hemlocked
New Member
- Jun 30, 2025
- 2
As a new member it is my hope that the short essay in defence of suicide can be accepted as my first post to this forum. I will lead in with a quick introduction to myself.
I first began thinking about suicide as a small child of 6, when I first went to school and immediately became a victim of extreme bullying. As life progressed and stayed impossibly confusing and difficult these thoughts stayed with me - throughout my teens and into adulthood. It was, however, only in the last five years, after I survived being trapped in a seven year long relationship with an abusive narcissist, that my thoughts on suicide became truly serious.
I decided during periods when I was free from depression, and therefore as rational as possible, that I would end my life and suffering if living did not become easier. I have worked extremely hard since then to make something of myself. After reading a book on ADHD I hade a sort of eureka moment, after which I started the process of obtaining a diagnosis for ADHD. Last year, after waiting for years (the Swedish mental healthcare system is very broken) I received my diagnosis for ADHD, and as a surprise bonus, for autism too.
At last, so many of the pieces of my life that never made sense started to fall into place. I began to hope. However, due to circumstances out of my control, and linked to my 7 year abusive relationship and marriage to an abusive Swede, everything has fallen apart. I am to be deported, after many years of living here, to my country of origin where I have no friends or family, where there is no social safety net, where I will have no job and no way to afford the very expensive mental healthcare I need (in order to get a job, amongst other things), nowhere to live, and the list goes on…
I have one appeal left, to a court that is famous for not hearing appeals. I am unlikely to succeed. And so I have prepared my exit. The short essay that follows has been part of my mental preparation, specifically to get my thoughts in order for the goodbye letters that I need to write.
In Defence of Suicide
The assumption that life is always preferable to death is deeply ingrained in human societies, but I believe this assumption is rarely questioned with the rigour it demands. Many hold that existence is inherently valuable, that suicide is necessarily irrational, and that life must be preserved regardless of its quality. These assumptions, however, do not withstand careful scrutiny. Rather than treating life as an unquestionable good, we must evaluate it based on the experiences it entails. If my suffering, or that of another, outweighs any potential for well-being, then continuing to live is not an obligation but an imposition. In such circumstances, the decision to end one's life is not an act of irrational despair but a rational response to an intolerable condition.
One of the greatest obstacles to recognizing this truth is the widespread tendency to overestimate the quality of life. People are prone to cognitive biases that distort their assessments of suffering. I see the status quo bias leading people to believe that continuing to live is inherently preferable simply because it is the default state. The optimism bias causes individuals to underestimate future suffering and overestimate the likelihood of improvement, even when evidence suggests otherwise. The adaptation effect further reinforces this illusion, as individuals become accustomed to their suffering and rationalize it rather than confronting the question of whether continued existence is truly beneficial. These biases obscure a fundamental reality: for many, life is filled with hardship, and there is no guarantee that the future will bring relief.
This illusion of life's value is further reinforced by societal and cultural norms that demand the preservation of existence at any cost. Many argue that one has a duty to family, to society, or to an abstract notion of human dignity to continue living. But I reject such arguments because they fail to recognize that the burden of proof should rest on those who claim that life is always worth living, not on those who question its worth. If I, or any other rational individual, determine after careful reflection that suffering is unbearable and that no realistic prospect of improvement exists, then forcing endurance of such an existence is an unjustifiable cruelty.
This is especially true for those of us whose suffering is extreme and irremediable. Those afflicted by chronic physical pain, severe mental illness, or social isolation that renders life unbearable may rationally conclude that non-existence is preferable. Many who oppose suicide fail to appreciate the depth of suffering that some of us endure, insisting instead that life must always be preserved. But I find this position deeply flawed, as it fails to account for the fact that not all lives contain enough good to justify their continuation.
Personal autonomy demands that individuals be allowed to make decisions about their own existence, including the choice to end it. The moral presumption should not be in favor of life at all costs, but rather in favor of allowing individuals to decide for themselves whether their lives are worth continuing. This does not mean that suicide is always the best choice, but it does mean that it is sometimes a rational and justifiable response to suffering. The refusal to acknowledge this fact is not a reflection of moral clarity but of an unwillingness to confront the uncomfortable reality that for some, non-existence is indeed preferable.
References
Benatar, D. (2006). Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence. Oxford University Press.
