on its own,

So, the question then becomes whether it is preferable to force someone to live with depression for a period of time, and it can be years, in some vague hope that the next meds they try will lift the depression and to avoid their family suffering the grief if they chose to die.

I think it can be, not least because the person with the depression has likely given up all hope that it will end and they are not thinking rationally by virtue of being depressed.

seamus

prinz wrote: »

What about a missing limb? A facial scar?

Why not? If these things made life utterly intolerable from the individual's point of view and they can convince others of that fact, then why not?
Of course, now we're getting into the implementation side of it by talking about the fringe/theoretical/grey areas.

If someone with depression could convince (let's say) a jury of ten people that their suffering is both intolerable and effectively untreatable, should the jury be allowed to sanction that person's legal death?

That's what my argument effectively boils down to - whether the person can convince society that a dignified death is the only reasonable mercy available to them.

prinz

seamus wrote: »

Why not? If these things made life utterly intolerable from the individual's point of view and they can convince others of that fact, then why not?

What happens if the person themselves is unable to communicate their wish? Do we have next of kin/barristers to convince others of the fact?

seamus wrote: »

effectively boils down to - whether the person can convince society that a dignified death is the only reasonable mercy available to them.

I know why you are using it, and I don't mean this in an aggressive way towards you or anything but that terminology really bugs the hell out of me in a massive way when the 'I want to die with dignity' card is pulled. Frankly I don't see anything undignified about the deaths of thousands of people who die from terminal cancer and the likes all the time. Sipping a cocktail of barbituates doesn't make your death any more dignified IMO. Pet peeve of mine when I hear people using it as if others have suffered an undignified end.

seamus

prinz wrote: »

What happens if the person themselves is unable to communicate their wish? Do we have next of kin/barristers to convince others of the fact?

Pretty much.

Pet peeve of mine when I hear people using it as if others have suffered an undignified end.

I do understand your objection, but I guess dignity is in the eye of the beholder. I've been racking my brain to think of a better word, but I can't. Since dignity pertains to the maintenance of one's self-respect, then it's a massively subjective thing. So I can understand how, especially for anyone who has seen a loved one die from a terminal disease, it might seem that a request to die with dignity is judging everyone else as having died without it. Perhaps it would be best to avoid use of the word "dignity" at all when discussing AS in an objective manner.

ntlbell

seamus wrote: »

Actually it's entirely different. From a base primal level, we are driven to mate. The instinct to mate is unrelated to the actual consequence of reproduction - that is, an animal doesn't understand that mating results in reproduction, all it knows is that it, really, really wants to get laid.

I wouldn't say that someone who doesn't want to have kids has something wrong them. However I would say that someone who absolutely zero sexual desire has something wrong with them. Whether it has genetic or chemical causal factors, being devoid of sexual desire is as abnormal as missing an arm.

Of course and as a human being you can clearly weigh up the pro's and cons of reproducing. So why not be able to the same for continuing to live? if they weight up all the pro's and con's and there's con's why does that mean there's a chemical imbalance?

Life for millions and millions of people isn't a very "pleasant" experience.

seamus wrote: »

Such is the same for the desire to live.
But one would need a rationale, a reason why they don't want to live. There is only "this world", there is nothing else. It's this or decaying in the ground. What possible rationale is there to justify not wanting to exist, except unhappiness with existence?

and some people would prefer to decay in the ground again, but why making this decision means you have some sort of chemical imbalance is bizarre. spending 900e on a pair of Christian Louboutin shoes would show me more of an imbalance than someone wanting to die.

seamus wrote: »

Alcohol keeps suicide rates down? Right....

Maybe do a little research on the link between alcohol abuse and suicide rates before you make such blatantly ill-informed statements.

That was partly tongue and cheek, e.g. spending a large part of your week under the influence will hide away the reality of how **** things can be around you

irishh_bob

Strata wrote: »

Suicide is often considered a selfish act by a person. Friends and loved ones feel guilty and wonder what they could have done to prevent the person from feeling so desperate that they wanted to end their life.

