The world doesn't owe us euthanasia

[LaughingGoat]

I see a lot of perseverating on the fact that euthanasia isn't an offered or accessible service, but I don't think it is something that we can or should expect as owed to us from others. Firstly, the act of killing someone else shouldn't be a burden placed on another person and it is not within the limits of a person's rights to autonomy to force someone else to offer it. Secondly, I often read statements from people who continue to struggle in existence, desiring an external death so strongly that it seemingly paralyzes them into inaction. While I certainly understand the desire there and the possible obstacle of SI, that doesn't mean that it is owed to us.

Now before I get accused of being "pro-life" or against the access of assisted suicide methods, I've said here multiple times that if it wasn't illegal and prosecutable as murder, I would willingly and actively offer without charge and perform the act of euthanasia on people who were seeking it. That's even considered an extreme view on here by many so hopefully that makes it clear I'm not anti-suicide, just against pushing off the responsibility of our own death onto other people. Someone could make a logical argument that your parents owe you death since they gave you life and I don't disagree with that, it's just not going to happen so one is best pursuing realistic ways to end their suffering. I also need to acknowledge there is a very small amount of people who are suffering from debilitating physical disabilities that would prevent them from any form of suicide, that's an exception to what I'm discussing here.



Edit: I wanted to add an edit to the end of the OP for anyone coming across it summarizing some of the good counter points people made on this post that provide a different perspective. I have not removed any of the original content. Also wanted to acknowledge that much of the difference in perspective between myself and some commentators comes down to how I view things in one's control and the productive response to lack of access being utilizing available and effective methods of suicide. That being said, I recognize that is my personal view and does not equate to some inherent or objective truth, respecting that others can and do hold varied points of view relevant to the lack of access to euthanasia.

Notable counter points that have been supported well by users in the thread:

• The lack of access to what is viewed as a peaceful method is robbing people of a dignified and tranquil end to their suffering, forcing them to utilize methods that are deemed violent, possibly risky, and inhumane.
• Governments around the world have typically made legislation that prevents people's access to certain forms of suicide and have not provided sufficient support for those that are suffering. They therefore do have the direct responsibility to provide people an end to their suffering.
• Some people are unable to overcome the hurdle of SI and commit the act themselves. They therefore should be provided an avenue of death in a way that is conducive to their situation.
• Doctors and medical providers provide palliative care to people with all sorts of terminal illnesses, so the lack of it for illnesses and situations resulting in mental anguish that is severe enough for one to desire suicide is inhumane.

Many of the arguments made were enlightening in helping me understand how others view the issue and were strongly supported through logical reasoning. I appreciate people engaging in an open, honest intellectual discussion. If there were people who took the ideas in this thread personally, I do apologize as my intent is never a personal attack, only to challenge ideas and have my perspective challenged to come a greater understanding and ideas in line with uncovered truths.

 

[UKscotty]

Yeah I don't get why people think society owes us something like this either.

Only 0.01% of people CTB so why would society want all the hassle of such a scheme for so few of us?

I wouldn't like it anyway, I'd prefer to drift off peacefully at home or in my tent gently breathing in CO whilst high and drunk.

 

[okuhvtuji]

I see a lot of perseverating on the fact that euthanasia isn't an offered or accessible service, but I don't think it is something that we can or should expect as owed to us from others. Firstly, the act of killing someone else shouldn't be a burden placed on another person and it is not within the limits of a person's rights to autonomy to force someone else to offer it. Secondly, I often read statements from people who continue to struggle in existence, desiring an external death so strongly that it seemingly paralyzes them into inaction. While I certainly understand the desire there and the possible obstacle of SI, that doesn't mean that it is owed to us.

Now before I get accused of being "pro-life" or against the access of assisted suicide methods, I've said here multiple times that if it wasn't illegal and prosecutable as murder, I would willingly and actively offer without charge and perform the act of euthanasia on people who were seeking it. That's even considered an extreme view on here by many so hopefully that makes it clear I'm not anti-suicide, just against pushing off the responsibility of our own death onto other people. Someone could make a logical argument that your parents owe you death since they gave you life and I don't disagree with that, it's just not going to happen so one is best pursuing realistic ways to end their suffering. I also need to acknowledge there is a very small amount of people who are suffering from debilitating physical disabilities that would prevent them from any form of suicide, that's an exception to what I'm discussing here.

Assisted suicide is always performed by the patient (who has to press a button to activate the lethal injection). It's not murder. Ppl who are suicidal and want access to euthanasia are worried they might become incapacitated and become a liability for their relatives.

 

[LaughingGoat]

Assisted suicide is always performed by the patient (who has to press a button to activate the lethal injection). It's not muder

Correct, that's why I think it's fair to promote legislation for assisted suicide. Euthanasia is a different act than assisted suicide.

