Discussion What do you consider prolife?

[PhilosOfDoom]

I was reading a thread of a member who expressed his sorrows, seemed to be impulsive, having self-hatred, and one of the commenters said something along the lines, "man, go to therapy, get meds, go outside, get exercise, you can still get better, you haven't even gotten any help," severely paraphrased. Then, several members brigaded against him, calling him prolife. I can see that as dismissive, but at what point is it encouraging help, vs being pro-life? I hear many people expressing that they are pro-choice, as long as they got help, but how do you tell them to get help without apparently being prolife? I see people stating to them that they wish them peace, sometimes expressing their approval, yet it being obvious the person is partaking in impulsivity, has not got help sometimes by his own admission, and using a thought pattern of self-hatred to fuel their motivation. Not to sound argumentative, but I'm genuinely very curious.

TLDR; What do you personally label as a portrayal of pro-life, vs encouraging psychotherapy?

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I see people stating to them that they wish them peace, sometimes expressing their approval, yet it being obvious the person is partaking in impulsivity, has not got help sometimes by his own admission, and using a thought pattern of self-hatred to fuel their motivation

There's a lot in the OP, I'm going to start by focusing on this sentence.

I equate pro-choice for suicide with pro-choice for getting help. I assume by help that one means psychological or psychiatric.

Even if one is impulsive, if they choose to ctb, it is their right to make that choice, even if I personally think that's not the best time to engage with that choice. It's not my body that's in jeopardy, so it's not my say. I can try to influence a different decision, and I can also not say anything, either way, it's really about me and my own discomfort and how I self-soothe.

One also has a choice whether or not to engage with mental health services. There are a plethora of stories that such services were only temporarily effective, were down right abusive, or caused irreversible damage. I think it is as valuable to be circumspect in seeking help as to be circumspective in ending one's life.

If I am truly pro-choice, I have to honor one's right to choose even if I don't agree with how they arrive at or exercise the choice, as long as it does not directly harm another by forcing them to participate in an act of self-harm, such as the train method or suicide by cop.

To put it in perspective, I cannot claim the right to free speech if I want it denied to others just because I don't like what they say. As long as they aren't using speech abusively, such as gaslighting in order to control another, or yelling fire when there is no fire, I accept one's right to say what they choose.

Finally, returning to the quoted text, there is no responsibility to save someone from themselves. If I am in doubt, I refer to the opening paragraphs of the Rules and FAQ, which state near the end: Understand that there is information on this site that if used could kill you. The way you use any information posted on this website is fully and solely your responsibility.

This forum can be like a reality show, or watching a horror movie and yelling Nooooo! when a character makes a dumbass move and is about to walk into danger. One can get very emotionally involved here and forget the autonomy and separateness of another who is posting. There is a natural tendency to want to save someone, even from themselves, but pro-choice offers a safe and healthy boundary. To me it says: If you want the right to choose what to do with your own body, you have to allow others to exercise that right as well. If you want the right to escape this shithole when and how you deem fit, or even possible, you have to allow others the same autonomy.

Sometimes impulsivity is the only way to overcome the instinct to survive when it no longer serves, and if one waits, they may realize it would have been the wrong choice, or they may be taking a longer path only to arrive at the same destination. Either way, most often I find it's wise, after I yell No! if so inclined, to step back and let them do what they're going to do, and return to focusing on what I want or need to do.

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

I see people stating to them that they wish them peace, sometimes expressing their approval, yet it being obvious the person is partaking in impulsivity, has not got help sometimes by his own admission, and using a thought pattern of self-hatred to fuel their motivation

There's a lot in the OP, I'm going to start by focusing on this sentence.

I equate pro-choice for suicide with pro-choice for getting help. I assume by help that one means psychological or psychiatric.

Even if one is impulsive, if they choose to ctb, it is their right to make that choice, even if I personally think that's not the best time to engage with that choice. It's not my body that's in jeopardy, so it's not my say. I can try to influence a different decision, and I can also not say anything, either way, it's really about me and my own discomfort and how I self-soothe.

One also has a choice whether or not to engage with mental health services. There are a plethora of stories that such services were only temporarily effective, were down right abusive, or caused irreversible damage. I think it is as valuable to be circumspect in seeking help as to be circumspective in ending one's life.

If I am truly pro-choice, I have to honor one's right to choose even if I don't agree with how they arrive at or exercise the choice, as long as it does not directly harm another by forcing them to participate in an act of self-harm, such as the train method or suicide by cop.

To put it in perspective, I cannot claim the right to free speech if I want it denied to others just because I don't like what they say. As long as they aren't using speech abusively, such as gaslighting in order to control another, or yelling fire when there is no fire, I accept one's right to say what they choose.

Finally, returning to the quoted text, there is no responsibility to save someone from themselves. If I am in doubt, I refer to the opening paragraphs of the Rules and FAQ, which state near the end: Understand that there is information on this site that if used could kill you. The way you use any information posted on this website is fully and solely your responsibility.