There is often a lot of anger at the suicide victim for leaving their loved ones behind.

I believe that in some instances, people commit suicide because they're depressed and if they sought medical help then they wouldn't feel suicidal.

But I also think that there are some people who commit suicide who just don't want to live anymore - they're not depressed, they just don't enjoy life and don't want to continue living and no amount of medication/treatment will make them feel any different.

Nobody asked to be born so surely people should be able to choose to die without having to worry about leaving behind loved ones full of grief and anger.

I suppose what I'm really wondering is: do you think it will it ever be socially acceptable to end your own life?

probabley not as a lot of people perfer the lie

i.e , that suicide is a cowardly act , how anyone could objectivley believe this is beyond me

that its a permanent solution to a temporary problem , this bland inane cliche is usually trotted out by people who have the most basic understanding of depression or horrible possitions people find themselves in , problems are often not temporary

thats god has a plan for everyone or that everyone can be successfull and happy , god allows thousands of kids to die every day of hunger , why would he give a **** about rich westerners , the universe requires none of theese things , we are insignificant , ashes and dust

on a personal level , ive the upmost respect for those who end it ,better than being a monotonous pill popping , couch sitting bore who whines to a shrink once per week , would have done it myself on many occasion only i lacked the bottle to take the ultimate step , suicide is a dignified way of dealing with the loss of happiness , the breaking of spirit and the destruction of self esteem , on your own terms , something very admirable about that

nicechick!

Strata wrote: »

Taking on board Seamus and r3nu4l's posts perhaps my question really should be: do you think suicide will ever be socially acceptable for a person who is suffering chronic depression and who has exhausted every treatment option with no alleviation of the disease?

Thanks

Yes it will as people of becoming more aware, empathic & accepting of mental health. Understanding of depression is key to this as tragically for some the end result is suicide but when it gets personal it will always in my view be questioned by those suffering the tragic loss of a loved one.

nicechick!

irishh_bob wrote: »

probabley not as a lot of people perfer the lie

i.e , that suicide is a cowardly act , how anyone could objectivley believe this is beyond me

that its a permanent solution to a temporary problem , this bland inane cliche is usually trotted out by people who have the most basic understanding of depression or horrible possitions people find themselves in , problems are often not temporary

thats god has a plan for everyone or that everyone can be successfull and happy , god allows thousands of kids to die every day of hunger , why would he give a **** about rich westerners , the universe requires none of theese things , we are insignificant , ashes and dust

on a personal level , ive the upmost respect for those who end it ,better than being a monotonous pill popping , couch sitting bore who whines to a shrink once per week , would have done it myself on many occasion only i lacked the bottle to take the ultimate step , suicide is a dignified way of dealing with the loss of happiness , the breaking of spirit and the destruction of self esteem , on your own terms , something very admirable about that

I agree somewhat a friend ''attempted'' a while back though thankfully things have improved for her I actually thought at the time ''you brave girl'' (though I will never admit this to her)

Now not all are pill popping, couch sitting or whiners I might add!! For many have pretty successful life's can actually interact socially, good careers, active have interests/hobbies etc but are miserable while doing so!! In fact they may hate every minute of it but choose not to let there battle with depression to rule! They will also know that Its also very important to talk to a professional or professionals it is not a battle to be won alone

drkpower

seamus wrote: »

The hard part is around whether we have the right to choose when to die in general. I don't actually have a specific problem with a perfectly healthy person killing themselves "just because". However I believe that's a logical paradox because someone who would choose to end their life for no reason is not someone of sound mind. Could chronic depression count as "suffering intolerably"? Perhaps. But how many people with depression remain completely unchanged, regardless of treatments?

That simply isnt true. The law already accepts that people can choose to end their life for any reason, or indeed no reason (in the context of refusa of life-saving treatment). You can want to kill yourself for 'no reason' and be 'of sound mind'.

seamus wrote: »

If someone with depression could convince (let's say) a jury of ten people that their suffering is both intolerable and effectively untreatable, should the jury be allowed to sanction that person's legal death?.