 

[BardBarrie]

There is no 'killing another person' with Assisted Dying; the patient ultimately kills themself.

Also, we're not 'owed' meat, digital entertainment nor medical care yet we still get access to them. <shrug>

 

[DoubleUp8]

I feel the u.s. government owes me something. After all they are deducting almost $200 a month for Medicare premiums from my social security check and I am not on SSI. My check is based on what me and my employers paid into the system when I was part of America's labor force. I get nothing for that money they are defrauding me out of every month not having seen adequate medical care in years which I badly need. I am severely disabled and in much pain. U.S. government absolutely owes me either a humane life or a humane death but will give me neither

 

[BardBarrie]

Only 0.01% of people CTB

@UKscotty people being in a tiny minority is no reason to deny a service, especially if said demographic can pay for it.

so why would society want all the hassle of such a scheme for so few of us?

Saves society the hassle of retrieving hanged bodies, cleaning up splattered jumper remains off the pavement and collecting various body parts off of railway tracks I guess.

 

[LaughingGoat]

There is no 'killing another person' with Assisted Dying; the patient ultimately kills themself.

Also, we're not 'owed' meat, digital entertainment nor medical care yet we still get access to them. <shrug>

Correct, that's why I think it's fair to promote legislation for assisted suicide. Euthanasia is a different act than assisted suicide.

You pay for those things, it's a good or service and doesn't go against people's moral values or desire to not engage in killing (though meat is literally murder).

I feel the u.s. government owes me something. After all they are deducting almost $200 a month for Medicare premiums from my social security check and I am not on SSI. My check is based on what me and my employers paid into the system when I was part of America's labor force. I get nothing for that money they are defrauding me out of every month not having seen adequate medical care in years which I badly need. I am severely disabled and in much pain. U.S. government absolutely owes me either a humane life or a humane death but will give me neither

That's a definitely fair point and I think it would be great if all people who are elderly or disabled were offered assisted suicide. I would still say their failure to do the right thing regarding social security and medical care is a separate issue from euthanasia. Kind of like how I think we have more social care for homeless people, but I wouldn't say they're owed me giving them access to live in my house.

 

[BardBarrie]

I feel the u.s. government owes me something. After all they are deducting almost $200 a month for Medicare premiums from my social security check and I am not on SSI. My check is based on what me and my employers paid into the system when I was part of America's labor force. I get nothing for that money they are defrauding me out of every month not having seen adequate medical care in years which I badly need. I am severely disabled and in much pain. U.S. government absolutely owes me either a humane life or a humane death but will give me neither

No Assisted Dying for you: those 11 Aircraft Carriers aren't going to pay for themselves.

 

[DoubleUp8]

Assisted suicide is available for some terminal illness patients in Oregon and California and I think some other states. But the only way approved really sucks. They give you a prescription for a barbiturate cocktail you are supposed to drink. But it has a 9-11 percent failure rate. And when it doesn't kill you the results can be hellish. Chemical burns in mouth and throat. Can burn up vocal cords making people unable to talk .

 

[pthnrdnojvsc]

I see a lot of perseverating on the fact that euthanasia isn't an offered or accessible service, but I don't think it is something that we can or should expect as owed to us from others. Firstly, the act of killing someone else shouldn't be a burden placed on another person and it is not within the limits of a person's rights to autonomy to force someone else to offer it. Secondly, I often read statements from people who continue to struggle in existence, desiring an external death so strongly that it seemingly paralyzes them into inaction. While I certainly understand the desire there and the possible obstacle of SI, that doesn't mean that it is owed to us.

Now before I get accused of being "pro-life" or against the access of assisted suicide methods, I've said here multiple times that if it wasn't illegal and prosecutable as murder, I would willingly and actively offer without charge and perform the act of euthanasia on people who were seeking it. That's even considered an extreme view on here by many so hopefully that makes it clear I'm not anti-suicide, just against pushing off the responsibility of our own death onto other people. Someone could make a logical argument that your parents owe you death since they gave you life and I don't disagree with that, it's just not going to happen so one is best pursuing realistic ways to end their suffering. I also need to acknowledge there is a very small amount of people who are suffering from debilitating physical disabilities that would prevent them from any form of suicide, that's an exception to what I'm discussing here.