This forum can be like a reality show, or watching a horror movie and yelling Nooooo! when a character makes a dumbass move and is about to walk into danger. One can get very emotionally involved here and forget the autonomy and separateness of another who is posting. There is a natural tendency to want to save someone, even from themselves, but pro-choice offers a safe and healthy boundary. To me it says: If you want the right to choose what to do with your own body, you have to allow others to exercise that right as well. If you want the right to escape this shithole when and how you deem fit, or even possible, you have to allow others the same autonomy.

Sometimes impulsivity is the only way to overcome the instinct to survive when it no longer serves, and if one waits, they may realize it would have been the wrong choice, or they may be taking a longer path only to arrive at the same destination. Either way, most often I find it's wise, after I yell No! if so inclined, to step back and let them do what they're going to do, and return to focusing on what I want or need to do.

With that approach, what do you think of physician assisted-suicide in that case with filtering, and eligibility requirements? In addition, I noticed this awhile ago, but the Terms and Rules section in the bottom header has this as a line, " Users who are in a highly emotional state or suicidal should not browse the site at this time." Even though this seems like a defunct rule, and isn't actually believed/enforced by the moderators, site administrators, nor community. I presume it's a legal safe guard, but thought it was interesting.

 

[calendulo]

if your question is a sylogism, I can not to develop it. I do not remember already. I studied that 25 years ago.
But instead of that, I can to do an oxymoron, would be easier. If you do not mind, of course.
Prolife is the opposite to prokill.

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

if your question is a sylogism, I can not to develop it. I do not remember already. I studied that 25 years ago.
But instead of that, I can to do an oxymoron, would be easier. If you do not mind, of course.
Prolife is the opposite to prokill.

I wasn't attempting to make any conclusion, nor argument via sylogism. I was intending to speak of peoples' definition or approach to pro-life, or more specifically, what text is considered therapeutic encouragement, vs a 'portrayal' of prolife. Though of course, if I did make any logical inconsistancies or assertions, please let me know. I do not mean to come across in that manner.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

With that approach, what do you think of physician assisted-suicide in that case with filtering, and eligibility requirements?

Honestly, I think the question is derailing to the thread. Your OP was pretty meaty, focused on this specific environment, with multiple points to consider. I'd consider your question in a separate thread.

In addition, I noticed this awhile ago, but the Terms and Rules section in the bottom header has this as a line, " Users who are in a highly emotional state or suicidal should not browse the site at this time." Even though this seems like a defunct rule, and isn't actually believed/enforced by the moderators, site administrators, nor community. I presume it's a legal safe guard, but thought it was interesting.

I never noticed that. I would assume the legal safeguard as well. Most everyone who comes here does so because they are suicidal, and a high percentage are in a highly emotional state, hence the attraction. This site is like a specialized flame that attracts those two specific species of moths, and those who want to catch and rehabilitate them.

 

[NonDefaultOption]

I don't think gaslighting is pure evil, but I think that technique is abused a lot. And I don't think that just making the ends meet is a good way to approach anything. It's a trip, with every step, and the steps make the trip, not just the end goal, because they all exist. But to use gaslighting as a tool to promote ignorance, is not right.

My hallucinations gaslighted me to no end, and there were times when I couldn't escape them for days, for weeks sometimes. They broke me. That why I say gaslighting is not always bad. It's not bad when you who receive it can rise to the occasion, stand your ground and say "Fuck you, I'm not taking your poison anymore. I may not know everything, but you don't have the right to tell me what to think. I will make my own decisions regardless.", it can help you learn to stand your ground like that. But if you gaslight, you better bear responsibility and not add more crap to the world by just gaslighting and not following up with aftercare and saying "you're right, I shouldn't do that" or something.

We're in a world which is connected through internet, so there's even more opportunities for bullying, and learning to stand your ground is a good thing. And if you always keep your fixed worldview as it is, how can you expect the world to become a better place? I mean, think about if all the people kept their worldview as is for the rest of their lives and nothing ever changed, what would be the point? That why I think doubt in healthy dozes and in right situations is a good thing. Using doubt as a weapon though, is never good, just like you could use morphine to kill somebody or help them get through a vital surgery. Most things can be turned into a weapon and abused, but that alone shouldn't be the reason to hate those things.

...

As far as those folk who accused the helper being pro-life when he might've been pro-choice, yeah... people always look for somebody to blame. Why? Because they feel bad themselves, or are triggered, which is kinda the same thing. Being triggered means there's an opportunity to learn: the thing in the other person that triggered you, is what you haven't dealt with in yourself. Or they might think the person who gives advice doesn't give good enough advice. I'm pissed too whenever people tell me to keep eating medication and going to meetings with mental health officials when in the big picture the total effect of them in long term is more negative than positive compared to tackling the problem without them. Things are religious when you're stuck in certain way more narrowly and can't tell the meaning behind things clearly, but you still insist on being that way with the motive of belonging to a group of people, so you can feel belonging and connection. Idk... I'm just babbling now.

