In my opinion, anyone has the right to end their life, regardless their reasons (and even without telling these reasons to anyone). To me it’s a basic human right akin to the right to live.
In addition, it would be only fair, if everyone had access to “eternal sleep” pills, that gently end your life (no questions asked) + a paid service, that would take care of your remains, your property, open bills etc.
Whether you lived a happy life, or you wish, you were never born – you should be able to choose the most enjoyable or at least a dignified setting to end it. (For myself I would wish a deserted shore without any company, or with cute girl/woman. I’m not talking about a date, though I wouldn’t judge people who want a date.) Obviously, one should be considerate of other people too – no need to let other people see your dead body (besides a “final journey” service employee or another willing escort person, a mortician and friends, who wish to attend your funeral). There is no need for the society to pay for an expensive farewell setting. One could sign a special insurance in advance, or just save the money for this event. If no savings / insurance are available, just allow people, who want to die, take the pills in some place close to a morgue etc.
Working as an employee of a “final journey” service, doesn’t sound like dream job, but IMHO there’re worse jobs out there. I don’t know how I would feel about it, but if not enough people were willing to do this job, I would volunteer to participate at least for a short time (probably I would even decline the payment). The state should just protect these people (along with the ones willing to die) from anti-choice vigilantes and the like.
I think, if all the above was implemented, the world would become a better place, and even less people would want to die. Disrespect for the death wish itself and the ones, who wish/try to end their lives, places a course on our world. Not an attempt to end one’s own life desecrates life in general. Forcing life upon others desecrates it.
I guess, there would be quite a few cases, when people change their mind and decide to stay alive for a while – so be it. (Much, much better than failed suicide attempts we hear about nowadays.) Obviously, our “final journey” service should have a clause on this, and the escort should not be pushy by any means and in any direction. (Oh, and when I say “our”, I mean anyone who supports this idea in pro-choice community, or even the whole world – the way it should be, a world, that I could call my world…)
21 comments
Why is it that whenever someone starts talking about rights / human rights, it always leads into a tangent about someone else providing some kind of product or service? I wouldn’t want to meet the people providing that product or performing that service. That would disturb me, knowing human nature.
But furthermore, whatever happened to the idea of autonomous rights? When this whole idea of natural rights was born, people figured that everyone, in a state of nature, had ultimate freedom – they were unrestrained by laws or obligations and could just do whatever they wanted, which ultimately winds up destroying freedom as it promotes the rise of tyrants and despots. But the idea was that this state of nature is the pure expression of human will. You can do whatsoever you want, regardless of laws or obligations, but other people might not like it. Suicide is an extreme examples of that logic – other people might not want to help you kill yourself, but they can’t stop you from doing it, even if they want to. If it were any other way, I’d probably feel worse because any other way would demand a proliferation of all the awful things I see in the world that lead to feeling this way.
All I want is that:
A) Suicide pills (akin to certain sleep drug, but better) are available for any adult (no questions asked; maybe just some measure to reduce the risk of misusing it)
B) All laws demanding prevention of suicide (or reporting suicide intent/attempts) are abolished
C) Commercial and voluntary services as described above are legal
( For example, I think, it would be just fair, if a person suffering so much, that they want to die, doesn’t need to plan every little thing one by one – from funeral/cremation to clearing of the apartment, cancelling any open subscriptions, inheritance etc. Then, if they fail or decide to live – they would need to revert everything (if they’re even in condition to take care of it), etc. )
D) Vigilantes, that try to prevent suicides or harass employees and volunteers mentioned above, should be dealt with in such a manner, that they lose any interest to continue being pests.
You don’t want to meet people providing such services? You know what, you don’t need to!
I for one would not want to meet people, who oppose making such services legal.
I’m more than happy about abolishing those laws, but commercializing suicide? That’s like an affirmation that nobody really cares, one way or the other – industrializing apathy more than attempting to address it, which would kind of reinforce feelings of worthlessness in people. The same way the current system promotes feelings of powerlessness and isolation.
The reason I said I wouldn’t want to meet the people providing those services is because I’ve already met plenty of people who would relish at the thought of it, because they enjoy that sort of thing. Those are the people who would be drawn to it, and would proliferate because of it. Just look at the economy right now – businesses aren’t content to keep their profit margins stable, they demand growth. And growth lies in creating a demand for something, and encouraging it. Why would this be any different than erectile dysfunction drugs or antidepressants?
Well, I gave you a concrete example in my last post (it’s the block “C” now, I fixed the letters).
Are you saying that you would oppose making such a service legal (support a legislation making it illegal) ?
Whatever problems may arise from allowing commercial services like that, the situation when these services are prohibited appeals me even less.