I dont see what a jury would add to this -on what grounds could a jury find against an individual, who says his suffering is intolerable, and who has indicated they want to kill themselves? Why not just accept the word of the individual (assuming they have beeed psychiatrically assessed and 'cleared')?

midlandsmissus

seamus wrote: »

My argument in regards to someone who just "doesn't want to live anymore" is that it means that there is something functionally wrong with them.

If someone says, "I don't enjoy life any more", then the obvious solution is to change your life into a format that you do enjoy. Making it a reasonable thing for someone to "opt-out" of life because they're bored is ignoring the simple fact that boredom can be alleviated.

In all other cases, a desire to end ones life is likely down to some kind of chemical imbalance in the body, causing emotional stress to override the innate desire for self-preservation.

Or to put it more simply, there is no reasoning that an otherwise healthy person can give for suicide which does not have a non-lethal solution.

Philosophical thought can make everything seem futile, but the ultimate futility of life doesn't logically link with ending it. If life is futile, then why not just do your best to enjoy yourself? What can ending one's life solve that living it can't?

I do think that with the general erosion of religious authority in the west, assisted suicide will become more and more acceptable in cases of terminal illness or exceptional suffering. I have yet to speak to anyone who objects to euthanisia on humanitarian grounds (at least from a general moral level), yet it's considered a political hot potato and a taboo subject because religious groups will continually voice their objection to it.

'Change your life into a format that you do enjoy'. You're missing a major reason for suicide. What if it's something that you CANT change, something that happened in the past. For example sexual abuse or rape, where you are haunted by thoughts of it every second of every day. There is no peace, no escape. I would read Bill Zeller's suicide note for a good understanding on this one.

midlandsmissus

midlandsmissus wrote: »

'Change your life into a format that you do enjoy'. You're missing a major reason for suicide. What if it's something that you CANT change, something that happened in the past. For example sexual abuse or rape, where you are haunted by thoughts of it every second of every day. There is no peace, no escape. I would read Bill Zeller's suicide note for a good understanding on this one.

I think he was talking about "just not wanting to live anymore" when otherwise healthy; I don't think past abuse falls under that category.
What happened to Bill Zeller was heartbreaking though.

midlandsmissus

bluewolf wrote: »

I think he was talking about "just not wanting to live anymore" when otherwise healthy; I don't think past abuse falls under that category.
What happened to Bill Zeller was heartbreaking though.

Ok I agree, Suicide is the choice of the tormented. If some-one decides I don't want anymore of life, I agree, they must have some underlying torment.

strobe

midlandsmissus wrote: »

'Change your life into a format that you do enjoy'. You're missing a major reason for suicide. What if it's something that you CANT change, something that happened in the past. For example sexual abuse or rape, where you are haunted by thoughts of it every second of every day. There is no peace, no escape. I would read Bill Zeller's suicide note for a good understanding on this one.

bluewolf wrote: »

I think he was talking about "just not wanting to live anymore" when otherwise healthy; I don't think past abuse falls under that category.
What happened to Bill Zeller was heartbreaking though.

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Ok I agree, Suicide is the choice of the tormented. If some-one decides I don't want anymore of life, I agree, they must have some underlying torment.

While Seamus may have been talking about people "just not wanting to live anymore" I don't see why something that happened in the past wouldn't fall under that category. Past abuse would be a cause, a cause that can't be changed but it is the effect or the 'symptom' which can be changed. Someone paralysed through a stroke can't go back in time and change the fact that the stroke happened but that does not mean the effects of the stroke can not be treated. We can't change the past, you can't travel back in time and change the fact that you were abused or mistreated or saddened in some way but that doesn't mean that the effect it has had on someone can't be alleviated.

opinion guy

Strata I may be reading into things here but I'm forced to ask - are you asking this question out of a personal desire for death/suicide ?