Benatar, D. (2017). The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life's Biggest Questions. Oxford University Press.
I first began thinking about suicide as a small child of 6, when I first went to school and immediately became a victim of extreme bullying. As life progressed and stayed impossibly confusing and difficult these thoughts stayed with me - throughout my teens and into adulthood. It was, however, only in the last five years, after I survived being trapped in a seven year long relationship with an abusive narcissist, that my thoughts on suicide became truly serious.
I decided during periods when I was free from depression, and therefore as rational as possible, that I would end my life and suffering if living did not become easier. I have worked extremely hard since then to make something of myself. After reading a book on ADHD I hade a sort of eureka moment, after which I started the process of obtaining a diagnosis for ADHD. Last year, after waiting for years (the Swedish mental healthcare system is very broken) I received my diagnosis for ADHD, and as a surprise bonus, for autism too.
At last, so many of the pieces of my life that never made sense started to fall into place. I began to hope. However, due to circumstances out of my control, and linked to my 7 year abusive relationship and marriage to an abusive Swede, everything has fallen apart. I am to be deported, after many years of living here, to my country of origin where I have no friends or family, where there is no social safety net, where I will have no job and no way to afford the very expensive mental healthcare I need (in order to get a job, amongst other things), nowhere to live, and the list goes on…
I have one appeal left, to a court that is famous for not hearing appeals. I am unlikely to succeed. And so I have prepared my exit. The short essay that follows has been part of my mental preparation, specifically to get my thoughts in order for the goodbye letters that I need to write.
In Defence of Suicide
The assumption that life is always preferable to death is deeply ingrained in human societies, but I believe this assumption is rarely questioned with the rigour it demands. Many hold that existence is inherently valuable, that suicide is necessarily irrational, and that life must be preserved regardless of its quality. These assumptions, however, do not withstand careful scrutiny. Rather than treating life as an unquestionable good, we must evaluate it based on the experiences it entails. If my suffering, or that of another, outweighs any potential for well-being, then continuing to live is not an obligation but an imposition. In such circumstances, the decision to end one's life is not an act of irrational despair but a rational response to an intolerable condition.
One of the greatest obstacles to recognizing this truth is the widespread tendency to overestimate the quality of life. People are prone to cognitive biases that distort their assessments of suffering. I see the status quo bias leading people to believe that continuing to live is inherently preferable simply because it is the default state. The optimism bias causes individuals to underestimate future suffering and overestimate the likelihood of improvement, even when evidence suggests otherwise. The adaptation effect further reinforces this illusion, as individuals become accustomed to their suffering and rationalize it rather than confronting the question of whether continued existence is truly beneficial. These biases obscure a fundamental reality: for many, life is filled with hardship, and there is no guarantee that the future will bring relief.
This illusion of life's value is further reinforced by societal and cultural norms that demand the preservation of existence at any cost. Many argue that one has a duty to family, to society, or to an abstract notion of human dignity to continue living. But I reject such arguments because they fail to recognize that the burden of proof should rest on those who claim that life is always worth living, not on those who question its worth. If I, or any other rational individual, determine after careful reflection that suffering is unbearable and that no realistic prospect of improvement exists, then forcing endurance of such an existence is an unjustifiable cruelty.
This is especially true for those of us whose suffering is extreme and irremediable. Those afflicted by chronic physical pain, severe mental illness, or social isolation that renders life unbearable may rationally conclude that non-existence is preferable. Many who oppose suicide fail to appreciate the depth of suffering that some of us endure, insisting instead that life must always be preserved. But I find this position deeply flawed, as it fails to account for the fact that not all lives contain enough good to justify their continuation.
Personal autonomy demands that individuals be allowed to make decisions about their own existence, including the choice to end it. The moral presumption should not be in favor of life at all costs, but rather in favor of allowing individuals to decide for themselves whether their lives are worth continuing. This does not mean that suicide is always the best choice, but it does mean that it is sometimes a rational and justifiable response to suffering. The refusal to acknowledge this fact is not a reflection of moral clarity but of an unwillingness to confront the uncomfortable reality that for some, non-existence is indeed preferable.
References
Benatar, D. (2006). Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence. Oxford University Press.
Benatar, D. (2017). The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life's Biggest Questions. Oxford University Press.
