Yeah life is like the casino fallacy. Just keep living, keep playing and stay in the game - eventually you'll hit that jackpot, they say.
Everybody likes to think in terms of jackpots. You always hear about the successes, but the failures are filed away; the "File Drawer" effect. It'll get better doesn't work that way if you do the math. The more you keep playing the more you keep bleeding a 3% house edge. The few will be heralded as jackpot poster kids, the rest will end up worse off in the long run no matter whatever perceived temporarily improvement. Improvements and wins are only relative, in the grand scheme of things if you're not content at least over 50% of the time, a life of 80% pain for 20% gain (both of equal magnitude) it's not rational to play. It's like playing at a clandestine lemonade stand Casino where I flip a coin where the house Edge is 60%. For every win on $100 wager you get your hundred bucks back plus $40 winnings, but for every loss you lose your complete $100 wager. If this was a math problem you would win by not playing as it would be completely irrational. But when it comes to blindsided pro-life dichotomy, they say you should keep playing! Apparently it's not irrational to play a game that's rigged against you. As long as you're alive to buy the lemonade and hemorrhage, stay alive and in the game, they say.
Hypocrisy with the suicide is irrational fallacy. But I can't blame academia, there would definitely be a lot of upheaval and heat if suicide were hailed rational decision making in the literature as it would be tantamount to saying methamphetamine is good for kids (even though it actually may be, according to FDA ADHD approved drug Desoxyn© (Methamphetamine)). I think most people in philosophy, science, and higher order thinking domains realize suicide is perfectly rational, but declaring so would not be without lash out or recall.