Because their over-privileged people who have been lucky enough not to be a subject to the absolute worst suffering life has to offer. If they suddently were subjected to the torment that many on here suffer, for a longer, neverending period they would surely whistle anther tune.
Thereisnothing
Enlightened
- Jan 4, 2020
- 1,604
I have many illnesses and some very life limiting ones. Life is incredibly hard for me because of this and other reasons. My life is very impaired. However I feel although alot has been taken from me regards health, I am still blessed that can do things. I can see, hear, talk etc etc. Those people with terminal illnesses wish to live and cant and the ones who are terminal may wish to get it over with, yet still cling on. I nursed my mother with cancer and it was so very sad, seeing her have to go all through that. I maybe suicidal, but yet I also dont feel for me I have a right to take my life, when someone like my beautiful mother and others I have lost through illnesses so wished to be here and couldn't be.
This is why people say its selfish. It is, yes but also selfish of people to want those suffering not to have the choice. Its not a cut and dried thing and never will be. Its abit like asking why do they euthanize animals and not humans.
Its not until life is gone you truly appreciate how valuable it is, even if there is suffering.
This is why people say its selfish. It is, yes but also selfish of people to want those suffering not to have the choice. Its not a cut and dried thing and never will be. Its abit like asking why do they euthanize animals and not humans.
Its not until life is gone you truly appreciate how valuable it is, even if there is suffering.
APharmaDestroyedLife
Your RX drugs are likely your real problem
- Nov 4, 2019
- 305
People love to impose their beliefs and values on others. People love to judge others. People do not understand mental illness or those that have philosophical objections to modern life or life in general.
Governments spending billions of dollars to wage war and kill each other over made up gods and invisible lines on the ground. Imagine if all those weapons , and borders, and gods did not exist, and we the human race put all our energy into bettering the planet, humanity, healthcare, and allowing people to pursue true happiness.
You're supposed to just put your head down, go to school, go to work, pay your taxes, grow old, get sick and die, and make sure you have kids so they can keep the machine going.
The idea of LIFE and Living should be so much more than society teaches us. If it was... if life was truly about finding your passion and succeeding based on that passion, there would be a lot less people wanting to die.
Selfish is a human word defined by Humans that has no relevance anywhere else in the Universe. Selfishness makes people feel Guilty and Guilt is a great tool of control over others.
People who say it is selfish, are clearly more worried about how they feel than how you feel. So who is the more selfish person here?
Governments spending billions of dollars to wage war and kill each other over made up gods and invisible lines on the ground. Imagine if all those weapons , and borders, and gods did not exist, and we the human race put all our energy into bettering the planet, humanity, healthcare, and allowing people to pursue true happiness.
You're supposed to just put your head down, go to school, go to work, pay your taxes, grow old, get sick and die, and make sure you have kids so they can keep the machine going.
The idea of LIFE and Living should be so much more than society teaches us. If it was... if life was truly about finding your passion and succeeding based on that passion, there would be a lot less people wanting to die.
Selfish is a human word defined by Humans that has no relevance anywhere else in the Universe. Selfishness makes people feel Guilty and Guilt is a great tool of control over others.
People who say it is selfish, are clearly more worried about how they feel than how you feel. So who is the more selfish person here?
Last edited:
Misanthrope
Mage
- Oct 23, 2018
- 557
Because they have created a distinction that to my perspective does not exist. One that is blind to the concept of quality of life being compromised and being unendurable outside of terminal illness. I will just copy what I wrote before.
I have never understood this distinction between mental health and physical health. Especially when it comes to euthanasia debates and who gets denied and why.
To me it is the same things as it has the exact same end result.
Chronic Physical Illness: Terminal or otherwise, that compromises acceptable quality of life. Avenues of recovery and respite having been exhausted. End result, loss of value in living.
Chronic Mental Disorder: Which compromises acceptable quality of life. Avenues of recovery and respite having been exhausted. End result, loss of value in living.
Both are costly and both produce burdens on the surrounding people and the taxpayer. So I still see no distinction.
If people in either of these states reach that conclusion, have not been coerced, demonstrate capacity and an ability to consent. It should not matter if it is mental health or physical issues at that point. That seems humane to me. It is the the only way you can respect autonomy of a person. Sad, but better than the alternative of living life that has no value to you any more.
People will make the counterpoint, that the mentally ill are incapable of knowing what they want because they are mentally ill. But that does not hold water either. Because that is also true of physical issues that affect mood, impulse control and produce their own deluded states.
It is why capacity law is meant to exist in the first place. It should cover this.
Also physical health issues feed into mental health issues and vice versa. All exacerbating the other. Having a mental health condition does not suddenly render the physical condition non existent either. If anything it will worsen the natural psychological pressures a non labeled person still has to contend with.
It should go right back to capacity and consent. This distinction between physical and mental seems mostly a political one or a knee jerk reactionary one founded on some abstract morality. Or flawed understanding that assumes incorrectly that people with mental health diagnosis cannot make decisions. If they can be prosecuted for a crime and found culpable while having a mental health diagnosis that is kind of proof of the opposite. There is a lot of that proof locked up in prisons.
It is fair to point out a physical diagnosis may produce objective certainty that you will not recover. The same can't be said for the mentally disordered. But that isn't entirely true either. Because some are declared treatment-resistant and have exhausted what is on offer. To the point services quite literally tell them to focus on quality of life concerns.