Please understand I ask that with no judgement whatsoever

midlandsmissus

strobe wrote: »

While Seamus may have been talking about people "just not wanting to live anymore" I don't see why something that happened in the past wouldn't fall under that category. Past abuse would be a cause, a cause that can't be changed but it is the effect or the 'symptom' which can be changed. Someone paralysed through a stroke can't go back in time and change the fact that the stroke happened but that does not mean the effects of the stroke can not be treated. We can't change the past, you can't travel back in time and change the fact that you were abused or mistreated or saddened in some way but that doesn't mean that the effect it has had on someone can't be alleviated.

Yeah I think that's my great life's work. . To learn how to forgive. And not let a past issue affect you. But how do you forgive? I saw a great documentary about a daughter of a Manson murder's victim, who had forgiven her parent's killer, Tex Watson, and even campaigned for his parole, and she had great peace of mind. Suicide really is the choice for those who have no peace of mind every second of every day. I've been there and been suicidal, thankfully feeling hope again now, and in a better place. But think if I could just reach that elusive forgiveness I would be eternally free from what happened.

midlandsmissus

Also Strata, Irishb_obb and nicechick! I don't know if you're suicidal now or have been and you don't need to say, but I was absolutley at death's door a few months ago after an incident which pushed me over the edge, every second I thought about suicide, and made one attempt which hospitalised me. A few very kind people reached out to me here on boards.ie, (including the lovely strobe above), and it was a ray of light that pierced into the depths of my black mind. For a start it got through to me that there are kind people in the world. So I want you to know that even though I'm an anonymous boards user I care about ye as human beings and if you ever want to pm me please do. I can say now I am glad I survived, and things can get better from the unimaginable black hole a very depressed person is in. I'm testiment to that .

irishh_bob

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Also Strata, Irishb_obb and nicechick! I don't know if you're suicidal now or have been and you don't need to say, but I was absolutley at death's door a few months ago after an incident which pushed me over the edge, every second I thought about suicide, and made one attempt which hospitalised me. A few very kind people reached out to me here on boards.ie, (including the lovely strobe above), and it was a ray of light that pierced into the depths of my black mind. For a start it got through to me that there are kind people in the world. So I want you to know that even though I'm an anonymous boards user I care about ye as human beings and if you ever want to pm me please do. I can say now I am glad I survived, and things can get better from the unimaginable black hole a very depressed person is in. I'm testiment to that .

you make a lot of valid points in your last few posts , i myself was the victim of torment in the past by someone , well two people actually but one in particular defined the course of my life , i think about this person everyday but have no idea where they even are , this troubles me as i dont believe i will ever have closure unless i settle things with them , was the victim of extreme bullying in the workplace while overaseas in my early twentys , i didnt realise the seriousness of it at the time and foolishly stuck around too long for more punishment , the psychological abuse completley twisted my thinking and for a while i thought i was in the wrong and done things i regret to this day as a result of this forged mindset , it change me forever , i havent come close to my old self in thirteen years and know i never will , as i said before , i think a lot of people who get depressed cannot live with the loss of the old self and as such , decide to end it , im a coward and dont have the bottle to follow thought but even 12 and a half yrs after my ( public ) suicide attempt , i wish i had suceeded , life really didnt get any better since , thier hasnt been anything of value which has happened since

Strata

..

Fuinseog

Strata wrote: »

Suicide is often considered a selfish act by a person. Friends and loved ones feel guilty and wonder what they could have done to prevent the person from feeling so desperate that they wanted to end their life.

There is often a lot of anger at the suicide victim for leaving their loved ones behind.

I believe that in some instances, people commit suicide because they're depressed and if they sought medical help then they wouldn't feel suicidal.

But I also think that there are some people who commit suicide who just don't want to live anymore - they're not depressed, they just don't enjoy life and don't want to continue living and no amount of medication/treatment will make them feel any different.

Nobody asked to be born so surely people should be able to choose to die without having to worry about leaving behind loved ones full of grief and anger.

I suppose what I'm really wondering is: do you think it will it ever be socially acceptable to end your own life?

suicide is a matter of honour amongst some. Until relatively amongst gentlemen it was away to cleanse wrongdoing or to make good disgrace.

some business people who lost in the current economic climate sought this way.