TAW122
Emissary of the right to die.
- Aug 30, 2018
- 7,222
In previous threads when I talked about the paternalistic, tyrannical, and draconic mental health system as well as psychiatry itself, and also other various threads (including those about 'confidentiality') and such, while this isn't a new thread, this thread combines some of the major points from the previous threads and explains the logical and sequential consequence of a paternalistic and prohibitive world when it comes to the act of CTB, the (real) stigma of CTB prevention and the consequences of society making the topic as well as the act of CTB to be taboo. What do I mean and refer to as 'breadcrumbs'? Breadcrumbs at least in the context of CTB are basically hints (whether explicitly or even implicitly) on the eventual outcome of the act of CTB (when it does happen). In this article, I will explain and elaborate on the term and concept of 'breadcrumbs' (with relation to CTB itself), and how it will result in an inevitable and unwanted 'surprise' for many people, even if one doesn't wish that outcome; simply due to the prohibition of CTB discussion, the act of CTB, and other paternalistic measures that society has on people who even try to broach the subject.
A general story (not necessarily me, but just anyone who is determined to CTB)
So imagine someone who wants to CTB, but due to the present world that one resides in (a prohibitive society that demonizes, pathologizes, and censors discussion of the topic of CTB, criminalizes and punishes the act of CTB (this includes more than just planning but also attempting and failing), rather than understanding and treating it as an act of bodily autonomy), one is not able to do so freely or as easily and even if they wanted to open up, due to the risks of unwanted repercussions, one simply cannot afford to, and in the end, just end up leaving breadcrumbs (hints and little signs) of CTB for the bereaved. So suppose in this example, a person named 'O'. O grew up in fairly ordinary family and generally was alright throughout O's life. Then suddenly throughout adolescence and what not, O had a tumultous event, and it is something that O cannot really get over. The best O could do is to 'cope'. But one day, O's coping is just insufficient and O's suffering continued to persist, so O decided to look for a means of escape. O managed to find the means of escaping, but O knows that because O cannot risk having one's own cover blown by either well-meaning friends or even O's family. O had to act discreetly. Normally, O would be open about O's plans and what O does in O's life though O oneself isn't the kind of person to be really open about things and certainly not about CTB! Given that CTB is still heavily stigmatized and society (collectively speaking) is still hellbent and impinging, intervening, or even trying to foil people who may be planning or attempting to CTB (regardless of the reason or cause, regardless of circumstance or context; maybe only for terminal illnesses), O knows that O cannot be open regardless of what O wishes to (O may feel bad for not being able open up with family or O's closest friends IRL). Therefore, after O planned carefully and picked out the method, the date, and time, while dropping some breadcrumbs about life (some suffering and some events but nothing too dark or anything that could give more direct hints to future 'CTB'), O finally acts… and succeeded in CTB'ing. After the news is discovered (and perhaps even the closest to O, O's family and close friends) nobody really knows the full motive, the full story, and what not, and while O could share 100% of the story in depth and reasoning, O did not purely out of the risk of doing so, therefore, the best O did was leave 'breadcrumbs' for the people around O's life. Of course, in an ideal world where CTB discussion, planning, and even attempts were not immediately met with demonization, pathologization, or even paternalistic detention of individuals who simply exercise one's own right of ultimate self-determination, then perhaps one could argue that O would not have had to leave breadcrumbs. In an ideal world, O could have been open about O's struggle without fear of repercussions such as unwanted scrutiny, guilt-trips and shame, or even (unjust) detainment in the name of health and safety! O certainly did not threaten or present a danger to anyone but O oneself, and in an pro-choice world, O's right to die and bodily autonomy would have been fully respected.
