Its not euthanasia, its suicide.

[Twilight Hue]

not accepting unsupported bold empty claims is not denial.

It is when you dismiss peer reviewed material that deals with the subject.

 

[McBell]

It is when you dismiss peer reviewed material that deals with the subject.

It appears you know the article you presented does not support your claims....

 

[Twilight Hue]

It appears you know the article you presented does not support your claims....

Stay in denial then.

 

[McBell]

Stay in denial then.

not accepting unsupported bold empty claims is not denial

 

[The Sum of Awe]

It's almost as if you're suggesting just because one person can cope with particular issue/s then everybody else should.

And one's internal life may have aspects hidden from other people, even one's nearest and dearest.

I'm quite gobsmacked at the "pull yourself together I'm coping" attitude. My choices about my life are my concern and no-one else.

I think it's a good suggestion that if one person can cope with particular issues, then everybody else should learn to cope with them as well. If a person becomes paraplegic and struggles endlessly trying to cope with that, should we allow them to give up because they simply don't want to live with that?

You may say that isn't comparable to mental illness, and I'd agree. Paraplegia is physical and learning to deal with its limitations are much more concrete, unlike Borderline PD and Autism which vary from patient to patient, have no physical means of observing their internal struggles, and are still somewhat mysterious.

The issue here is that suicide is a permanent solution to a finite problem. The problem is finite if this person is still able to function in the world (as others mentioned: she has a SO, she has a pet, a job, etc). She is still incredibly young. It's not only possible, but I'd say likely, that with the right help and maybe another decade, she could turn this around and learn to deal or live with these mental health issues. As others have noted, it's very possible that the "Treatment Resistance" is misdiagnosed. There are many people who have considered suicide, or even attempted suicide, and are glad they survived years later.

 

[The Hammer]

I think it's a good suggestion that if one person can cope with particular issues, then everybody else should learn to cope with them as well. If a person becomes paraplegic and struggles endlessly trying to cope with that, should we allow them to give up because they simply don't want to live with that?

Yes we should let them give up.

You may say that isn't comparable to mental illness, and I'd agree. Paraplegia is physical and learning to deal with its limitations are much more concrete, unlike Borderline PD and Autism which vary from patient to patient, have no physical means of observing their internal struggles, and are still somewhat mysterious.

So what?

The issue here is that suicide is a permanent solution to a finite problem.

I don't disagree.

The problem is finite if this person is still able to function in the world (as others mentioned: she has a SO, she has a pet, a job, etc). She is still incredibly young. It's not only possible, but I'd say likely, that with the right help and maybe another decade, she could turn this around and learn to deal or live with these mental health issues.

Why should she have to struggle for a decade? What's gives us the right to say other people have to be happy/content/non-suicidal.

Not our call. It's hers.

As others have noted, it's very possible that the "Treatment Resistance" is misdiagnosed. There are many people who have considered suicide, or even attempted suicide, and are glad they survived years later.

Very true. But it's not our decision to make.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Why should she have to struggle for a decade? What's gives us the right to say other people have to be happy/content/non-suicidal.

The same reason most people would try to talk a loved one out of it. Because life is valuable, and people who are thinking of these things aren't being rational in their decisions. Emotional thinking is at hand here in the suicidal person, and logical thinking is at hand when we can provide evidence that people can lead successful lives with these mental disorders, and also when we provide evidence that she is functioning in her life currently (even though she is in pain). Logical reasoning > emotional reasoning for making permanent decisions every time.

Not our call. It's hers.

Very true. But it's not our decision to make.

To what degree should we let people just do whatever they want? In my opinion, the line should be drawn when they are literally destroying their lives. Should we even eliminate the wait time for these things, and allow them to do this euthanasia in under a month's time after they are diagnosed with "Treatment Resistant Depression"? Should we allow anorexic people to continue their unhealthy habit of vomiting and starving themselves?

