M
MichaelSandBL
Member
- Jan 25, 2023
- 40
Most countries have some similar law so I'm going to try to avoid referencing a specific law so this could be more broadly applied but in subsequent posts probably should be specific.
It's pretty common to have qualified rights and unqualified rights the latter are in all circumstances illegal for the state to infringe upon the former only to those not detained (excluding those with compulsory treatment orders in community)
My intent is not to be a sovereign citizen who BTFOs with fax and logistics but bring up petitioning parliament's etc to make a statement on neutrality or clarification on a policy.
So here's the meat and potatoes of this post:
Mental health laws generally have a clause to "protect" suicidal persons regardless of if suicide is legal in that country.
But human rights laws have unqualified rights to hold opinions especially religious except explicitly banned opinions (for example banned political parties) though the text will generally not mention that.
Therefore right to die is protected as an option but being known to have such an opinion or being a member of Dignitas or a local advocacy group will be held against the one subject to the mental health law in tribunals.
So that's why we have people of sound mind Incarcerated in institutions or autistics etc who have only the refusal to discharge them due to lack of "community support" keeping them in.
Given that these places can make people feel worse this just perpetuates a vicious cycle.
Some protection against someone being held solely on desire to die is a frontier on the right to die cause.
Would a well written petition help, not to make it pro-choice but instead ask for neutrality to be written into the law on right to die.
It's pretty common to have qualified rights and unqualified rights the latter are in all circumstances illegal for the state to infringe upon the former only to those not detained (excluding those with compulsory treatment orders in community)
My intent is not to be a sovereign citizen who BTFOs with fax and logistics but bring up petitioning parliament's etc to make a statement on neutrality or clarification on a policy.
So here's the meat and potatoes of this post:
Mental health laws generally have a clause to "protect" suicidal persons regardless of if suicide is legal in that country.
But human rights laws have unqualified rights to hold opinions especially religious except explicitly banned opinions (for example banned political parties) though the text will generally not mention that.
Therefore right to die is protected as an option but being known to have such an opinion or being a member of Dignitas or a local advocacy group will be held against the one subject to the mental health law in tribunals.
So that's why we have people of sound mind Incarcerated in institutions or autistics etc who have only the refusal to discharge them due to lack of "community support" keeping them in.
Given that these places can make people feel worse this just perpetuates a vicious cycle.
Some protection against someone being held solely on desire to die is a frontier on the right to die cause.
Would a well written petition help, not to make it pro-choice but instead ask for neutrality to be written into the law on right to die.