If it weren't for the government making Nembutal, SN , helping with suicide , suicide booths crimes then we'd have a way to escape extreme suffering extreme pain. The government is what is getting in the way between sellers like Kenneth Law , N from D, and people who need to escape extreme torture. the U.S. goverment is even about to ban the sale of SN to individuals see link below.


there was a guy "N from D" selling nembutal online for many years on the PPH and they got wind of him on this site and ordered Nembutal here and in the PPH a lot for several years. Kenneth law sold SN. the governments arrested both of these people after media reports put them to their attention the NY times and other media.

what people don't get is that if there is a demand for something like guaranteed suicide methods then someone will produce a product to fill that demand. and that would be the case except that the governments have made creating suicide kits or , selling substances like nembutal , SN to individuals crimes. even now the U.S government House of Representatives just passed the banning of the sale of SN to individuals. the senate still has to vote on it but looks like it will pass.

so it's the government making guaranteed suicide methods like helping someone else with suicide , Nembutal , suicide booths etc crimes . there would be all these options created by other individuals like Kenneth Law and , N from D if it weren't for the evil governments stealing our right to escape extreme torture.

House Passes Trahan’s Youth Poisoning Protection Act

trahan.house.gov

House Passes Trahan’s Youth Poisoning Protection Act

trahan.house.gov

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed Congresswoman Lori Trahan's (MA-03)Youth Poisoning Protection Act, bipartisan legislation that would ban the consumer sale of products containing high concentrations of sodium nitrite, a meat-curing chemical that can be lethal when ingested. The legislation was introduced last year along with Representatives Mike Carey (R-OH-15), Katie Porter (D-CA-47), and Chris Stewart (R-UT-02) as well as Senators Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and JD Vance (R-OH).

"The Youth Poisoning Protection Act is urgently needed to limit consumer access to high concentrations of a dangerous, toxic chemical that's being promoted online as a method to die by suicide," Congresswoman Trahan said during debate over the bill on the House floor. "It solely seeks to end the straight to consumer sale of highly concentrated Sodium Nitrite that is helping fuel the efforts of anonymous suicide forum users pushing vulnerable people to end their lives. It's simple, it's straightforward, and it has the potential to save lives."

A 2021 New York Times investigation into an online suicide forum found that sodium nitrite was being popularized and encouraged as an easily accessible method to die by suicide. The forum, which is disguised as a safe place to discuss suicidal ideation, hosts threads where anonymous users provide detailed instructions and real-time guidance on how to die by suicide using sodium nitrite.

 

[LaughingGoat]

Assisted suicide is available for some terminal illness patients in Oregon and California and I think some other states. But the only way approved really sucks. They give you a prescription for a barbiturate cocktail you are supposed to drink. But it has a 9-11 percent failure rate. And when it doesn't kill you the results can be hellish. Chemical burns in mouth and throat. Can burn up vocal cords making people unable to talk .

Surprisingly enough there's 10 states and DC that offer assisted suicide in some form, but like you say it's pretty limited. And yep, even medical Nembutal injections have a higher failure rates than people realize.

 

[BardBarrie]

Correct, that's why I think it's fair to promote legislation for assisted suicide. Euthanasia is a different act than assisted suicide.

We are in agreement, however I also believe if there are practitioners willing to provide euthanasia services, then so be it.
Nobody should be *forced* to do such things.

You pay for those things, it's a good or service and doesn't go against people's moral values or desire to not engage in killing (though meat is literally murder).

Exactly: if there's a willing provider, there'll be willing customers.

 

[LaVieEnRose]

It's still fucked as hell to be forced into a horrible disabled existence because of something congenital like autism against your will then not to only have your exit not facilitated (fine) but have it be actively impeded.

The legal-medical system forces people into psychiatric wards for suicidality. However you slice it that's still a ginormous infringement on civil liberty. Frankly assisted death/euthanasia as well as involuntarily detaining people for suicidality are opposite sides of the same same coin. I don't find it consistent that one should be taken as a matter of course and the other per se declared wrong.

 

[LaughingGoat]

there was a guy "N from D" selling nembutal online for many years on the PPH and they got wind of him on this site and ordered Nembutal here and in the PPH a lot for several years. Kenneth law sold SN. the governments arrested both of these people after media reports put them to their attention the NY times and other media.

what people don't get is that if there is a demand for something like guaranteed suicide methods then someone will produce a product to fill that demand. and that would be the case except that the governments have made creating suicide kits or , selling substances like nembutal , SN to individuals crimes. even now the U.S government House of Representatives just passed the banning of the sale of SN to individuals. the senate still has to vote on it but looks like it will pass.


so it's the government making guaranteed suicide methods like helping someone else with suicide , Nembutal , suicide booths etc crimes . there would be all these options created by other individuals like Kenneth Law and , N from D if it weren't for the evil governments stealing our right to escape extreme torture.

We have 1.2 guns per person in the US, so they're not doing a very good job of stealing our right to die. How were people killing themselves for thousands of years before SN and N were used? I hate to be that person, but people find ways to kill themselves in all sorts of situations where they have no "easy" way. The right to die is absolute in my mind, but it comes with personal responsibility.