 

[The Hammer]

The same reason most people would try to talk a loved one out of it. Because life is valuable, and people who are thinking of these things aren't being rational in their decisions. Emotional thinking is at hand here in the suicidal person, and logical thinking is at hand when we can provide evidence that people can lead successful lives with these mental disorders, and also when we provide evidence that she is functioning in her life currently (even though she is in pain). Logical reasoning > emotional reasoning for making permanent decisions every time.

I don't really care if a person is making a logical or emotional decision, both are valid choices from their perspective, which matters more than anything else.

To what degree should we let people just do whatever they want? In my opinion, the line should be drawn when they are literally destroying their lives. Should we even eliminate the wait time for these things, and allow them to do this euthanasia in under a month's time after they are diagnosed with "Treatment Resistant Depression"? Should we allow anorexic people to continue their unhealthy habit of vomiting and starving themselves?

We stop people from infringing on the freedom and safety of others, not themselves. People are free to destroy their own lives.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I don't really care if a person is making a logical or emotional decision, both are valid choices from their perspective, which matters more than anything else.


We stop people from infringing on the freedom and safety of others, not themselves. People are free to destroy their own lives.

If someone is determined to destroy their own life, they will one way or another. But medical doctors participating and allowing this treatment option without rebuttal? In an indirect way, it seems they're encouraging it by telling people "Yeah, it's okay to do this. Not only will we not stop you, we will help you."

What if doctors decided to give heroin addicts heroin because the addicts refused to quit?

 

[The Hammer]

If someone is determined to destroy their own life, they will one way or another.

Exactly

But medical doctors participating and allowing this treatment option without rebuttal? In an indirect way, it seems they're encouraging it by telling people "Yeah, it's okay to do this. Not only will we not stop you, we will help you."

It could also be seen as more humane. What's the alternative? The patient uses a shotgun? A large amount of pills leading to seizure/cardiac arrest?

What if doctors decided to give heroin addicts heroin because the addicts refused to quit?

They kind of do do this. Methadone for instance.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Exactly

It could also be seen as more humane. What's the alternative? The patient uses a shotgun? A large amount of pills leading to seizure/cardiac arrest?

What concerns me is that, should every single person who wants to commit suicide be allowed to without question? There are so many people who've turned their life around after a good fight, many years later, and appreciated life even more afterwards. If we allow anyone who's suicidal to do this, where does it end? We will have no more turn around stories like this, anyone who is miserable in their life will have no more motive to keep going or trying to improve it. Any trauma or depression becomes a death sentence if practices that allow such low standards for suicide persist.

There is a Reddit thread about this, and so many people are saying they want to go out like this woman. People give up too easy when the option to give up is right in front of them: https://www.reddit.com/r/awfuleverything/comments/1bv2m17

They kind of do do this. Methadone for instance.

I'm not well informed on this. Is this a temporary thing to ween them off, or is it actually meant to feed their addiction?

 

[EconGuy]

This recent story involving a perfectly healthy woman who was told her depression is incurable and she will never ever get better

I'd like to point out that the story calls it "crippling depression, autism and multiple personality disorder."

Nothing about that is healthy.

That said, I agree that it's a shame, but why can't people who are objectively suffering be allowed to end their own lives? Because it hurts others sensibilities?

I mean, I would agree that the decision shouldn't be taken lightly and every reasonable measure should be taken to help anyone that wants to end their own lives because of their mental illness and suffering, but if dying is easier than living, I don't see why anyone has, after making a reasonable attempt to help her, the right to tell her that she can't end her life peacefully. If she's not allowed, what are the chances she'll say, "oh, ok, never mind, might as well do the best I can!"?

 

[McBell]

What concerns me is that, should every single person who wants to commit suicide be allowed to without question?

What are you talking about?
There were at minimum two doctors, and three council members who signed off on this.

How is that anything close to "without question"?

The Dutch Euthanasia law:

Dutch law on Termination of life on request and assisted suicide (complete text) – The World Federation of Right to Die Societies

wfrtds.org

 

[The Sum of Awe]

What are you talking about?
There were at minimum two doctors, and three council members who signed off on this.

How is that anything close to "without question"?