If you cannot have quality of life then euthanasia seems fair and respectful of autonomy.
I have never understood this distinction between mental health and physical health. Especially when it comes to euthanasia debates and who gets denied and why.
To me it is the same things as it has the exact same end result.
Chronic Physical Illness: Terminal or otherwise, that compromises acceptable quality of life. Avenues of recovery and respite having been exhausted. End result, loss of value in living.
Chronic Mental Disorder: Which compromises acceptable quality of life. Avenues of recovery and respite having been exhausted. End result, loss of value in living.
Both are costly and both produce burdens on the surrounding people and the taxpayer. So I still see no distinction.
If people in either of these states reach that conclusion, have not been coerced, demonstrate capacity and an ability to consent. It should not matter if it is mental health or physical issues at that point. That seems humane to me. It is the the only way you can respect autonomy of a person. Sad, but better than the alternative of living life that has no value to you any more.
People will make the counterpoint, that the mentally ill are incapable of knowing what they want because they are mentally ill. But that does not hold water either. Because that is also true of physical issues that affect mood, impulse control and produce their own deluded states.
It is why capacity law is meant to exist in the first place. It should cover this.
Also physical health issues feed into mental health issues and vice versa. All exacerbating the other. Having a mental health condition does not suddenly render the physical condition non existent either. If anything it will worsen the natural psychological pressures a non labeled person still has to contend with.
It should go right back to capacity and consent. This distinction between physical and mental seems mostly a political one or a knee jerk reactionary one founded on some abstract morality. Or flawed understanding that assumes incorrectly that people with mental health diagnosis cannot make decisions. If they can be prosecuted for a crime and found culpable while having a mental health diagnosis that is kind of proof of the opposite. There is a lot of that proof locked up in prisons.
It is fair to point out a physical diagnosis may produce objective certainty that you will not recover. The same can't be said for the mentally disordered. But that isn't entirely true either. Because some are declared treatment-resistant and have exhausted what is on offer. To the point services quite literally tell them to focus on quality of life concerns.
If you cannot have quality of life then euthanasia seems fair and respectful of autonomy.
Kirbster
Member
- Jan 6, 2020
- 26
I think people value another's worth based on what that person can do for them. If a person takes their own life, they no longer have anything to offer-- which is a horrible offense in the eyes of society: to be unusable. The only reason a person gets a pass for being worthless to society is if they determine it to be beyond their control. People just hold a certain stigma towards death that allows certain deaths to be represented as honorable and others as selfish. In truth, death is death and there is no value that can be applied to it.
TAW122
Emissary of the right to die.
- Aug 30, 2018
- 6,819
All good responses. @APharmaDestroyedLife and @Misanthrope summed it up thoroughly and very well, especially on a economic and utility based reason. As for Misanthrope's response in relation to capacity and consent, I think that should be sufficient to deem that the person does in fact, know what he/she wants. To add to his point, another counterargument against the people who claim "that mentally ill people don't know what they want" is that these pro-lifers and suicide-preventionists never see the other side of logic.
Take for instance, a hideous criminal commits a horrific crime, there are quite a few people that would condemn the suspect to severe punishment (multiple life imprisonment terms and maybe even the death penalty). It's rather inconsistent that the same people who deem people who suicide to be mentally ill and not rational, yet when it comes to criminals and pure malice, they would see them as competent and guilty as charged. More so, in places and jurisdictions that allow the death penalty, there are even pro-lifers and anti-suicide advocates that support seeing the death penalty applied to said convict(s). Talk about the double standard and ignorance.
Take for instance, a hideous criminal commits a horrific crime, there are quite a few people that would condemn the suspect to severe punishment (multiple life imprisonment terms and maybe even the death penalty). It's rather inconsistent that the same people who deem people who suicide to be mentally ill and not rational, yet when it comes to criminals and pure malice, they would see them as competent and guilty as charged. More so, in places and jurisdictions that allow the death penalty, there are even pro-lifers and anti-suicide advocates that support seeing the death penalty applied to said convict(s). Talk about the double standard and ignorance.
greencoat111
Member
- Jan 5, 2020
- 43
I agree . Everyone I've ever met who has said this was lucky enough to be from a privileged background and didnt have the first clue about how it felt to be suicidal
WhyIsLife56
Antinatalism + Efilism ❤️
- Nov 4, 2019
- 1,075
Despondent
Archangel
- Dec 20, 2019
- 6,777
With or without terminal illness, if you want to ctb, there's a reason and it isn't selfish. People don't understand and it's so upsetting. Before I found this forum, I thought I was selfish. Selfish for wanting to ctb and leave this world and the people that I love behind. I joined this forum and this couldn't be more wrong. It's not. They more than likely (some) worry about their family and the aftermath WHEN THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE HERE AT THAT POINT. They want to be saved but they feel like they can't be. Again, with or without terminal illness. It can be the most minor occurrence that can cause someone to want to take their own life. And the fact of the matter is, suicidal ideation has more then likely been experiened by most people. Even only once and maybe only briefly. It's selfish for them to think that the ctber is selfish, only because they couldn't stick around "long" for them.
I'm worrying about this myself. I'm a U.S. citizen who votes, and I'm feeling guilty that I may not be able to hold on until November despite what this year's election may mean for my country and the world.
Similar threads
- helppls//
- Suicide Discussion
Suicide Discussion
pariah80