 

[BardBarrie]

Assisted suicide is available for some terminal illness patients in Oregon and California and I think some other states. But the only way approved really sucks. They give you a prescription for a barbiturate cocktail you are supposed to drink. But it has a 9-11 percent failure rate. And when it doesn't kill you the results can be hellish. Chemical burns in mouth and throat. Can burn up vocal cords making people unable to talk .

In that case the service has not been completed: should the patient still wish to, they should be given as many batches of the cocktail until they become part of the 89-91%.

 

[LaughingGoat]

We are in agreement, however I also believe if there are practitioners willing to provide euthanasia services, then so be it.
Nobody should be *forced* to do such things.



Exactly: if there's a willing provider, they'll be willing customers.

Absolutely and like I said in the OP, I would quite literally be providing that service if it was legal as long as they're ok with gun, hanging, or bring their own pharmaceuticals.

 

[KillingPain267]

What people here mean is that the world owes us to not be anti-painless-ctb. Right now most nations and cultures outright ban anything that could be easily lethal quickly, and if you try to obtain it somehow (or try other methods) you are put in a psych ward. Think of it as drug legislation. Even though you could make your own dangerous lab with drugs or buy them illegally, it is harder and more dangerous and costs 10 times the normal price when getting them prescribed. So instead, legalize all drugs so at least people can get drugs with labels on them knowing what they get. No more heroin laced with fentanyl or synthetic cannabis substitutes for weed (unless you want substitutes then you go to another pharmacy or whatever). So likewise, every human should be allowed to buy N or something similar in a store or vet pharmacy for a normal market price, no questions asked and no shaming or getting arrested or put in a psych ward. So what is meant is that the world owes us to legalize things like N and not judge us for wanting it telling us to call hotlines.

 

[pthnrdnojvsc]

We have 1.2 guns per person in the US, so they're not doing a very good job of stealing our right to die. How were people killing themselves for thousands of years before SN and N were used? I hate to be that person, but people find ways to kill themselves in all sorts of situations where they have no "easy" way. The right to die is absolute in my mind, but it comes with personal responsibility.

so you agree with the government making nembutal , suicide booths, helping someone else with suicide crimes?

It's a million times easier for me to hire a company that will shoot me in the head than for me to do it . for example someone else can take many shots at my head if they want to kill me which they would if it were legal and i paid them a few $100 dollars. i can only take one shot at my head and hope i don't miss hope i don't flinch before the shot . then i have to defeat si ( it's scary as hell to shoot your own self in the head , we've seen many here say they can't do it. I have a shotgun a few feet away from me . i can't get myself to do it yet. i would pay someone today to do it if it were a reputable company . it's a million times better and easier to be able to hire help. .

The U.S government made it a crime for anyone to shoot you or help you with suicide even if you want it . so no one is going to help you because they don't want to go to prison.

there's no reason or justification for those monsters to ban things that will allow us to escape extreme suffering . the only reason they do it is to make us slaves and keep us suffering taking away our rights

It's scary as hell ( si ) to even drink SN or Nembutal much worse to shoot yourself you fear remaining alive with more damage etc. the most important thing by far is a guarantee of Death

plus imo they 'll ban guns in a few years. as you can see here they are about to ban SN in the U.S.

House Passes Trahan’s Youth Poisoning Protection Act

trahan.house.gov

The U.S. is the worst country. what other country's congress has banned the sale of SN to individuals ?

I do agree with you that those bastards don't have to provide us with anything : I just wish they'd get out of the way and let me hire a hit man or assisted suicide from someone like Dr kevorkian or a suicide booth or take away their laws making nembutal crimes in other words let them go away to hell. everyone is hoping these monsters will give us euthanazia but it's them who took it away again see the congress now passing the SN ban

House Passes Trahan’s Youth Poisoning Protection Act

trahan.house.gov

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed Congresswoman Lori Trahan's (MA-03)Youth Poisoning Protection Act, bipartisan legislation that would ban the consumer sale of products containing high concentrations of sodium nitrite, a meat-curing chemical that can be lethal when ingested. The legislation was introduced last year along with Representatives Mike Carey (R-OH-15), Katie Porter (D-CA-47), and Chris Stewart (R-UT-02) as well as Senators Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and JD Vance (R-OH).

"The Youth Poisoning Protection Act is urgently needed to limit consumer access to high concentrations of a dangerous, toxic chemical that's being promoted online as a method to die by suicide," Congresswoman Trahan said during debate over the bill on the House floor. "It solely seeks to end the straight to consumer sale of highly concentrated Sodium Nitrite that is helping fuel the efforts of anonymous suicide forum users pushing vulnerable people to end their lives. It's simple, it's straightforward, and it has the potential to save lives."