But as far as pro-choice and pro-life goes, I think a lot of people might just be pro-death and try to coach others too to be like that too. If you're pro-choice, wouldn't you want to always live if you had the possibility to live the kind of life you can? I know my "demons" may get me someday and have me end up exiting life, but that doesn't stop me from living good life now or later. Why should it stop anyone else if you have the possibility to ilve that good life?
The question you have to ask is, can you offer what the other person needs in order for them to live a good life in future? You have to be very, very honest about that, can't compromise your integrity for the sake of anything there, no sir.
I know a lot of ways to make your life better, but I don't go about spreading them all too much. They're all things a lot of people already know, all you need is to connect a tiny bit of dots and have the experiences yourself and relate it all to practical life, and you should be good. But the thing is, it's an effort that requires resources. By resources I mean being able to study and practice and change your life dramatically. I think most people lack resources. Money is just one thing, willingness to compromise your lifestyle consistently and suffer it consistently for years, to be patient and to put your faith in things and make real effort...

I'm not willing to offer people that road because it can be so painful, even if they might get to the "finish line" of nice life = having the basics covered. Life's good when you have basics covered, and basics include doing work you feel is meaningful and is "you", and being with people who accept the core you. It's a huge undertaking to commit to that road, not the walk in the park a lot of people want to sell it as. Nobody can do that work for you, no life coach no spiritual guru no personal trainer, nobody, you have to do it yourself. That why I'm careful about who I offer it, at least way more careful than I used to be. If you can't identify one or two things that would be most helpful for the person you want to help (and the gauge for helpful things includes, that the less effort the person has to put to get the better result, the more helpful the thing is), I don't think you should even try to help them. Just shooting a shotgun of many little help pellets towards that person is gonna leave them confused at best. Aiming that pellet in a vital spot helps, but it's usually easier for them to catch a bullet than many pellets, because for things to work, you usually need to do them more than once or twice, to make a habit of them. Else it's temporary and the person will revert sooner or later.
And besides, a lot of things that are helpful to many people are detrimental to many others. Like keto diet or going to gym or even doing shadow work, if the time is right or if you're not in enough shape to handle the punishment. Even detox protocols can leave you so weak you develop an injury of sorts if you can't bring yourself to rest adequately.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't try, but to think more carefully when you go around trying to help people. You don't have to know all the helpful things out there, and you don't have to have full picture of the person and their life, but you need some sense in it to make an impact and not just fill the need to have meaning in your own life. I've done things in this area the wrong way and I know it'll make you feel bad, and that when you speak with something you can back up with your own experience and with a sense of what's going on, you can make more of an impact.

Road to hell is paved with good intentions, and while helping people to find happiness is a good thing, you have to have the integrity to ask yourself very honestly, are you really doing that when you're about to do it.

 

[bpdandme]

I don't think anyone wants to be complicit in someones death and it's sad when a member leaves, there is definitely a difference between being pro-life and being compassionate. I think everyone on this site is compassionate towards each other and will offer help because we are all in the same sad situation of wanting to die which makes people sympathetic. By being pro-choice you have to be open to both life and death. I personally think it's okay to offer help and suggest alternatives but also think it's fine if someone would rather wish them peace.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

Point taken. I'll try and cut down on the OP to make it more concise, and less rambly.

Well, you can do that if you like. My concern was that your question would make the thread rambly. :)

 

[calendulo]

I wasn't attempting to make any conclusion, nor argument via sylogism. I was intending to speak of peoples' definition or approach to pro-life, or more specifically, what text is considered therapeutic encouragement, vs a 'portrayal' of prolife. Though of course, if I did make any logical inconsistancies or assertions, please let me know. I do not mean to come across in that manner.

Ah,...............I though it was policy; and it is not, my fault...................you are searching a definition...ok.................then a prolife will be an human being..............i do not know in english.........maybe in favour of life.

I hope that now sounds you better.

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

Ah,...............I though it was policy; and it is not, my fault...................you are searching a definition...ok.................then a prolife will be an human being..............i do not know in english.........maybe in favour of life.

I hope that now sounds you better.

Apologies, didn't know it was a second language. You actually know a second language, and it is fine! Much better than I would be if I learned a foreign language. And yes, your input is appreciated

I don't think gaslighting is pure evil, but I think that technique is abused a lot. And I don't think that just making the ends meet is a good way to approach anything. It's a trip, with every step, and the steps make the trip, not just the end goal, because they all exist. But to use gaslighting as a tool to promote ignorance, is not right.

