Evaluation of mental capacity for automated suicide machines

[henikova]

What questions would you include in the evaluation system of an automated suicide machine (like Sarco) to make sure only people with suitable mental capacity can start it?

My idea: include a standardized IQ test. If you reach 100+ result, you are given 10 questions about your situation in life. If you answer mostly no's to these, you are cleared for take off.

1. Are you able to manage your daily activities without feeling overwhelmed or stressed?
2. Do you handle unexpected events or changes in your routine well?
3. Do you maintain healthy relationships with family, friends, and colleagues?
4. Are you able to cope with difficult emotions, such as anger, sadness, or anxiety?
5. Are you able to set and achieve goals that are important to you?
6. Do you handle conflicts or disagreements with others effectively?
7. Are you able to communicate your thoughts and feelings effectively with others?
8. Do you maintain a sense of balance and perspective in your life?
9. Do you engage in activities that bring you joy and fulfillment?
10. Are you able to seek support and help from others when you need it?

Obviously one can lie to get through these, but it's mostly to help the users evaluate their situation.

 

[CentreMid]

I don't believe a standardized IQ test would be a good idea. I have reasons as to why but they are not relevant to the conversation, plus I'd just be ranting forever so it's best for me to stay on track. Additionally, What about the people who score below 100? The average score for any IQ test is 80-115, and anyone who scores in that 80-100 range would automatically be ruled out, despite being average and considered competent. Also, sometimes, the people with intellectal disabilities suffer greatly, but are unable to communicate their distress. The conditions you've laid out would ensure that those people continue living and suffering in silence without a choice or chance of release. Would you really want to deny them that right?

Also, I believe that people's reasons for wanting to ctb are their own and shouldn't be gatekeept. As for helping people evaluate their situation, there are some pro-life implications there, even if you don't mean to express that line of thinking. What about the people who can handle change well? What about people who can handle ther emotions, have decent relationships, finances and love their hobbies, but simply don't want to continue living because of the declining state of the world? There are people who have what we would consider "normal" and "healthy" lives who may want to ctb for their own reasons, and we shouldn't deprive them of that choice or opportunity.

 

[henikova]

I don't believe a standardized IQ test would be a good idea. I have reasons as to why but they are not relevant to the conversation, plus I'd just be ranting forever so it's best for me to stay on track. Additionally, What about the people who score below 100? The average score for any IQ test is 80-115, and anyone who scores in that 80-100 range would automatically be ruled out, despite being average and considered competent. Also, sometimes, the people with intellectal disabilities suffer greatly, but are unable to communicate their distress. The conditions you've laid out would ensure that those people continue living and suffering in silence without a choice or chance of release. Would you really want to deny them that right?

Also, I believe that people's reasons for wanting to ctb are their own and shouldn't be gatekeept. As for helping people evaluate their situation, there are some pro-life implications there, even if you don't mean to express that line of thinking. What about the people who can handle change well? What about people who can handle ther emotions, have decent relationships, finances and love their hobbies, but simply don't want to continue living because of the declining state of the world? There are people who have what we would consider "normal" and "healthy" lives who may want to ctb for their own reasons, and we shouldn't deprive them of that choice or opportunity.

You are right.

But I believe some gatekeeping should be implemented. What about children who would jump in for banalities like romantic issues, teenager impulsivity, bullying and other things that can be addressed by proper therapy, consultation and law enforcement?

 

[CentreMid]

You are right.

But I believe some gatekeeping should be implemented. What about children who would jump in for banalities like romantic issues, teenager impulsivity, bullying and other things that can be addressed by proper therapy, consultation and law enforcement?

Therapy doesn't always work for bullying, and children have died by suicide for that reason. As for the romantic relationship side of things, again, that's not up to us. While I may not agree with children who may may want to ctb becuase of a relationship, it's still none of my business and not my place to tell them what to do and what not to do.

Plus, there are a number of users here who have shared their stories, adding to the pile of evidence that therapy, consultation and law enforcement does not work and can even make certain issues worse. I know that they're not children, but it's still evidence nonetheless. If the aforementioned methods of "help" are that damaging to adults, imagine how much worse it would be to someone whose mind is still developing and who may not be able to cope or rationalize what's happening to them.

Again, by stating that gatekeeping should be allowed, you are implicating a pro-life/anti-choice stance even if it's not what you intend to communicate.

 

[FuneralCry]

People should be able to die exactly when they want to, the right to die is simply a basic human right that everyone who exists in this world has. We are all going to die anyway, so people should be able to take control over when they die in a peaceful way. It's cruel to want to gatekeep suicide and interrogate people over this, why should anyone no matter their age and their situation have to stay here when they don't want to. Continuing to exist isn't an obligation, and I view wanting suicide as being more a logical choice than existing in this world in the first place. Life is full of harm, risks and unlimited potential for suffering, life in itself is enough of a reason to want to die.

 

[henikova]

life in itself is enough of a reason to want to die.

I need this on a t-shirt. :)

 

[GasMonkey]

But I believe some gatekeeping should be implemented

That's absurd coz the entire goal of the Sarco project is to remove all gatekeeping (except being an adult of sound mind).
Are you one of those old folks who think that young people shouldn't CTB? Lots of those lately on the forum.

BTW Dr Philip Nitschke already said what questions the AI will ask the person:
▪ Who are you?
▪ Where are you?
▪ What day is it?
▪ What will happen if you press the button?

 

[wait-bus-stop]

I'd have no test: just an application and a waiting period. After the waiting period, you can CTB.

 

[hellispink]

No questions asked. Anyone wanting to end is welcome as soon as is their decision, it is their right. Its none of my business into why or what's up with them or anything. I respect everyone decision and privacy.

 

[ksp]

society can not keep gatekeeping suicide, and it shouldn't try - it should only respect personal autonomy

A BRILLIANT schoolboy shot himself in the head after carefully calculating the benefits of life and deciding it was not worth living, an inquest was told yesterday… (15 year old)

source: independent.co.uk - 1997

(i have others, and i've seen footage of another 7 or 8 year old boy - very intelligent, but i don't want to get gory)


this is my life, and this is my death - i am the only owner

the parents made the decision to have kids, so they should provide all necessities of life until 18, but after that, the parents have to accept the initial responsibility and the whatever outcome of their children (also, children should not be forced to follow in their parents footsteps)

gatekeeping suicide is not acceptable

provide nembutal / sarco to everyone, and let me ask society for help (if i want it)

the only case when a person doesn't have autonomy is if they can't sign their name, and can't understand the consequences of their actions (dementia, or other deep mental illnesses); even in these cases there are 'advanced requests' like in canada, where dementia patients can request MAID if they become incapacitated, or become unable to make their own decisions

i agree with @GasMonkey and Philip Nitschke assessment for the sarco (or nembutal):

BTW Dr Philip Nitschke already said what questions the AI will ask the person:
▪ Who are you?
▪ Where are you?
▪ What day is it?
▪ What will happen if you press the button?

simple, and to the point: are you mentally competent, or not?
if yes - the final decision is mine, and mine alone

 

[Sparr0w]

also, another point on the IQ test: what if your whole reason was that you had cognitive disabilities or otherwise weren't educated???
like, if dot or one of the other members with a typing quirk/disability took the automated test, they might fail because their (correct) answers weren't spelled correctly. or if you have dyslexia, or a million other reasons why a standard IQ test might not actually correlate to if you're in a sound state of mind and know what you're doing.

yeah, i think a waiting period and/or just making sure the person knows what they're doing and isn't in the middle of a mental break is better.