A 2021 New York Times investigation into an online suicide forum found that sodium nitrite was being popularized and encouraged as an easily accessible method to die by suicide. The forum, which is disguised as a safe place to discuss suicidal ideation, hosts threads where anonymous users provide detailed instructions and real-time guidance on how to die by suicide using sodium nitrite.

 

[LaughingGoat]

It's still fucked as hell to be forced into a horrible disabled existence because of something congenital like autism against your will then not to only have your exit not facilitated (fine) but have it be actively impeded.

The legal-medical system forces people into psychiatric wards for suicidality. However you slice it that's still a ginormous infringement on civil liberty. Frankly assisted death/euthanasia as well as involuntarily detaining people for suicidality are opposite sides of the same same coin. I don't find it consistent that one should be taken as a matter of course and the other per se declared wrong.

I agree completely that involuntary committal is morally and societally wrong, but that's a separate argument in my view.

What people here mean is that the world owes us to not be anti-painless-ctb. Right now most nations and cultures outright ban anything that could be easily lethal quickly, and if you try to obtain it somehow (or try other methods) you are put in a psych ward. Think of it as drug legislation. Even though you could make your own dangerous lab with drugs or buy them illegally, it is harder and more dangerous and costs 10 times the normal price when getting them prescribed. So instead, legalize all drugs so at least people can get drugs with labels on them knowing what they get. No more heroin laced with fentanyl or synthetic cannabis substitutes for weed (unless you want substitutes then you go to another pharmacy or whatever). So likewise, every human should be allowed to buy N or something similar in a store or vet pharmacy for a normal market price, no questions asked and no shaming or getting arrested or put in a psych ward. So what is meant is that the world owes us to legalize things like N and not judge us for wanting it telling us to call hotlines.

That's a fair argument, but there are a ton of issues with legalizing drugs that can kill that go beyond our purview of wanting easy suicide. I am btw pro decriminalization, but actively making and supplying certain drugs would also cause a lot of harm to people outside our community.

 

[DoubleUp8]

I tried to quote laughing goat but I don't know if the app worked correctly. But I want to ask him and I am just guessing male gender cuz I really don't know for sure, but I want to know where did the comment about owing homeless people something like living his house. Of course not. You're not taking money or anything from homeless people. It just seems like that came straight out of left field and doesn't even relate to anything let alone this thread. Did I miss something? Is anyone saying that you owe homeless people room and board? It is an issue the government should have and could have addressed years ago but to say any private citizen owes them something is a stretch. Maybe there are some communists arguing that. Idk. I haven't heard that 1 yet

 

[LaughingGoat]

so you agree with the government making nembutal , suicide booths, helping someone else with suicide crimes?

It's a million times easier for me to hire a company that will shoot me in the head than for me to do it . for example someone else can take many shots at my head if they want to kill me which they would if it were legal and i paid them a few $100 dollars. i can only take one shot at my head and hope i don't miss hope i don't flinch before the shot . then i have to defeat si ( it's scary as hell to shoot your own self in the head , we've seen many here say they can't do it. I have a shotgun a few feet away from me . i can't get myself to do it yet. i would pay someone today to do it if it were a reputable company . it's a million times better and easier to be able to hire help. .

there's no reason or justification for those monsters to ban things that will allow us to escape extreme suffering . the only reason they do it is to make us slaves and keep us suffering taking away our rights

plus imo they 'll ban guns in a few years. as you can see here they are about to ban SN in the U.S.

House Passes Trahan’s Youth Poisoning Protection Act

trahan.house.gov

The U.S. is the worst country

I think from our perspective of morailty, we see nothing wrong with euthanasia. But there are other views of humanist philosophy and moral systems than our view. So yes, while you and I see eye to eye in having no issue personally with euthanasia, expecting others to do allow those things is not something I think we have a right to.

Guns are never getting banned in this country, it is literally part of our culture (as sad as that is).

I tried to quote laughing goat but I don't know if the app worked correctly. But I want to ask him and I am just guessing male gender cuz I really don't know for sure, but I want to know where did the comment about owing homeless people something like living his house. Of course not. You're not taking money or anything from homeless people. It just seems like that came straight out of left field and doesn't even relate to anything let alone this thread. Did I miss something? Is anyone saying that you owe homeless people room and board? It is an issue the government should have and could have addressed years ago but to say any private citizen owes them something is a stretch. Maybe there are some communists arguing that. Idk. I haven't heard that 1 yet

Hit the @ key and start typing the person's name right after, it will pop up after a few letters and look like this @DoubleUp8.

You're right, that was a bad analogy since it's private vs public. I do however view governments and societies as being made up of individuals not a singular mass. So if the expectation is for euthanasia, some person is still going to have to perform the act.

