Venting A presumptuous claim by the DWD organization of people wanting to live

[TAW122]

When reading about the Death With Dignity (DWD) information about their organization, I came across a sentence that comes off as presumptuous and arrogant. This is the claim that they state "people who seek medical aid in dying want to live, but are stricken with life-ending illnesses." (source1, source2) It is presumptuous because it lumps everyone who is in a similar predicament that whoever chooses aid in death would have chosen "life" had they not had a diagnosis of a severe or terminal illness(es). This could not be further from the truth as there are many different valid reasons of why people want to die and it is not necessarily linked to one nor a subset of similar reasons. These reasons can include personal reasons, freedom and independence, philosophical reasons (existential ones and what not about life itself), and many more.

Mind you, these organizations are still important towards our fight for the right to die (on our own terms) and just because I rail against certain values they hold doesn't mean that they aren't useful in their regards. They are just as important in countering the mainstream pro-life, anti-choice culture that we are in. I believe they may even serve as a gateway towards the (long term and eventual) right to die becoming a common, recognized legal right (in a late future world).

Anyways, I figured that I point out this little caveat on certain death with dignity and right to die organizations as that minor point seems to reek of pro-life rhetoric. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't support them (since they are still a significant ally towards our endgoal – which is the legalization and recognition of the right to die as a civil right). They are still putting up a good fight against the religious, political, and/or otherwise pro-life, anti-choice advocates. Personally, I also support them as one day I may even be in need of their services (whether I suffer a debilitating illness, terminal illness, and/or end up in a situation where my quality of life is so poor that even I lack the physical capacity to DIY CTB).

What are your thoughts on this? I know that not everyone (even those who support the right to die) are on the same page, but I believe they can be useful allies and have similar common goals. @Forever Sleep @FuneralCry

 

[CandyK__]

It's partially necessary for them to have such opinions, as if they went on a fight saying that they stand for enabling death to those without life-ending illness, they would be perceived as radical group, and given much less credibility, whereas stating the ideology in smaller steps, might in future enable us to die. Even if they only stand for what they say, still this might bring us great advantage by showing a foot-in-a-door approach. This was discussion is able to be talked about openly, and not taboo. But for now we're still here, and even places like SaSu are being restricted in access to in certain places.

 

[Forever Sleep]

I think they mirror assisted suicide clinics in this regard. I get the impression they also don't want dealings with people who are suicidal or depressed. Again- they seem to prefer to 'help' people with terminal/ chronic illness- where suicide wouldn't be their first choice- if another was viable. Perhaps they WILL start to admit people with severe mental illness. But- likely because the person might say things like- 'Without this illness- I wouldn't be feeling like this.'

I agree- both organizations make a point of NOT aligning themselves with suicidal people. Both organizations do indeed seem pro-life in this way. Perhaps it is to appear more acceptible in wider society. So- they mirror popular opinion that life should be preserved wherever possible and that they are only there as a last resort when modern medicine fails.

I've always found it kind of perverse really- 'No, your life isn't terrible enough yet. Maybe come back in 10 years- contract a few more diseases, lose more of your physical abilities, experience daily chronic pain. Wait until things are excruciatingly bad and MAYBE then- we'll help you... for a bigger fee than you'd pay now.'

Really friends- we're all on death row as it were. We HAVE been given a life sentence as it were. Especially those holding on for assisted suicide. They may well believe you haven't suffered enough to be eliible yet. Maybe it will change- if general attitudes towards assisted suicide change. If organizations like MAID start offering their services to a wider range of people, perhaps in time, it will become more accepted and campaigned for.

 

[FuneralCry]

It's just ignorant when people push the view that existence was something desirable for everyone in the first place, I would always personally see non-existence as being preferable, I don't see existing as being appealing at all.

 

[Arihman]

They might want to avoid being slandered/attacked by pro-lifers, but it's pointless, imo, those people just don't want to give other people the right to die. That's it.

Any concession of freedom to suicidal people is offensive in these assholes' eyes.

 

[AShipinthedark]

I suffered a complete logic breakdown, even if I'm properly medicated, even if my life miraculously turned around, even if I was the healthiest bitch on this planet, no. The plague of knowledge and detail and pattern recognition have driven me on a very specific path. Very existentially, I believe I am called to cross the boundary. I believe my death will have positive repercussions for those who don't want to die. That belief is just too ingrained now, and living with the delusions I have is agony, no, I would rather risk being wrong and do something, then do nothing and risk being right.