I think abolishing laws prohibiting suicide (which, imo, is an absurd kind of law that rightly needs to be abolished, like a prohibition against fishing for whales in Utah) would be a good thing, but I think services that do final planning / arrangements could already feasibly exist (per living wills, arrangements with an attorney etc). I don’t see why it should be streamlined by making it specifically legal /for that purpose/ though. It seems redundant.
But if we’re talking about suicide on-demand, or services that offer a no-hassle “full service” suicide packages, I think that’s another can of worms entirely, as I’ve touched on already. Everyone already has the right to kill themselves, regardless of what the rest of society thinks. People do it all the time. I’d rather see government used towards making society better, rather than providing an option to exit it if you don’t like it. That seems like something any government worth its salt would exploit to the fullest degree, as well as something corporations would eat up like crack cocaine.
I think, in the most western countries there are already no laws prohibiting suicide attempts.
What needs to be abolished are the laws, that allow police to “save” you against your will (unless you endanger others), and allow doctors to hold you in a psychiatric hospitals/wards against your will (and possibly even treat you against your will).
It seems, we’re both strongly convinced regarding elimination of hassle for these who wish to end their lives, so no point to debate this anymore as long it’s just us 2 in this thread.
But are you in favor of allowing people (who wish to die, yet are not terminally ill and don’t experience physical pain) to legally obtain the well known sleeping drug, used by Dignitas ?
None of my suggestions should require a notable allocation of government’s resources. And if some resources are required – just rise the money via appropriate insurance (a special insurance for these, who wish to have easy access to the well known sleeping drug, related information and a place to end their life instead of doing it at home “to maximize landlord’s satisfaction”.)
I support the abolishion of drug laws, and expansion of personal autonomy, but I don’t support government or private organizations trying to simplify the act of ending one’s life. I think, biologically, we’re wired how we are to prevent us from treating life flippantly. If there’s enough motivation for a person to seriously go through with suicide, that barrier of difficulty exists to filter out those who aren’t in enough chronic pain to overcome that threshold. I’d rather keep the choice in the hands of the individual and nature. Also, I don’t really give a damn about my landlord, so if I do ever kill myself, I’ll make sure to do it at home so as to inconvenience that greedy SOB as much as possible. 😛 Just sayin’.
As much of a benefit to those that are suicidal a law like this could be, I doubt that it will ever happen. In fact, I think I agree with the majority of xanadu’s points. For one a lot of suicidal people end up changing their minds, seeking help, turning their life around etc. But if access to easy, painless suicide methods is given, these people might make a split second decision on impulse. Also, most suicidal people are “sick” emotionally and DO want help, they just don’t know how to ask for it. The majority don’t really want to die, they just don’t want to live like this. I believe, yes, everyone already has the right to end their life. It may not be painless, it may be scary, but they do have the right if they don’t stop themselves. For those of us that have chose this route and dwelled on the decision for months, years even, we have come to terms with that. Giving a prescription of such lethality to ANYONE that wants it, as you’ve stated, would lead to so many deaths. So many people that could have been saved if they sought help. Psychiatric treatment might not work for everyone…but
for many it does especially those without chronic illness.
Your main concern seems to be, that “emotionally sick” people and the ones who easily change their mind would access a painless and sure method.
Then how about a compromise, that only these, who are not sick (or reject any kind of treatment, isn’t it their right?) + wait 3 (or 6, or 12) months, would access this painless and sure method?
Are you really OK with the situation, that people, who are already unlucky and pained, are forced to experience more pain and fear, or break laws to acquire prohibited or restricted drugs?
People that are not emotionally struggling or do not have a mental illness rarely turn to suicide unless it is as a means to end circumstances that have not gone right in their lives. To those, I suggest things can get better and it’s worth waiting out. As someone who is “already unlucky and pained” and was “forced to experience more pain and fear”, I know what it’s like. FYI drugs aren’t the only way to exit this life. I hear death via shotgun bullet to the head is painless and quick. For the most part, if you live in the US and state laws allow it, firearms are easy to get a hold of. Why would the government give quick access to drugs and essentially promote suicide, as xanadu stated? Yes, people commit suicide as a means to escape pain. Your main point is that if people understood what kind of pain we, assuming you are suicidal since it’s your topic of choice, go through that they would readily help us in our plight for relief. The answer is no. They will never understand because for a lot of people it is a temporary problem. Why expect the government to help? It is your right to not seek help, yes. But I am saying the vast majority are uneducated about mental health and what kind of help they will recieve; add to that the stigma that comes with suicide. That is why most don’t seek help. I think you should at least give it a shot before you go so at least you tried. But hey what do I know.
Awesome. So you’ve reasons why basically every group should not have access to a good method to end their live.
Please don’t throw expressions like “FYI” at me in such a context. I’ve been to suicide forums for like 15 years already (with longer pauses). I’ve read a lot about methods, and I personally do have access to a good one (not going to post it for an obvious reason).
I live in Germany, not in US. I never tried to acquire a gun, but it seems to be not as easy as in some states in USA. But more importantly, I find a violent, bloody method like a shotgun disgusting. I don’t want a gun sticking in my mouth, or even just pointed at me be the last thing I experience in my life. Nor would I say that this method is fair for the most people.
“Why would the government give quick access to drugs and essentially promote suicide, as xanadu stated?”
1. Just 3 posts above this one xanadu said, that he supports abolition of drug laws, which would be awesome IMHO.
2. Allowing doesn’t mean promoting. I really hate it when people twist words like that.
3. As for why they should do it – obviously there’s no point for them to do it, unless the majority in the country wants it.
“Your main point is that if people understood what kind of pain we, assuming you are suicidal since it’s your topic of choice, go through that they would readily help us in our plight for relief.”
I don’t know what you’re smoking, but would you kindly refer to where exactly I make this point? It’s just BS. Frankly, I’m tired of this discussion. I assumed that here I’m among like-minded people and don’t need to argue much, at least when it comes to availability of good methods. I thought, we would be talking about fine details, yet it feels almost like I’m arguing with an anti-choice person.
I’m not talking about US gov. Nor am I talking about any other current or near future gov. I’m talking about my dream. You don’t need to convince me, that my proposal is very unlikely to be implemented any time soon. I just wanted to share my feelings with like-minded people, that’s all.
I would suggest that even mental illness / emotional distress can be transient in severity – it might seem like you’re stuck in an endless spiral that can only get worse, but that’s how you feel in that moment, and there are always possible ways things might get better in time. We’re creatures that adapt, and the mind is a very malleable thing.
I disagree…but to the topic at hand. Consider this: if the government were to give these drugs to people, how much do you think all these services would cost? They would definitely charge a pretty penny. What about the people that can’t afford these services? They are forced to suffer then and go about dying the traditional way which kind of defeats the purpose if you ask me. After all, how many people commit suicide because of financial trouble? If the government provided these services for free or reduced cost, whose money do you think would be covering those costs? Taxpayers. And the average American, assuming you live in America, OP, is not going to want to pay for someone to commit suicide. They average American taxpayer could give a shit less whether you die in a gutter on the side of the street when it comes to their money especially regarding stigma of suicide and they are certainly not going to allow such a law to pass. So, if you have the money to pay for the easy hypothetical route, then it would be just as easy to take a trip to Mexico and get the required to end your life. That’s my argument, all emotions and moral standing aside.
required medication*
What kind of drugs are you talking about??? Production of N (aka PS) is pretty cheap, it’s used to euthanize dogs and even large animals like horses! Do I need to explain you why exactly it’s expensive in US atm?
The last but not the least…
I always wondered, if maybe MAYBE availability of a good method (easy, sure, painless, peaceful – like a sleeping drug) wouldn’t necessary make all these people who “are “sick” emotionally and DO want help” (as well as the ones with temporary problems) kill themselves in droves? Maybe if they knew, that the method will not fail, no one will stop them, they’d die 100% – maybe they would be forced to see important things more clearly? I bet – at least some of them would fight harder and never try to kill themselves.
Speaking as someone in America, that kind of optimism would get a slap in the face by the reality of how ridiculous and impulse-driven most people seem to be. I dunno if it’s different across the pond, but here, if that sort of method were readily available and promoted as such, many, many people would use it because their boyfriends/girlfriends left them, or they were mad at their parents, or because of minor setbacks that put them into an emotional fervor. People can be the stupidest primates.
But we don’t know for sure, do we?
Hm… In the picture you painted they appear big children… Perhaps it’s time for them to grow up? Or least the next generation can grow up?
That kind of gets to the root of why I don’t like the idea of euthanasia clinics – it seems too much like instant gratification. All the return with none of the effort, which is the pandemic I see every day when I walk out my front door.
I said “services”, not drugs alone. Who do you think cleans up the mess when someone commits suicide? Their family? You said someone should be able to commit suicide at a place of their choosing and you mentioned insurance as well. All of that costs money.
And who cleans it up now? And what kind of mess are you talking about?
I said “If no savings / insurance are available, just allow people, who want to die, take the pills in some place close to a morgue etc.”
It’s a much bigger mess if someone uses a shotgun or dies even a peaceful death, yet is not found soon in a rented apartment.
Sure, the govt doesn’t need to pay for this, but it’s a strain put on the landlord, people who find the corpse, neighbours, their family members and friends etc. – this strain has a bigger negative impact than a bit money spent on managing a place next to morgue where people can die without traumatizing others.
Also, if we consider other suicides and attempts like jumping from buildings and bridges, car crashes, suicides by trains, etc. – again, the summary negative impact is much higher than bit money spent in advance.