 

[pyx]

even if it was implemented it would be highly selective. i don't think many people would 'qualify' here in the eyes of the clinician.

 

[DoubleUp8]

I tried to quote laughing goat but I don't know if the app worked correctly. But I want to ask him and I am just guessing male gender cuz I really don't know for sure, but I want to know where did the comment about owing homeless people something like living his house. Of course not. You're not taking money or anything from homeless people. It just seems like that came straight out of left field and doesn't even relate to anything let alone this thread. Did I miss something? Is anyone saying that you owe homeless people room and board? It is an issue the government should have and could have addressed years ago but to say any private citizen owes them something is a stretch. Maybe there are some communists arguing that. Idk. I haven't heard that 1 yet

In that case the service has not been completed: should the patient still wish to, they should be given as many batches of the cocktail until they become part of the 89-91%.

Would you want to try it again after it didn't work the 1st time and left you in horrible pain and unable to speak?

I think from our perspective of morailty, we see nothing wrong with euthanasia. But there are other views of humanist philosophy and moral systems than our view. So yes, while you and I see eye to eye in having no issue personally with euthanasia, expecting others to do allow those things is not something I think we have a right to.

Guns are never getting banned in this country, it is literally part of our culture (as sad as that is).

Hit the @ key and start typing the person's name right after, it will pop up after a few letters and look like this @DoubleUp8.

You're right, that was a bad analogy since it's private vs public. I do however view governments and societies as being made up of individuals not a singular mass. So if the expectation is for euthanasia, some person is still going to have to perform the act.

Where is dr Kevorkian when we need him

 

[BardBarrie]

Would you want to try it again after it didn't work the 1st time and left you in horrible pain and unable to speak?

Yep: odds are well in my favour and the alternative is to *remain* in the horrible pain, unable to speak.

 

[pthnrdnojvsc]

I think from our perspective of morailty, we see nothing wrong with euthanasia. But there are other views of humanist philosophy and moral systems than our view. So yes, while you and I see eye to eye in having no issue personally with euthanasia, expecting others to do allow those things is not something I think we have a right to.

Guns are never getting banned in this country, it is literally part of our culture (as sad as that is).

Hit the @ key and start typing the person's name right after, it will pop up after a few letters and look like this @DoubleUp8.

You're right, that was a bad analogy since it's private vs public. I do however view governments and societies as being made up of individuals not a singular mass. So if the expectation is for euthanasia, some person is still going to have to perform the act.

their morality is control enslavement oppression which is why they make assisting suicide , suicide booths crimes. and why they are passing the banning of SN law.

but that's false subjective morality pure fiction .

The only objective truth is that extreme suffering and extreme pain are bad . and that we all die anyway. those 2 objective first principles. 3. our most important rights are also the right to move away from suffering 4. and freedom, individual autonomy . all this are moral and should be allowed . but none of these are. we are slave prisoners. all which they immorally take away on purpose to control , enslave and keep us in the prison.

If you don't have the right to move away from suffering in a guaranteed painless quick easy way then you don't have any right and any freedom and are a slave prisoner . and we all are because they took away nembutal , assisted suicide, suicide booths etc by making those crimes.

everyone is brainwashed not to see these are the truths and the important things. for example if i'm disabled can't produce and about to suffer extreme torture i should be allowed to go in to a suicide booth and escape that torture prevent it . i wouldn't be hurting anyone but i would be only violating their evil false illogical ideology. this situation that we are all in slaves prisoners opressed injustice further makes it an imperative to escape this prison.

 

[DoubleUp8]

Yep: odds are well in my favour and the alternative is to *remain* in the horrible pain, unable to speak.

There is always other methods that could be employed. I wouldn't want to do it that way the 1st time. Probably 1 reason I'm not dead yet. The failure rate is too unacceptably high for me. I don't fear death but I dread a failed attempt. I want as close to certain as possible.

their morality is control enslavement oppression which is why they make assisting suicide , suicide booths crimes. and why they are passing the banning of SN law.

but that's false .

The only objective truth is that extreme suffering and extreme pain are bad . and that we all die anyway. those 2 objective first principles. 3. our most important rights are also the right to move away from suffering 4. and freedom, individual autonomy . all this are moral and should be allowed . but none of these are. we are slave prisoners. all which they immorally take away on purpose to control , enslave and keep us in the prison.

If you don't have the right to move away from suffering in a guaranteed painless quick easy way then you don't have any right and any freedom and are a slave prisoner . and we all are because they took away nembutal , assisted suicide, suicide booths etc by making those crimes.

everyone is brainwashed not to see these are the truths and the important things. for example if i'm disabled can't produce and about to suffer extreme torture i should be allowed to go in to a suicide booth and escape that torture prevent it . i wouldn't be hurting anyone but i would be only violating their evil false illogical ideology. this situation that we are all in slaves prisoners opressed injustice further makes it an imperative to escape this prison.