In conclusion, the unfortunate outcome that many pro-lifers, anti-choicers, preventionists, and the masses of society loathe so much is due to the culmination of the anti-CTB, anti-choice paternalistic policies, attitudes, norms, and even measures taken against people who are suspected to think of, plan, or even attempt CTB'ing. So simply from an logical, consequentialist perspective, the inevitability of breadcrumbs is the result of the current world in which one resides and lives in, where people around them whether IRL or other places will just end up being 'shocked' and 'surprised' at the result (when someone CTBs), regardless of whether one wishes to or not. This is again due to the way society treats the topic of CTB ideation, plans of CTB, attempt of CTB, and also the fact that sectioning, involuntary commitment, psych holds exist for those who have CTB ideation, whether they may/will/have had followed through. So until the way society (collectively) changes their attitudes and policies towards CTB in general, it is inevitable that those who are determined and serious about CTB'ing will (not necessarily by their own wishes) leave breadcrumbs for those who are left behind.
A general story (not necessarily me, but just anyone who is determined to CTB)
So imagine someone who wants to CTB, but due to the present world that one resides in (a prohibitive society that demonizes, pathologizes, and censors discussion of the topic of CTB, criminalizes and punishes the act of CTB (this includes more than just planning but also attempting and failing), rather than understanding and treating it as an act of bodily autonomy), one is not able to do so freely or as easily and even if they wanted to open up, due to the risks of unwanted repercussions, one simply cannot afford to, and in the end, just end up leaving breadcrumbs (hints and little signs) of CTB for the bereaved. So suppose in this example, a person named 'O'. O grew up in fairly ordinary family and generally was alright throughout O's life. Then suddenly throughout adolescence and what not, O had a tumultous event, and it is something that O cannot really get over. The best O could do is to 'cope'. But one day, O's coping is just insufficient and O's suffering continued to persist, so O decided to look for a means of escape. O managed to find the means of escaping, but O knows that because O cannot risk having one's own cover blown by either well-meaning friends or even O's family. O had to act discreetly. Normally, O would be open about O's plans and what O does in O's life though O oneself isn't the kind of person to be really open about things and certainly not about CTB! Given that CTB is still heavily stigmatized and society (collectively speaking) is still hellbent and impinging, intervening, or even trying to foil people who may be planning or attempting to CTB (regardless of the reason or cause, regardless of circumstance or context; maybe only for terminal illnesses), O knows that O cannot be open regardless of what O wishes to (O may feel bad for not being able open up with family or O's closest friends IRL). Therefore, after O planned carefully and picked out the method, the date, and time, while dropping some breadcrumbs about life (some suffering and some events but nothing too dark or anything that could give more direct hints to future 'CTB'), O finally acts… and succeeded in CTB'ing. After the news is discovered (and perhaps even the closest to O, O's family and close friends) nobody really knows the full motive, the full story, and what not, and while O could share 100% of the story in depth and reasoning, O did not purely out of the risk of doing so, therefore, the best O did was leave 'breadcrumbs' for the people around O's life. Of course, in an ideal world where CTB discussion, planning, and even attempts were not immediately met with demonization, pathologization, or even paternalistic detention of individuals who simply exercise one's own right of ultimate self-determination, then perhaps one could argue that O would not have had to leave breadcrumbs. In an ideal world, O could have been open about O's struggle without fear of repercussions such as unwanted scrutiny, guilt-trips and shame, or even (unjust) detainment in the name of health and safety! O certainly did not threaten or present a danger to anyone but O oneself, and in an pro-choice world, O's right to die and bodily autonomy would have been fully respected.
In conclusion, the unfortunate outcome that many pro-lifers, anti-choicers, preventionists, and the masses of society loathe so much is due to the culmination of the anti-CTB, anti-choice paternalistic policies, attitudes, norms, and even measures taken against people who are suspected to think of, plan, or even attempt CTB'ing. So simply from an logical, consequentialist perspective, the inevitability of breadcrumbs is the result of the current world in which one resides and lives in, where people around them whether IRL or other places will just end up being 'shocked' and 'surprised' at the result (when someone CTBs), regardless of whether one wishes to or not. This is again due to the way society treats the topic of CTB ideation, plans of CTB, attempt of CTB, and also the fact that sectioning, involuntary commitment, psych holds exist for those who have CTB ideation, whether they may/will/have had followed through. So until the way society (collectively) changes their attitudes and policies towards CTB in general, it is inevitable that those who are determined and serious about CTB'ing will (not necessarily by their own wishes) leave breadcrumbs for those who are left behind.