My hallucinations gaslighted me to no end, and there were times when I couldn't escape them for days, for weeks sometimes. They broke me. That why I say gaslighting is not always bad. It's not bad when you who receive it can rise to the occasion, stand your ground and say "Fuck you, I'm not taking your poison anymore. I may not know everything, but you don't have the right to tell me what to think. I will make my own decisions regardless.", it can help you learn to stand your ground like that. But if you gaslight, you better bear responsibility and not add more crap to the world by just gaslighting and not following up with aftercare and saying "you're right, I shouldn't do that" or something.

We're in a world which is connected through internet, so there's even more opportunities for bullying, and learning to stand your ground is a good thing. And if you always keep your fixed worldview as it is, how can you expect the world to become a better place? I mean, think about if all the people kept their worldview as is for the rest of their lives and nothing ever changed, what would be the point? That why I think doubt in healthy dozes and in right situations is a good thing. Using doubt as a weapon though, is never good, just like you could use morphine to kill somebody or help them get through a vital surgery. Most things can be turned into a weapon and abused, but that alone shouldn't be the reason to hate those things.

...

As far as those folk who accused the helper being pro-life when he might've been pro-choice, yeah... people always look for somebody to blame. Why? Because they feel bad themselves, or are triggered, which is kinda the same thing. Being triggered means there's an opportunity to learn: the thing in the other person that triggered you, is what you haven't dealt with in yourself. Or they might think the person who gives advice doesn't give good enough advice. I'm pissed too whenever people tell me to keep eating medication and going to meetings with mental health officials when in the big picture the total effect of them in long term is more negative than positive compared to tackling the problem without them. Things are religious when you're stuck in certain way more narrowly and can't tell the meaning behind things clearly, but you still insist on being that way with the motive of belonging to a group of people, so you can feel belonging and connection. Idk... I'm just babbling now.

But as far as pro-choice and pro-life goes, I think a lot of people might just be pro-death and try to coach others too to be like that too. If you're pro-choice, wouldn't you want to always live if you had the possibility to live the kind of life you can? I know my "demons" may get me someday and have me end up exiting life, but that doesn't stop me from living good life now or later. Why should it stop anyone else if you have the possibility to ilve that good life?
The question you have to ask is, can you offer what the other person needs in order for them to live a good life in future? You have to be very, very honest about that, can't compromise your integrity for the sake of anything there, no sir.
I know a lot of ways to make your life better, but I don't go about spreading them all too much. They're all things a lot of people already know, all you need is to connect a tiny bit of dots and have the experiences yourself and relate it all to practical life, and you should be good. But the thing is, it's an effort that requires resources. By resources I mean being able to study and practice and change your life dramatically. I think most people lack resources. Money is just one thing, willingness to compromise your lifestyle consistently and suffer it consistently for years, to be patient and to put your faith in things and make real effort...

I'm not willing to offer people that road because it can be so painful, even if they might get to the "finish line" of nice life = having the basics covered. Life's good when you have basics covered, and basics include doing work you feel is meaningful and is "you", and being with people who accept the core you. It's a huge undertaking to commit to that road, not the walk in the park a lot of people want to sell it as. Nobody can do that work for you, no life coach no spiritual guru no personal trainer, nobody, you have to do it yourself. That why I'm careful about who I offer it, at least way more careful than I used to be. If you can't identify one or two things that would be most helpful for the person you want to help (and the gauge for helpful things includes, that the less effort the person has to put to get the better result, the more helpful the thing is), I don't think you should even try to help them. Just shooting a shotgun of many little help pellets towards that person is gonna leave them confused at best. Aiming that pellet in a vital spot helps, but it's usually easier for them to catch a bullet than many pellets, because for things to work, you usually need to do them more than once or twice, to make a habit of them. Else it's temporary and the person will revert sooner or later.
And besides, a lot of things that are helpful to many people are detrimental to many others. Like keto diet or going to gym or even doing shadow work, if the time is right or if you're not in enough shape to handle the punishment. Even detox protocols can leave you so weak you develop an injury of sorts if you can't bring yourself to rest adequately.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't try, but to think more carefully when you go around trying to help people. You don't have to know all the helpful things out there, and you don't have to have full picture of the person and their life, but you need some sense in it to make an impact and not just fill the need to have meaning in your own life. I've done things in this area the wrong way and I know it'll make you feel bad, and that when you speak with something you can back up with your own experience and with a sense of what's going on, you can make more of an impact.

Road to hell is paved with good intentions, and while helping people to find happiness is a good thing, you have to have the integrity to ask yourself very honestly, are you really doing that when you're about to do it.

That is actually really good fucking advice, that is a really good comment. And you're right, I've been guilty of doing that, heck even today. So that really helps with preventing that, and to only help when there is clear path for that person, and other circumstances are met. Some people just won't want to do the the full path to recovery, that's pretty sound. Really insightful, and no thinking how long it took you to write that, thanks a lot!