Like me. They deny us a humane life as well as a humane death. They worship at the altar of suffering.

 

[KuriGohan&Kamehameha]

It's still fucked as hell to be forced into a horrible disabled existence because of something congenital like autism against your will then not to only have your exit not facilitated (fine) but have it be actively impeded.

The legal-medical system forces people into psychiatric wards for suicidality. However you slice it that's still a ginormous infringement on civil liberty. Frankly assisted death/euthanasia as well as involuntarily detaining people for suicidality are opposite sides of the same same coin. I don't find it consistent that one should be taken as a matter of course and the other per se declared wrong.

You put into words exactly what I'm thinking bestie. It's one thing for the government not to facilitate it, okay, fair enough, even if I disagree with that stance. It's another thing when the law is designed to actively stop any suicidal person from carrying out the act regardless of their situation, making self-determination incredibly difficult.

I saw a similar comment on a subreddit of therapists, when there was a discussion involving the recent euthanasia case of a 28 year old Dutch woman who had fought for years to access MAID. Sure, we don't need the government in order to access lethal methods, but are they as good and painless as a quick swig or IV of barbiturates? A far cry from it.

Putting that aside, it's like you say, if you've been clocked as a suicidal person the police can and will detain you against your wishes. Hospitalisation or at least a hold in A&E WILL be guarenteed. They are bound to try and stop everyone who might have suicidal inclinations no matter what. Yes, it's possible to hide it sometimes, but not if someone fails an attempt.

Camping shops and chemical suppliers have become suspicious of people purchasing items like intert gases, charcoal either on its own or paired with tents, or anything that can potentially be used for suicide. They will report people for attempting to purchase banned items. There are chaplains at famous jump spots, suicide nets, oxygen being added to helium or nitrogen canisters, and more and more CCTV/surveillance than ever preventing people from just going into the woods and tying a noose, or lighting some charcoal in a hotboxed car.

I don't see how one can hold that knowledge and perceive that suicide is freely accessible. Even having a method like SN, involves sneaking around and getting so many ducks in a row, and basically dying alone in a hotel somewhere with no way to say goodbye to any loved ones. Notes are confiscated by the police. The whole situation is risky. There is an inherent lack of dignity or absolute certainty in this situation that assisted suicide solves.

Maybe it is weak of me, but I would do anything to have a peaceful death using opiates or barbiturates rather than struggle with heart palpitations and vomitting for half an hour after taking lethal salts not knowing if I'll die, or vomit again in my sleep and wake up in an ICU under a sectioning hold. I think this is why many other people want euthanasia to become legal, because it's a guaranteed, peaceful death that doesn't have to be endured alone.

Taking matters into one own hands is not as easy as it's made out to be. Yes, SI and feeling completely ready or not also plays a role in what level of risk someone is willing to take, of course, but let's not pretend that non-violent methods are easy to access or don't pose a risk of harm to others. Something like sodium azide is really risky when others are exposed to it. Multiple people died from CO2 poisoning in an apartment complex in Japan several years ago because one of the tenants got desperate and lit charcoal in her flat, the smoke ended up wafting into other people's homes and killing them.

Euthanasia solves all of these problems.

Edit: Also I think it was probably far easier to access many methods 5-10 years ago. Now that e-commerce is so regulated, it's way more difficult. Governments publish reports constantly on how to prevent suicide and MORE involuntarily commitment laws are passed, not less. If anything it is becoming increasingly harder for suicidal people as technology and information sharing has progressed

 

[LaughingGoat]

their morality is control enslavement oppression which is why they make assisting suicide , suicide booths crimes. and why they are passing the banning of SN law.

but that's false subjective morality pure fiction .

The only objective truth is that extreme suffering and extreme pain are bad . and that we all die anyway. those 2 objective first principles. 3. our most important rights are also the right to move away from suffering 4. and freedom, individual autonomy . all this are moral and should be allowed . but none of these are. we are slave prisoners. all which they immorally take away on purpose to control , enslave and keep us in the prison.

If you don't have the right to move away from suffering in a guaranteed painless quick easy way then you don't have any right and any freedom and are a slave prisoner . and we all are because they took away nembutal , assisted suicide, suicide booths etc by making those crimes.

everyone is brainwashed not to see these are the truths and the important things. for example if i'm disabled can't produce and about to suffer extreme torture i should be allowed to go in to a suicide booth and escape that torture prevent it . i wouldn't be hurting anyone but i would be only violating their evil false illogical ideology. this situation that we are all in slaves prisoners opressed injustice further makes it an imperative to escape this prison.