The Dutch Euthanasia law:

Dutch law on Termination of life on request and assisted suicide (complete text) – The World Federation of Right to Die Societies

wfrtds.org

To me it means mental health science is throwing in the flag. "There's nothing else we can do for you" just doesn't sound like something a professional psychiatrist would say, when there could be plenty of others who would have not given up supporting her in the best way possible.

Another thing that worries me is, in a capitalist society, it's likely the process would become more dumbed down and easier the more repeated situations like these happen. And who's going to stop them? Certainly not the government who allowed this program in the first place. A dead person is cheaper than a living person who's using up resources. We know big pharma is in bed with the government, we know oil companies are, why should doctors be any different?

Maybe when we get to a place where mental health disorders are not linked with social inequalities, then we can talk about whether or not this was a decision made by a person's own freewill. Otherwise, it's a slippery slope to class genocide. Veterans, disabled, the poor... let them all go and tell them it was their choice.

 

[The Hammer]

Any trauma or depression becomes a death sentence if practices that allow such low standards for suicide persist.

That's just a slippery slope argument. Those that want to will do it regardless, as you've stated. So why not give them access in a humane way?

Those that want help should also have access to that as well, it's a win-win as I see it.

 

[Secret Chief]

That's just a slippery slope argument. Those that want to will do it regardless, as you've stated. So why not give them access in a humane way?

Those that want help should also have access to that as well, it's a win-win as I see it.

I'm reminded of the fact that (until 1961) suicide was a criminal offence. Wtf? Did they bring you back to life so they could charge you? What was the punishment for a failed attempt: hanging?

 

[Secret Chief]

The issue here is that suicide is a permanent solution to a finite problem. The problem is finite if this person is still able to function in the world (as others mentioned: she has a SO, she has a pet, a job, etc). She is still incredibly young. It's not only possible, but I'd say likely, that with the right help and maybe another decade, she could turn this around and learn to deal or live with these mental health issues. As others have noted, it's very possible that the "Treatment Resistance" is misdiagnosed. There are many people who have considered suicide, or even attempted suicide, and are glad they survived years later.

So if I wanted to end my life you think I shouldn't be allowed to? Am I going to be on suicide watch for a decade?

 

[Twilight Hue]

I'd like to point out that the story calls it "crippling depression, autism and multiple personality disorder."

Nothing about that is healthy.

That said, I agree that it's a shame, but why can't people who are objectively suffering be allowed to end their own lives? Because it hurts others sensibilities?

I mean, I would agree that the decision shouldn't be taken lightly and every reasonable measure should be taken to help anyone that wants to end their own lives because of their mental illness and suffering, but if dying is easier than living, I don't see why anyone has, after making a reasonable attempt to help her, the right to tell her that she can't end her life peacefully. If she's not allowed, what are the chances she'll say, "oh, ok, never mind, might as well do the best I can!"?

I posted if she wants to off herself, that is her choice.

However I don't condone so called 'health' professionals going on about how she is completely hopeless and might as well off herself. Those people shouldnt be licensed.

Only exceptions of course are clearly terminal conditions to avoid what is inevitable anyways. That's what euthanasia was implemented for when it was originally instituted.

 

[Twilight Hue]

That's just a slippery slope argument. Those that want to will do it regardless, as you've stated. So why not give them access in a humane way?

Those that want help should also have access to that as well, it's a win-win as I see it.

I don't think suicide should ever be an easy painless endeavor in chronic situations. Sometimes that harshness causes people to snap out of that mindset.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It's almost as if you're suggesting just because one person can cope with particular issue/s then everybody else should.

And one's internal life may have aspects hidden from other people, even one's nearest and dearest.

I'm quite gobsmacked at the "pull yourself together I'm coping" attitude. My choices about my life are my concern and no-one else.

I think that's actually what @Rival is saying. I am definitely not saying that. And I agree with your sentiments.

I was taken aback by the "other people have had it worse so get over yourself" type of attitude. Everyone takes in and processes things differently Something that traumatized one person for life, could be "fine" for another person to cope with and vice versa.