 

[Traveler VII]

"The plague of knowledge and detail and pattern recognition have driven me on a very specific path"

"I believe I am called to cross the boundary."

Interesting.

In my case, these plagues you've mentioned have strong ties to matters from my upbringing which extend well beyond me.

Combined, they amount to historical precedent.

This presents a loop which, by necessity, culminates in my death.

 

[AShipinthedark]

In my case, these plagues you've mentioned have strong ties to matters from my upbringing which extend well beyond me.

Combined, they amount to historical precedent.

This presents a loop which, by necessity, culminates in my death.

Our communication subroutine programming languages are compatible...

 

[TAW122]

It's partially necessary for them to have such opinions, as if they went on a fight saying that they stand for enabling death to those without life-ending illness, they would be perceived as radical group, and given much less credibility, whereas stating the ideology in smaller steps, might in future enable us to die. Even if they only stand for what they say, still this might bring us great advantage by showing a foot-in-a-door approach. This was discussion is able to be talked about openly, and not taboo. But for now we're still here, and even places like SaSu are being restricted in access to in certain places.

I see and that makes sense to frame it in such a way that it doesn't come off too extreme and still somewhat relatable to the masses of people. It is indeed sad that even sanctuaries like SaSu and similar places are being restricted, if not, outright demonized by the media and masses. Therefore, I could see it being a gateway to slowly ease and open up the conversation into a very controversial and touchy subject (which it shouldn't be if there wasn't such a taboo to begin with!).

I think they mirror assisted suicide clinics in this regard. I get the impression they also don't want dealings with people who are suicidal or depressed. Again- they seem to prefer to 'help' people with terminal/ chronic illness- where suicide wouldn't be their first choice- if another was viable. Perhaps they WILL start to admit people with severe mental illness. But- likely because the person might say things like- 'Without this illness- I wouldn't be feeling like this.'

I agree- both organizations make a point of NOT aligning themselves with suicidal people. Both organizations do indeed seem pro-life in this way. Perhaps it is to appear more acceptible in wider society. So- they mirror popular opinion that life should be preserved wherever possible and that they are only there as a last resort when modern medicine fails.

I've always found it kind of perverse really- 'No, your life isn't terrible enough yet. Maybe come back in 10 years- contract a few more diseases, lose more of your physical abilities, experience daily chronic pain. Wait until things are excruciatingly bad and MAYBE then- we'll help you... for a bigger fee than you'd pay now.'

Really friends- we're all on death row as it were. We HAVE been given a life sentence as it were. Especially those holding on for assisted suicide. They may well believe you haven't suffered enough to be eliible yet. Maybe it will change- if general attitudes towards assisted suicide change. If organizations like MAID start offering their services to a wider range of people, perhaps in time, it will become more accepted and campaigned for.

Good explanation and yes, even the more mainstream ones don't want to attract too much controversy being too open about death and also more 'palatable' for society at large. It is indeed perverse that it is up to a third party to make a determination on what is enough for one and the person seeking such services are at the mercy of the organization to give the greenlight to voluntary death/assisted death.

It's just ignorant when people push the view that existence was something desirable for everyone in the first place, I would always personally see non-existence as being preferable, I don't see existing as being appealing at all.

Yes of course, life itself is an unnecessary event that did not need to occur.

They might want to avoid being slandered/attacked by pro-lifers, but it's pointless, imo, those people just don't want to give other people the right to die. That's it.

Any concession of freedom to suicidal people is offensive in these assholes' eyes.

I think that's true and also with regards to concession of freedom to suicidal people, I think you summed it up pretty well, these asshole pro-lifers see it as an attack on their delusional world view and will do (just about) anything to validate and protect it, even at the detriment of the suicidal person. They really don't care about the repercussions of their actions and of course, disgustingly put the onus on suicidal people to get better or to just somehow like life (which validates their antiquated and prejudiced views).

I suffered a complete logic breakdown, even if I'm properly medicated, even if my life miraculously turned around, even if I was the healthiest bitch on this planet, no. The plague of knowledge and detail and pattern recognition have driven me on a very specific path. Very existentially, I believe I am called to cross the boundary. I believe my death will have positive repercussions for those who don't want to die. That belief is just too ingrained now, and living with the delusions I have is agony, no, I would rather risk being wrong and do something, then do nothing and risk being right.

That makes sense and I suppose for those who wish to live, they always have the option to live, contrary to what prolifers like to claim. Pro-life is the default stance of existence and there is no shortage of it in this prohibitive, life loving, nauseating world.