I hear your view, I just don't get the obsession on this site with a injectable death. There are numerous ways to kill yourself reliably and that are close to or completely immediate and painless. Even if we lived in a world where it wasn't completely painless and immediate, we're talking about ending your suffering forever so I don't understand why someone would continue suffering forever in extreme torture if a few minutes is what is needed to end that or be angry if they make the choice not to. I completely disagree with his notion that we're forced to continue living, we're here on the internet freely having a discussion all living in different parts of the world; we're not detained in nazi concentration camps (though plenty committed suicide there as well).

You put into words exactly what I'm thinking bestie. It's one thing for the government not to facilitate it, okay, fair enough, even if I disagree with that stance. It's another thing when the law is designed to actively stop any suicidal person from carrying out the act regardless of their situation, making self-determination incredibly difficult.

I saw a similar comment on a subreddit of therapists, when there was a discussion involving the recent euthanasia case of a 28 year old Dutch woman who had fought for years to access MAID. Sure, we don't need the government in order to access lethal methods, but are they as good and painless as a quick swig or IV of barbiturates? A far cry from it.

Putting that aside, it's like you say, if you've been clocked as a suicidal person the police can and will detain you against your wishes. Hospitalisation or at least a hold in A&E WILL be guarenteed. They are bound to try and stop everyone who might have suicidal inclinations no matter what. Yes, it's possible to hide it sometimes, but not if someone fails an attempt.

Camping shops and chemical suppliers have become suspicious of people purchasing items like intert gases, charcoal either on its own or paired with tents, or anything that can potentially be used for suicide. They will report people for attempting to purchase banned items. There are chaplains at famous jump spots, suicide nets, oxygen being added to helium or nitrogen canisters, and more and more CCTV/surveillance than ever preventing people from just going into the woods and tying a noose, or lighting some charcoal in a hotboxed car.

I don't see how one can hold that knowledge and perceive that suicide is freely accessible. Even having a method like SN, involves sneaking around and getting so many ducks in a row, and basically dying alone in a hotel somewhere with no way to say goodbye to any loved ones. Notes are confiscated by the police. The whole situation is risky. There is an inherent lack of dignity or absolute certainty in this situation that assisted suicide solves.

Maybe it is weak of me, but I would do anything to have a peaceful death using opiates or barbiturates rather than struggle with heart palpitations and vomitting for half an hour after taking lethal salts not knowing if I'll die, or vomit again in my sleep and wake up in an ICU under a sectioning hold. I think this is why many other people want euthanasia to become legal, because it's a guaranteed, peaceful death that doesn't have to be endured alone.

Taking matters into one own hands is not as easy as it's made out to be. Yes, SI and feeling completely ready or not also plays a role in what level of risk someone is willing to take, of course, but let's not pretend that non-violent methods are easy to access or don't pose a risk of harm to others. Something like sodium azide is really risky when others are exposed to it. Multiple people died from CO2 poisoning in an apartment complex in Japan several years ago because one of the tenants got desperate and lit charcoal in her flat, the smoke ended up wafting into other people's homes and killing them.

Euthanasia solves all of these problems.

View attachment 143015

It's fair points and I'm all for changing how society views or facilitates suicide, involuntary committal, etc.

But primarily on this point...

"Maybe it is weak of me, but I would do anything to have a peaceful death using opiates or barbiturates rather than struggle with heart palpitations and vomitting for half an hour after taking lethal salts not knowing if I'll die, or vomit again in my sleep and wake up in an ICU under a sectioning hold. I think this is why many other people want euthanasia to become legal, because it's a guaranteed, peaceful death that doesn't have to be endured alone."

...I don't see that as other people owing it to us. If someone doesn't ctb because they won't use a violent method or struggle with SI, I don't think that inherently means it falls on others. The options exist to ctb, they have for thousands of years before these compounds were used, it is a choice to choose or not choose to use them. I would be right along with you to vote on legislation allowing N to be freely used for suicide, but it's often proclaimed here that the lack of it or euthanasia is forcing people to live and that's simply not true from my view. In regards to saying it's not freely accessible, the vast majority of people can gain access to a rope and somewhere to hang. While I genuinely think it would be great if suicide was handed to people on a platter in the form of easily used drugs, I don't see it as a requirement for one to kill themselves.

 

[sserafim]

The world does owe us euthanasia though. Existence was a burden placed onto the person brought into existence and was not within the limits of a person's rights to autonomy, as existence was forced upon them. We were all brought into existence against our will, so it's only fitting that we all have the right to a guaranteed and peaceful death. That's the only way to make things right, as no one was able to consent to existence. Therefore, we should all have the right to leave this world whenever we want to, and have a surefire way to exit