 

[calendulo]

Apologies, didn't know it was a second language. You actually know a second language, and it is fine! Much better than I would be if I learned a foreign language. And yes, your input is appreciated

No apologies, and honestly I actually do not know a second language, I just try it.
Gramatically I am totally a huge fake. I am aware of that.

Coming back to your thread I am like a grammar english''s killer.

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

No apologies, and honestly I actually do not know a second language, I just try it.
Gramatically I am totally a huge fake. I am aware of that.

Coming back to your thread I am like a grammar english''s killer.

Considering your comma and period use isn't all that off, just a couple missing occasionally, and you seem to know some principals of English, e.g capitalizing the first letter, so you're not that bad. If I remember some of your comments correctly, some were very close to how they are supposed to be in native English. I personally feel that when others can fully understand your writings, you know the language pretty well, but that's me. I am a victim of grammatical mistakes, I'll be honest. I'm a big victim of using run-on sentences, something that isn't technically incorrect, just not standard practice.

 

[calendulo]

Considering your comma and period use isn't all that off, just a couple missing occasionally, and you seem to know some principals of English, e.g capitalizing the first letter, so you're not that bad. If I remember some of your comments correctly, some were very close to how they are supposed to be in native English. I personally feel that when others can fully understand your writings, you know the language pretty well, but that's me. I am a victim of grammatical mistakes, I'll be honest. I'm a big victim of using run-on sentences, something that isn't technically incorrect, just not standard practice.

What can I say?. I get no words. Thank you. I appreciate your so kind comment.
Sincerely, It is a great relief to be understood, grammatically of course.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I don't think gaslighting is pure evil, but I think that technique is abused a lot.

I assume you brought up gaslighting because I mentioned it in a negative light, that is, to control another under the auspices of free speech.

Sorry, OP, for derailing, but I want to address this.

So, in my understanding of gaslighting, it is the altering of another's perception of reality. I hear you that your hallucinations did this to you, and you overcame the challenge. How intense! But if a person does it to another person, well, I wouldn't call it pure evil, but how can it be a positive thing, that is, with the intention to benefit the one being gaslighted? If one rationalizes it is to the victim's benefit, I'd say that rationalization is highly suspect. Once one convinces another that their perception of reality is in error and defines it for them, the convincer has control over that person. Clearly your hallucinations had control over you until you took back your power.

One example of gaslighting is the history taught in schools as dictated by the government. The winner in a war gets to decide the story of what happened, which rarely aligns with reality. When enough time passes, no one is left who remembers the truth, and those who do are often punished or simply called liars if they speak it.

A personal example. I posted I was leaving Facebook and offered my email via PM. A semi-estranged family member responded by sending me a PM that wished me well and goodbye. Later I resumed contact via messenger. When I didn't respond to some messages, she contacted someone we knew in common, said she hadn't heard from me since a certain event when in fact she had, and asked for my email address. That person was stupid and gave it to her without my consent, but emailed me and told me they had. Minutes later, the family member emailed me. She said, "I don't know if this is still a good address" (implying she already had it), that she hadn't heard from me since the event (a blatant lie), and that she was worried. The story gets more convoluted than that, but the point is that if I allowed her to define reality, then I would have given her power over my personal, private life and validated her violation of my boundaries. Was she evil? No. But she negated my autonomy and boundaries to serve her own wants. She wanted me to answer when she called, and when she didn't, she lied and created a new reality to make her boundary violations appear okay to that third party and to me.

@NonDefaultOption, I'm not trying to make you wrong or shoot you down. I agree that we grow stronger and more capable when we overcome challenges. I'm certainly stronger for seeing through the manipulation and how I subsequently managed my family member. But in the same token, I don't have gratitude for abuse, I have gratitude for my own resilience, fortitude, and intelligence. I just wanted to say all that in response to your comment since the part about gaslighting seemed to be in response to my previous comment.

 

[k75]

What do you personally label as a portrayal of pro-life, vs encouraging psychotherapy?

I did read your whole post, as well as the rest of the thread. I just don't want to get into all that, so forgive.

I don't like labels. It's too easy to misuse or misunderstand them. That's what I see happen a lot, when pro-life accusations are tossed around in a negative way. To me, pro-life is bad when a person decides living is the only acceptable option for everyone else and decides for others that they have to continue living no matter what. They try to control another person's fate because it isn't what they believe is right.

Pro-choice is accepting that everyone has a choice to live or not. But in my eyes, it does not mean standing aside and watching someone do something impulsive or excessively harmful and not trying to help or offer better alternatives. I think a lot of times, situations look worse from the inside. It can be impossible to see any way out but death, but maybe there is something someone less involved can see?

If I have knowledge that might help someone not hurt so much anymore, I would like to tell them about it in case it's new info for them that could help. I don't think that's the same as what people mean when they accuse someone of a pro-life stance. I'm not telling that person they can't end their life. I'm just helping them be smarter about it and to make sure it's the right thing and what they really want. I'm a fan of trying everything before giving up completely. But I respect that everyone has a right to do what they want with their own life.

