
Aergia
Wizard
- Jun 20, 2023
- 610
There's no apparent neuropsychological metric (afaik) you could use to accurately determine whether a given individual should be allowed to complete suicide, and there certainly isn't a single age you could use to decide for everyone (that includes 25). There are adults with the temperament and intelligence of children, and minors who are intelligent to understand the consequences of suicide and make a rational decision. I think we should make the judgement using age (>18 seems okay, I guess*) because it's probably the best heuristic we could use, practically speaking, when assessing an individual's capacity to think rationally.What is the age where a person reaches level of maturity and consciousnes to be worthy of making this decision for themselves rightfully? Is there even any specific one? Are there ever bad reasons? How do you make that judgement if it's matter of individual intelligence untied to age?
No.If someone suffers at very young age and already contemplates suicide, could that be enough of a proof that they understand it's concept no matter their age?
I'm sure there are exceptional cases but generally I think minors should be prevented from ctb.Should suicides of minors be stopped no matter what, or do you find cases like these their conscious rightful decisions?
I think the six-year-old's case is incredibly tragic and a counterexample to the idea that every individual should have the right to die. She didn't know the pain of existence—she'd just argued with her mom, knew what would cause death, and she probably knew that death was just a really bad thing. I find it incredibly hard to believe she truly realised the significance of what she was doing.
*Though it's more like there is no perfect age at which to set the requirement and I'm assuming the logic used to make 18 the minimum age for voting (an act that requires some capacity for rational thought) in most countries could be extended to the right to die.
Last edited: