The world doesn't owe us euthanasia

[divinemistress36]

It would be regulated Randomly. I read about a women in her 20s that has depression (which is treatable if you want to really put in the work, it could have different reasons that would not be clear directly). She was approved for euthanasia. That was not a single case. People with that condition that also have a good life and a boy friend. How can your depression be so severe when you have energy and the will for Hobbys and a boyfriend.

But people with medical conditions that are not lethal but make your life bad and limit stuff you can do in life. They are rejected.
What the hell??? So it makes it more in a way. "I decide if you are allowed to live".

The perfect solution for me is euthanasia through a device and gas that can be used for bought. SOMETHING like the suicide pod from Exit. You use the device for a small fee or you can buy some portable device that you can use everywhere you want. Gas through a device that was tested before by engineers is the most reliable.
Building that device and buying Nitrogen or Helium is not illegal. Also its not part of the medical sphere or no doctor is needed.

Not all depression is treatable

 

[LaughingGoat]

Mod @Dot was kind enough to let me add an edit to the OP to give a brief summation of the discussion here. Thank you to everyone who shared their insights.

 

[LaVieEnRose]

You provided sound arguments for all your points and I don't disagree with them. The only thing in principle I suppose I differ on is that people wanting a somewhat perfect, ideal suicide. I genuinely struggle to understand it, but I will concede that is my personal view on the matter and not indicative of some greater truth. Thank you for your well thought out responses.

People want perfection no matter what it is and bemoan when it doesn't exist. But I agree like with anything else if they want to CTB then they're just probably going to have to let go of any strict attachment to that perfect ideal (myself included). It's part of the process.

The long-term deliberation and discussion of all aspects of suicide on this forum, which as has been stated elsewhere is probably a minority phenomenon when it comes to self-termination, definitely can make it harder to get over that attachment.

Maybe a sentiment that is being conflated is one of "deserving" assisted death. I think a distinction can be drawn and it can be said that someone deserves something without the implications that they are "owed" it from someone else.

For example many people deserve a huge windfall of money in life or romantic love. That doesn't mean anyone owes it to them to deliver it to them!

 

[hibikikyuxx]

If the world doesn't owe us euthanasia even though we are suffering and didn't ask to be born, then parents deserve to be put in the same category as murderers for forcing a person into existence who then will die no matter what. If assisted suicide is "killing another person", then giving birth is also "killing another person".

 

[LaughingGoat]

People want perfection no matter what it is and bemoan when it doesn't exist. But I agree like with anything else if they want to CTB then they're just probably going to have to let go of any strict attachment to that perfect ideal (myself included). It's part of the process.

The long-term deliberation and discussion of all aspects of suicide on this forum, which as has been stated elsewhere is probably a minority phenomenon when it comes to self-termination, definitely can make it harder to get over that attachment.

Maybe a sentiment that is being conflated is one of "deserving" assisted death. I think a distinction can be drawn and it can be said that someone deserves something without the implications that they are "owed" it from someone else.

For example many people deserve a huge windfall of money in life or romantic love. That doesn't mean anyone owes it to them to deliver it to them!

I absolutely respect that perspective even though I don't share it. I've always felt that no one deserves or doesn't deserve anything in life such as love or money, only that they can make the best choices possible and do right by others. But like most things, I'm not saying I'm correct there or everyone should feel that way, just always interesting to hear different points of view.

If the world doesn't owe us euthanasia even though we are suffering and didn't ask to be born, then parents deserve to be put in the same category as murderers for forcing a person into existence who then will die no matter what. If assisted suicide is "killing another person", then giving birth is also "killing another person".

I don't disagree with that logic; parents are, by nature of their role in giving life, responsible for everything in their children's life. Even though I have no interest holding my own parents to that as an adult, it's not incorrect.

 

[LaVieEnRose]

I absolutely respect that perspective even though I don't share it. I've always felt that no one deserves or doesn't deserve anything in life such as love or money, only that they can make the best choices possible and do right by others. But like most things, I'm not saying I'm correct there or everyone should feel that way, just always interested in hearing different points of view.

"deserve" is really only a meaningful notion when it comes to deliberate human interactions; otherwise it is pretty hollow since it hardly insulates you from misfortune. But again if it doesn't necessarily imply any state of being "owed" something form anyone else, then even in the context of human interactions it becomes pretty meaningless in practice more often than not.

But from an emotional standpoint, fuck yeah we deserve a peaceful passing to our liking! Which is the sentiment that some people really are expressing.

 

[Illegal Preclear]

Why exactly does not having someone kill you mean you have to take a gun to a shooting range and kill yourself there or someone irresponsibly killing kids. It's a false equivalency. The extreme vast majority who manage to kill themselves do so without any such circumstance.

I can see someone doesn't watch a lot of successful CTB videos or read accounts of all methods. Firstly, the shooting range example - no, the person doesn't take their own gun to the range for the purpose of putting on a fun gory show for people, that would be very silly. They go there because they've been fucked over by Psychiatry and cannot purchase a gun and therefore a rental at a range would be their only means of access. I don't really blame them, they saw an opportunity and they took it. And the ever sadistic (to the carefree, happy and abled), misanthropic, dare I say Joker-ish side of me is glad they did because those people at the range got a reminder of how even the most Right Wing, 2nd Amendment loving people don't give half a shit if Disabled people lose their Constitutional Rights. (Because Right Wingers really only think those rights should apply to certain people even if they don't say it out loud.)

As for the Detergent Suicide thing I mentioned - this has happened. When people don't have access to clean methods, they're left with unclean methods - and those have caused collateral damage. Detergent Suicide got big in Japan in 2008 and many folks did it worldwide. Guess what? Not everyone is good at thinking of all the details that could go wrong when handling poison gases - leading to several bystander casualties and a lot of people getting sick and suffering property damage. Especially the First Responders whose first instinct is to break open a window of the locked car or home the incapacitated or dead person is in - giving themselves a big ol' face full of hydrogen sulfide.

And about people who wind up vegetables because their method went wrong - you'd have to be a very, very stupid or intellectually dishonest person to say that doesn't happen. A LOT. Even the most fatal methods like stepping in front of a train can leave the victim alive and mangled and stuck in a hospital bed/nursing home.

It would be far more logical and pragmatic to say "Why do we owe the guy who stepped in front of a train medical care when he wants to die? Why don't we just put a pillow over his face?" I'm being serious. If we're looking through the world in a lens of pure pragmatism - it's ALWAYS more pragmatic to kill as many people as possible so those who can better utilize the resources of this planet can continue to do so.

BTW - I'm a pragmatist to a fault. Extreme Nihilism and pragmatism - that's the way of life modern Western Civilization and Psychiatry and toxic Pro-Lifeism has carved me into.

@LaughingGoat I don't know where you're coming from with this "the world doesn't owe you euthanasia" business, but it's a very, very half-assed look at "the world owes you nothing" philosophy. That's a fine philosophy to have, but to half-ass it is very silly. If you want to look at the world that way, you have to accept that life is cheap. That death is nothing to be afraid of, and to die so your people have more resources to build something meaningful is the highest honor. Why would you want to make the highest honor something ugly, something with a good chance of failing, something done dirtily in secret, when it can be a beautiful, celebratory thing?

Believe you me, I would much rather have lived in a time and place where I could have my Disabled, Schizophrenic rear-end Aktion T4'd than being trapped in the toxic, perverse, degenerate clownworld I've been in for the past 35 years.

Or to use a less politically-charged example - Be one of those aliens from Star Trek Voyager where you went into the big, golden euthanasia egg and were CELEBRATED as an honorable person who sacrificed themselves so their families and society could benefit from the resources no longer going to you. The episode is called "Emanations" and it hurts my soul we can't live on a planet like that.

BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT? I collect a Disability check every month. The world absolutely doesn't owe me it. I acknowledge this. So why the fuck can't I step into a big, golden euthanasia egg and have everyone around me celebrate it and pledge the next 20 years of my Disability checks to a charity of my choice? Do you have any idea how much better this planet would be if those who desired death had the option of a clean, guaranteed, dare I say INCENTIVIZED death, and their resources could be re-routed to the needs who desired to remain alive and make the planet a better place?

Why WOULDN'T you want that?

 

[LaughingGoat]

I can see someone doesn't watch a lot of successful CTB videos or read accounts of all methods. Firstly, the shooting range example - no, the person doesn't take their own gun to the range for the purpose of putting on a fun gory show for people, that would be very silly. They go there because they've been fucked over by Psychiatry and cannot purchase a gun and therefore a rental at a range would be their only means of access. I don't really blame them, they saw an opportunity and they took it. And the ever sadistic (to the carefree, happy and abled), misanthropic, dare I say Joker-ish side of me is glad they did because those people at the range got a reminder of how even the most Right Wing, 2nd Amendment loving people don't give half a shit if Disabled people lose their Constitutional Rights. (Because Right Wingers really only think those rights should apply to certain people even if they don't say it out loud.)

As for the Detergent Suicide thing I mentioned - this has happened. When people don't have access to clean methods, they're left with unclean methods - and those have caused collateral damage. Detergent Suicide got big in Japan in 2008 and many folks did it worldwide. Guess what? Not everyone is good at thinking of all the details that could go wrong when handling poison gases - leading to several bystander casualties and a lot of people getting sick and suffering property damage. Especially the First Responders whose first instinct is to break open a window of the locked car or home the incapacitated or dead person is in - giving themselves a big ol' face full of hydrogen sulfide.

And about people who wind up vegetables because their method went wrong - you'd have to be a very, very stupid or intellectually dishonest person to say that doesn't happen. A LOT. Even the most fatal methods like stepping in front of a train can leave the victim alive and mangled and stuck in a hospital bed/nursing home.

It would be far more logical and pragmatic to say "Why do we owe the guy who stepped in front of a train medical care when he wants to die? Why don't we just put a pillow over his face?" I'm being serious. If we're looking through the world in a lens of pure pragmatism - it's ALWAYS more pragmatic to kill as many people as possible so those who can better utilize the resources of this planet can continue to do so.

BTW - I'm a pragmatist to a fault. Extreme Nihilism and pragmatism - that's the way of life modern Western Civilization and Psychiatry and toxic Pro-Lifeism has carved me into.

@LaughingGoat I don't know where you're coming from with this "the world doesn't owe you euthanasia" business, but it's a very, very half-assed look at "the world owes you nothing" philosophy. That's a fine philosophy to have, but to half-ass it is very silly. If you want to look at the world that way, you have to accept that life is cheap. That death is nothing to be afraid of, and to die so your people have more resources to build something meaningful is the highest honor. Why would you want to make the highest honor something ugly, something with a good chance of failing, something done dirtily in secret, when it can be a beautiful, celebratory thing?

Believe you me, I would much rather have lived in a time and place where I could have my Disabled, Schizophrenic rear-end Aktion T4'd than being trapped in the toxic, perverse, degenerate clownworld I've been in for the past 35 years.

Or to use a less politically-charged example - Be one of those aliens from Star Trek Voyager where you went into the big, golden euthanasia egg and were CELEBRATED as an honorable person who sacrificed themselves so their families and society could benefit from the resources no longer going to you. The episode is called "Emanations" and it hurts my soul we can't live on a planet like that.

BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT? I collect a Disability check every month. The world absolutely doesn't owe me it. I acknowledge this. So why the fuck can't I step into a big, golden euthanasia egg and have everyone around me celebrate it and pledge the next 20 years of my Disability checks to a charity of my choice? Do you have any idea how much better this planet would be if those who desired death had the option of a clean, guaranteed, dare I say INCENTIVIZED death, and their resources could be re-routed to the needs who desired to remain alive and make the planet a better place?

Why WOULDN'T you want that?

You clearly have taken my words as an attack on you since you are resorting to personal attacks; that was not my intention. I have responses to this, but I don't see it serving either of us to have an intellectual discussion if emotions are the driving force.

 

[leavingthesoultrap]

The world doesn't owe anyone, orphanages, charities, health care or anything. What's your point?
Humans are empathetic beings and we recognise suffering and want to minimise it.
That's why pets are being put to sleep instead of letting them suffer for days.

 

[qu13t5l33p]

I like to draw the comparison to abortion. One common argument against banning the practice is that those who need abortions will still get them done, just unsafely. Similarly, by not having effective and peaceful suicide methods available, it forces people to resort to inconsistent or gruesome methods.

 

[Illegal Preclear]

You clearly have taken my words as an attack on you since you are resorting to personal attacks; that was not my intention. I have responses to this, but I don't see it serving either of us to have an intellectual discussion if emotions are the driving force.

I'm not making personal attacks at all. I'm saying you haven't done enough research on the nitty gritty details of all suicide methods to see how easy it is to flub it up and make yourself a vegetable, or to create innocent casualties. I'm saying you need to do more homework. Your first assignment should be seeing how many suicide jumpers accidentally landed on other people - killing them.

I like to draw the comparison to abortion. One common argument against banning the practice is that those who need abortions will still get them done, just unsafely. Similarly, by not having effective and peaceful suicide methods available, it forces people to resort to inconsistent or gruesome methods.

I would say availability of Euthanasia is even far more important than abortion when you look at it this way: A back alley abortion can only kill one person. A messy suicide can create multiple casualties. Really - do a Google (or even better) a Yandex search on how many suicide jumpers have accidentally landed on someone - killing them. Or how much collateral damage an ill-thought out Detergent suicide can create.

Abortion prevents so much suffering and saves so many resources. Euthanasia will double or even triple that. There's literally no downside.

I still follow the old Church Of Euthanasia credo: Suicide - Abortion - Cannibalism - Sodomy. Except cannibalism because human meat is really gamey and gross. And except sodomy because Psychiatry killed the entire part of my brain responsible for sexual desire. So maybe I'd eat a Psychiatrist just out of spite even though it would taste gross.

 

[TAW122]

I've read this thread and overall, I feel like this is the reality of our world (not that I agree with it) in the sense that most people either for personal or religious reasons just simply wouldn't cross that line, even if it may be beneficial for people like us. Additionally, as for the government and State, it seems like less people would mean less workers and/or bodies to keep the economic system and world continue running.

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 and I hold this position as well. It would be a great concession even if they (the pro-sufferers, anti-choicers, pro-lifers) at the minimum stopped trying to actively impede, meddle, or otherwise interfere with another's wishes to exit this intolerable, undesirable existence. The comparison of this to the opposite sides of the same coin is interesting, and yes, there is certainly a big inconsistency in pro-lifers' logic, but (sadly) I doubt they would care or even want to change it, because it's all about fulfilling their status quo and atavistic morals. I also wrote a thread exposing pro-lifers for their hypocrisy when it comes to human rights violations.

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

View attachment 143015

Absolutely agree with you, especially the bolded paragraph. I want to clarify that I too, do not condone the collateral damage nor do I endorse what the Japanese woman did, but I can understand why she did what she did. I also wrote my stance on brutal methods and regarding collateral damage in another thread.

Where do they perform euthanasia though? Most of the time, I imagine it's assisted suicide. The patient is the one who drinks the nembutal, takes the tablets or presumably hits the button in the Sarco Pod. I suppose if it's via IV, then a doctor would need to do it. Still, I remember once at a museum, they had a prototype computer programme linked to a lethal injection. It asked you a bunch of questions before finally, you got to choose whether to go ahead with it. It was a weird kind of thrill to even go through the simulation- I must have been suicidal even then.

Not sure I like the argument though- basically that we're not owed a peaceful exit. Especially seeing as our societies are so keen on prolonging life- even if that isn't the patients wish.

What are we owed then? What do we owe society in return? Should society do it's best to support people- no matter how much help they need? Does it? Can it even? There's a finite amount of money- surely? In return- what should be expected of us? Should we be living as long as possible to pay our taxes?

Is it really all that reasonable in a society that likes to think of itself as highly developed and humane that there is a percentage of our population living in pain and against their will? And- should they decide that they can't anymore, they will need to risk maiming themselves via a home grown method. Plus, if they fail- possible involuntary sectioning.

I'd argue that our most important gift in life is choice. The ability to decide on our own destiny- freedom effectively. Suicidal people are all being coerced into continuing to live because of the restriction of reliable, peaceful methods.

Of course- it is more complicated than that. I would agree that assisted suicide needs to be regulated to prevent impulsive attempts and even murder via coercion. So- that does make it problematic when it comes to restricting harmful substances like SN. But then- that to my mind gives more weight to allowing it officially. Then, it could be controlled. But yeah- assisted suicide wherever possible rather than euthanasia.

Interesting point and yes, I second the fact that assisted suicide with careful regulation, safeguards is still the best of all worlds because it would significantly curb the amount of impulsive and often brutal CTBs that impact unwilling participants as well as reduce suffering overall. As for the prototype computer programme, that sounds rather interesting and even if pro-lifers fear or reject it out of ignorance, I could see that easily countering their argument/claim that "one is not a reliable witness or testimony to oneself!" This is because if pro-lifers really think we are really that mentally incompetent to make decisions for ourselves or don't know what's best for us, let the machine (or AI, or whatever one fancies) do the decision making! Anyways, I digressed a bit, but overall, yes having assisted suicide be available, with regulation and safeguards is probably the best of worlds and it shouldn't just be limited to terminally ill cases only.

 

[Superdeterminist]

Humanity owes itself peaceful means to suicide.

 

[Unknown21]

At least if it doesn't owe us this (although that's not true) then they shouldn't ban available methods like SN and others, let those who want to die do it on their own then.

 

[martinso67]

The government and legal entities like the Police should not make suicide an unwritten crime or illegal. Like it is nowadays.
I only wish that it would be really legal like Cannabis in some countries or cigarettes It's not regarded as good or supported by many people.
But when someone tries to suicide, he is not low key prosecuted or stopped by legal enforcement, if he was discovered.

Suicide is still in practice a crime in the developed and "free" Western world. The government stops reliable suicide methods and especially one's that gain traction like SN.
This is an infringement on human rights. They say everyone is free and has dignity. Someone deciding to end one's self is the practice of one's freedom. The freedom of others ends when one's freedom starts. When it's about the body of a human. Also in the human rights: The right to life.

It's not the obligation and not mandory to have to live. That's biological not possible. Everyone will die. But a peaceful and controlled death is better than a slow and maybe painful death by cancer.

 

[Morte]

thats dumb. I pay a lot of taxes, especially in my country where more than half of my income is stolen by the government. They OWE ME a dignified death, it's the least they can do.

 

[Qimaster]

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

Exactly what I to wanted to say!

@UKscotty We can also ask why should society go through the hassle of providing treatment for physical and mental health issues at all.
But they do don't they?

 

[lacrimosa]

Fine, then make nembutal and other drugs to peacefully CTB readily available. That takes the burden of guilt away from anyone whom might have to assist with someone CTB.

An easy solution would be to have a suicide booth that scans your ID and face to make sure you match your government ID, and this also makes sure you are above the age of 18, then you purchase the drugs, and voila, problem solved.

 

[Orange Cat]

We can also ask why should society go through the hassle of providing treatment for physical and mental health issues at all.
But they do don't they?

Society provides treatment for people who are sick because they are trying to help them and doctors have a duty of care. It's not the same thing as helping someone to end their life. No one is obligated to help someone else end their life.