Sometimes people are clearly acting on impulse and it's obvious because of things they've said that they don't really want to die but if someone doesn't help, they will hurt themselves and regret it. This isn't good. Suicide should be a conclusion you come to rationally, not in a panic. If I try to intervene, I'm not saying don't do it at all. I'm saying please wait awhile, see how you feel later. Death is not going away and it's rarely an emergency.

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

I did read your whole post, as well as the rest of the thread. I just don't want to get into all that, so forgive.

I don't like labels. It's too easy to misuse or misunderstand them. That's what I see happen a lot, when pro-life accusations are tossed around in a negative way. To me, pro-life is bad when a person decides living is the only acceptable option for everyone else and decides for others that they have to continue living no matter what. They try to control another person's fate because it isn't what they believe is right.

Pro-choice is accepting that everyone has a choice to live or not. But in my eyes, it does not mean standing aside and watching someone do something impulsive or excessively harmful and not trying to help or offer better alternatives. I think a lot of times, situations look worse from the inside. It can be impossible to see any way out but death, but maybe there is something someone less involved can see?

If I have knowledge that might help someone not hurt so much anymore, I would like to tell them about it in case it's new info for them that could help. I don't think that's the same as what people mean when they accuse someone of a pro-life stance. I'm not telling that person they can't end their life. I'm just helping them be smarter about it and to make sure it's the right thing and what they really want. I'm a fan of trying everything before giving up completely. But I respect that everyone has a right to do what they want with their own life.

Sometimes people are clearly acting on impulse and it's obvious because of things they've said that they don't really want to die but if someone doesn't help, they will hurt themselves and regret it. This isn't good. Suicide should be a conclusion you come to rationally, not in a panic. If I try to intervene, I'm not saying don't do it at all. I'm saying please wait awhile, see how you feel later. Death is not going away and it's rarely an emergency.

What I'm skeptical about is putting that into practice. From what I've seen, people will merely disregard it and go into their shells. My current hypothesis is that people come here seeing the goodbye threads and the such, e.g "good luck," and do not expect any comments mentioning an alternative. Therefore, they disregard that individual because all they wanted was encouragement, not constructive criticism or potential feedback. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that strategy hasn't seem to work in a lot of threads in which they explicitly say, "I'm going to ctb in xxx," that's when they are determined and are not open. It only works in the non-ctb announcement esk threads, such as asking questions, or mild-moderate venting. Even then, it seems to be a hit or miss. That my experience though. Perhaps it's wrong. Thanks for the input.

 

[k75]

What I'm skeptical about is putting that into practice. From what I've seen, people will merely disregard it and go into their shells. My current hypothesis is that people come here seeing the goodbye threads and the such, e.g "good luck," and do not expect any comments mentioning an alternative. Therefore, they disregard that individual because all they wanted was encouragement, not constructive criticism or potential feedback. Perhaps I'm wrong, but that strategy hasn't seem to work in a lot of threads in which they explicitly say, "I'm going to ctb in xxx," that's when they are determined and are not open. It only works in the non-ctb announcement esk threads, such as asking questions, or mild-moderate venting. Even then, it seems to be a hit or miss. That my experience though. Perhaps it's wrong. Thanks for the input.

Well, that's just my beliefs and how I deal with things. I try to help if I can, I step back if it's not wanted or needed. I've seen people who were very grateful for the community supporting them and helping them through the crisis, and I've seen people who weren't open to any help. For the most part, everyone seems to respect that.

These things also come in waves. Sometimes there are more new users who haven't found their footing yet and don't know what to expect, and sometimes there are more who have been here awhile who tend to have different reactions.

I think the tone of the forum does catch people off guard sometimes, too. There's a misunderstanding that SS is pro-suicide or death sometimes. And it's really far from it. Some live, some die, and everyone should be supported. There are a lot of people (myself included) who came determined to get a method and go quickly who end up finding connections and ways to survive instead. It's really amazing.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

My current hypothesis is that people come here seeing the goodbye threads and the such, e.g "good luck," and do not expect any comments mentioning an alternative. Therefore, they disregard that individual because all they wanted was encouragement, not constructive criticism or potential feedback.

I've yet to see a goodbye thread that no one has at least said, "You can change your mind." Maybe such threads exist, but they're not the norm.

My personal opinion is that a goodbye thread is a statement. Their mind is made up, they're ready to go. Unless they are acting uncertain, I'm going to respect their decision and wish them well. Personally, if I were to write a goodbye thread, I would state in the OP that I'd already thought it through and would find being questioned to be off-putting, irritating, and derailing. Also speaking personally, if someone is using a goodbye thread as a means to be talked out of ctb, I find that irritating, too, but that's just me. There are limits to my emotional reserves, however other people are very willing to step up and give that particular kind of support, so just because I'm not willing to offer it doesn't mean it isn't deserved and won't or shouldn't be met.

 

[whereispeace]

"Pro-life" = believing that suicide is always the wrong choice no matter what the circumstances are, and that it is inherently wrong. That's the way I see it.

 

[TimeToBiteTheDust]

Some people can solve their problems and some people not. I came to this site after realizing that ctb is my only option. I got all help I could but there's no way to improve. I've been stuck for months. I'll ctb one day. That's a fact. The "go get some help" doesn't worl with me. I go to therapy because I'm forced to. And I tell her everything all right because my decision is already made and that gives me relief.

 

[FohPah]

Have you ever watched someone make a big life decision that you disagreed with because you thought there were better options, but you still respected their decision? You might advise them against it; you might try to persuade them; you might even plead with them to make a different decision because of how it would affect you. But you can ultimately agree to disagree, because it's still important to you that they can make a decision that's important to them.

Pro-choice means the decision to live or die is just another one of those big life decisions. Whatever the decision, it should be respected.

Pro-life means the decision to live or die is not just another big life decision -- it's special somehow. Maybe life is sacred, and you'd be a murderer if you killed yourself. Maybe your life doesn't belong to you. Maybe suicide goes against the purpose of life, whatever that is. Maybe the decision to die cannot, by definition, be in the best interest of a living being, and therefore cannot be rational. Whatever the reason, the pro-life conclusion is that we can't just take our respect for any big decision someone makes regarding their own life, and extend that respect to their decision to end their life.

The difference between pro-choice and pro-life is whether the decision to live or die is in the same category as other big life decisions.

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

I've yet to see a goodbye thread that no one has at least said, "You can change your mind." Maybe such threads exist, but they're not the norm.

My personal opinion is that a goodbye thread is a statement. Their mind is made up, they're ready to go. Unless they are acting uncertain, I'm going to respect their decision and wish them well. Personally, if I were to write a goodbye thread, I would state in the OP that I'd already thought it through and would find being questioned to be off-putting, irritating, and derailing. Also speaking personally, if someone is using a goodbye thread as a means to be talked out of ctb, I find that irritating, too, but that's just me. There are limits to my emotional reserves, however other people are very willing to step up and give that particular kind of support, so just because I'm not willing to offer it doesn't mean it isn't deserved and won't or shouldn't be met.

Let me retract and replace something. Yes, there will be several of of comments with that mentioned. However, it's usually casually mentioned at the end of a comment. 1 out of what, 40# comments, which is like 2-3% of comments, but if I'm a new user; if I see one thread, and only 5-10 out of 40 mention something, I'm going to assume they're the minority. If I use my personal experience, when their proactively suicide, you block out everything else. Your brain is seeing the negative in everything, being filled with cognitive bias, least I'd say that's it for a decent sum of people from how they go on about burdening their family, and how they mention the least major factors, my experience. This seems to be a conversation of efficiency and personal experience which is something that cannot be logically argued due to the lack of statistics, so all of this on either side are personal opinions, or hypotheses. The primary question of the message you quote is whether people can be reasoned with when proactively suicide, which is not disprovable nor provable to a conclusive degree. I can only use my knowledge of them being in a cognitively negative and bias state when proactively suicidal, to extrapolate that they would be hard to reason with, and efforts would be fruitless. I do not have any evidence by admission, I could probably use examples, or whatever I wanted. Doesn't mean I can prove it. However, as I said, it's a personal hypothesis, not a claim. Otherwise, I'd better quote a psychologist, lookup data or be ready to defend my hypothesis based of deduction.

Have you ever watched someone make a big life decision that you disagreed with because you thought there were better options, but you still respected their decision? You might advise them against it; you might try to persuade them; you might even plead with them to make a different decision because of how it would affect you. But you can ultimately agree to disagree, because it's still important to you that they can make a decision that's important to them.

Pro-choice means the decision to live or die is just another one of those big life decisions. Whatever the decision, it should be respected.

Pro-life means the decision to live or die is not just another big life decision -- it's special somehow. Maybe life is sacred, and you'd be a murderer if you killed yourself. Maybe your life doesn't belong to you. Maybe suicide goes against the purpose of life, whatever that is. Maybe the decision to die cannot, by definition, be in the best interest of a living being, and therefore cannot be rational. Whatever the reason, the pro-life conclusion is that we can't just take our respect for any big decision someone makes regarding their own life, and extend that respect to their decision to end their life.

The difference between pro-choice and pro-life is whether the decision to live or die is in the same category as other big life decisions.

The answer to your question would be very devisive and split I'd think. Clarification; Numerous people do not respect peoples' decisions when they are minors, so is it impossible for them to continue to do so? I'm not convinced on either side of the coin, to have 'eligibility requirements', or to have a blanket view of it as a right. Someone may argue it's not a human right to have another help you with it, while others do, while others believe only certain people can commit. Of course, the state does not and cannot decide why people commit suicide by themselves, but they can do so when it comes to medical intervention, and that is a matter of contention and debate. If someone has a view that minors cannot reasonably commit, would they then be labeled as pro-life? Serious question. If not, then why can't they put extra modifiers or rules on to it?

EDIT: This seems to have been taken in the wrong way. (A by "they can do so when it comes to medical intervention" I meant assisted suicide, my mistake. And let me rephrase, I view it as a right for you to take your life, but some people argue when it comes to assisted. I was asking because some people have odd classifications as prolife. I phrased it badly on second thought.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I think what bothers you does not bother me.

I think if a new user looks only at goodbye threads and not the bigger picture of how the community works based on a variety of threads, they don't have even basic critical thinking skills and I don't hold out much hope that they can even successfully plan and carry out their own ctb. I can't fix it, I don't own it.

I also think that people are responsible for their own actions and have to deal with the consequences. Such is life. I cannot be responsible for their actions, so I'm not going to take on more than is mine. If they say they are going to ctb now and they are an adult, I say goodbye and good luck. If they haven't thought it out, it's not my responsibility to think it out for them. I'm here supporting people who ask questions about how to plan, or about whether it's a good decision before they mix the SN or tie the noose.

Your comment leads me to think that you're struggling with the potential pro-life within you, that you want to put on a super hero cape to rescue others from their own ignorance or inability to make their own decisions, and that you want a greater showing of super hero capes on the forum.

I recognize this is a simplistic and limited perspective, and perhaps completely in error. But as this thread progresses, I get the sense you want to fight *for* something, and that what's really going on is an internal struggle, a cognitive dissonance, and no one who's commented has alleviated it.

This is a place focused on death and how to do it. The shit is real. Sometimes that focus leads to a personal awareness that death is not the right choice, but self-deliverance needed to be faced in order to get to whatever truths it was eclipsing. Sometimes that focus leads to a legitimate goodbye and a crossed-out name, whether well-considered or not. And sometimes -- oftentimes -- people get the information they seek and act upon it without ever letting anyone here know. The shit is real.

 

[Nem]

I think prolife is a rigid, prehistoric attitude removing a persons right to decide if they want to continue or extinguish their life at free will
Peace/hugs

 

[PhilosOfDoom]

I think what bothers you does not bother me.

I think if a new user looks only at goodbye threads and not the bigger picture of how the community works based on a variety of threads, they don't have even basic critical thinking skills and I don't hold out much hope that they can even successfully plan and carry out their own ctb. I can't fix it, I don't own it.

I also think that people are responsible for their own actions and have to deal with the consequences. Such is life. I cannot be responsible for their actions, so I'm not going to take on more than is mine. If they say they are going to ctb now and they are an adult, I say goodbye and good luck. If they haven't thought it out, it's not my responsibility to think it out for them. I'm here supporting people who ask questions about how to plan, or about whether it's a good decision before they mix the SN or tie the noose.

Your comment leads me to think that you're struggling with the potential pro-life within you, that you want to put on a super hero cape to rescue others from their own ignorance or inability to make their own decisions, and that you want a greater showing of super hero capes on the forum.

I recognize this is a simplistic and limited perspective, and perhaps completely in error. But as this thread progresses, I get the sense you want to fight *for* something, and that what's really going on is an internal struggle, a cognitive dissonance, and no one who's commented has alleviated it.

This is a place focused on death and how to do it. The shit is real. Sometimes that focus leads to a personal awareness that death is not the right choice, but self-deliverance needed to be faced in order to get to whatever truths it was eclipsing. Sometimes that focus leads to a legitimate goodbye and a crossed-out name, whether well-considered or not. And sometimes -- oftentimes -- people get the information they seek and act upon it without ever letting anyone here know. The shit is real.

I can see why I may come across that way in the messages. However, it was an oversight on my part. My current belief is that someone can ctb if they want, without intervention, and it is justifiable in a variety of cases. I can see where it would seem like that, but I think it's due to me being phrasing it poorly. I meant physician assisted suicide, not in general. My bad.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I can see why I may come across that way in the messages. However, it was an oversight on my part. My current belief is that someone can ctb if they want, without intervention, and it is justifiable in a variety of cases. I can see where it would seem like that, but I think it's due to me being phrasing it poorly. I meant physician assisted suicide, not in general. My bad.

Respectfully, you were talking quite specifically about comments on the forum, and that's what I responded to.

Now you're introducing physician assisted suicide again. Nothing in the comment I responded to that started "Let me retract and replace something" even remotely hinted at physician assisted suicide. And as I said before, that subject was not part of your own OP and it's derailing to introduce it. If that's your main concern, I respectfully suggest you start a thread about it so everyone knows what conversation they're actually participating in.

For myself, I find this to be a completely non-productive discussion. I'm leaving the thread now.