The Right To Die

Our life expectancy in the Western World is ever increasing. Generally, this is seen as a very positive thing. However - the suicide statistics show there are quite some people not exactly waiting for an extended stay at planet earth.

I firmly believe that we should have a right to die.

I also firmly believe that we can't implement it right now for practical reasons: the family pressure on elder people to choose to die, sect hysteria & so on & so forth.

What I would like to discuss is therefore twofold:

1. Generically, why shouldn´t we have a right to die?

2. What measures can be practically taken to ensure some of us can actually go & execute their right to die in a way that doesn't compromise the right to live of what are weaker individuals or classes of individuals in society?

I am NOT talking about euthanasia in the sense of an exit strategy for chronically ill individuals. I am als NOT talking about random suicide born out of isolation, or, a medical condition. As to the latter, the more we avoid it; the better. What I am talking about is somebody that chooses in a controlled way to die in a controlled way.

GN

[einned]

Hey if you gotta go you got to go. It's that simple. But the problem with suicide is that 9 out of 10 times that someone has commited suicide there are other people traumatised (the traindriver who runs over a suicidal for example).
I think there should be some kind of an option where you could take to a counsellor or something and he would help you with a way to go. Preferably by a pill or injection you can administer yourself on a time suitable for you.

No one, should have a problem because it's in the privacy of your own home and the counsellor can take care of things afterwards.

[Impenitent]

do you remember "Logan's Run?"...

einned,

Well no, I don't think that's enough because you will still traumatise your family & friends. You also might just take it whenever you're depressed & in need of a shot of Prozac. Or you might take it as somebody holds a gun to your child's head.

There should be latency between the actual decision to die & the act of going really to inject yourself with something.

That should be the difference with suicide. Suicide is, after all, not a good thing.

GN

[einned]

GuidoNius,

Your right. It's a tough cookie to crack. There will always be negative things involved with this kind of act. But if you try to look at it from the point of view of someone who wants to put an end to his/her life there should be an easy way.

einned,

I don´t know. Mainly because I am far from sure one should look at it only from a point of view of the one who wants to die. It seems to me that that point of view is a too limited one.

For instance, somebody wants to die today given the circumstances of today. But, as the law stands today, he doesn´t commit the act. The same somebody, a year later, is in a situation where, if he wants, nobody would even know he chose death (no insurance hassles, no stigma on the family, ....) but given circumstances he is rather feeling a new somebody & struggles like hell not to die.

I am much for the right to die but I really think it´s not an easy one to make sure it remains a right instead of becoming a disguised duty.

GN

PS: this being said, I also believe that at some point in time it can become a "duty to die" - if I take away more love out of this world than I can ever bring back into it, I feel like I should die

[GreatWyrm of Babylon]

You guys are serious? I did not ask to be born, but by doing so our society has suddenly not only put me in a world where I did not ask to be but they demand that I pay for the debt caused by my very existence. If I do well with this life I did not ask for I have to pay for someone that did not do so well. If I do not do well, I have to steal from one that did. If I have the wit to be offended by this no win situation and wish out, I must owe a debt because I leave??? irrational

GWOB,

Don't feel any need to pay any debt to me, I am doing nicely without you.

The thing is that, unlike where you live apparently, it's a common approach to any attempted suicide to "rescue" the attempter. This suggests to me that, where I live at least (& maybe unfortunately for you), I do not appear to have the right to die.

I am very not interested in subjective feelings about this fact. I assume that it will not be extremely easy to change it. So I am just thinking how one can change it - without violating the basic reasons why people will try to rescue me if I do commit suicide.

It's fairly simple really, if you come out of the logical closet & look at the world as it is - irrationalities included.

GN

[Sodfather]

Although it's usually a sad way to go, I do believe that all people have the right to commit suicide under the majority of circumstances. If you can't own and control your own life in this world, what the hell can you control?

GWB, I like the point you made in your first sentence, but it doesn't quite do it for me 100%. If you have a family, a wife, or other loved ones, you do owe it to them to stay alive. They depend on you, you are the reason that they are in a situation where they depend on you, so you are obligated to remain to support them, nevermind to spare them the grief of your suicide.

In the end, even though you may be a heartless bastard and not give a damn about the aftermath that you leave behind (You won't be there to have to deal with it, so why would you care?), you still have a basic right to determine what happens with your life.

I am aware that Christianity disagress with what I have said, believing that your life is not yours, it is really God's. Well, frankly, that's a crock of shit. What, is God an Indian-giver now? Here, have this life, but I control if you have sex, how much money you make and spend, when you go to church, and ultimately, where you go after you die...So...Basicly, he never gave us a life since he directs every aspect of it? I swear, I find out a new Chrisianty crock-of-shit teaching every day. :(

[GreatWyrm of Babylon]

GN
I do look at the world, do you have a point? Just because I claim something is irrational, does not mean I cannot manipulate the symbols...

GWBO,

I don't have the freakiest clue about what you are trying to say.

I do have a feeling you wanted to have the last say.

That's fine with me.

GN

Sodfather,

So OK, but what measures do you feel would make exercising that right practical?

You mentioned some duties to others - even if from a personal point of view that's not going to have to stop you, still society will want to make sure that these others are not just left there just because somebody had a bad hair day.

More importantly, the others might turn on you & give you the impression that it is your duty to terminate yourself - from a personal point of view you might want the help of society not being terminated like that just because somebody else wants it, for instance for the money to be got.

GN

[Sodfather]

GuidoNius:

If it is the will of others that you be terminated, it is still your choice - laws or no laws. How can you be protected from committing suicide; how can any law or government intervention stop it? Are we talking isolation in a prison or something similar?

I just don't see any strong point in your post.

[Geoff332]

My position on this is abivalent (my position on most things has a degree of ambivalence -- so that's not surprising).

In general, I don't think we have a right to die. I do think we have a right to life -- and we can surrender that right. What we cannot do is transfer that right to another person (or entity). The US consitution refers to these sort of rights as inalienable.

By focusing on the inalienable right to life, it shifts the obligation. If you suggest that people have a choice to end their life, then surely you are the one who has to ensure that this choice does not conflict with the inalienable right to life. That means that you have to ensure that the decision to end your life is yours and yours alone. If that is not ensured, then you appear to be creating the possibility that the right to life be transferred to another person -- where they make the decision to end your life. I would think if you want to argue for a right to die, you need to ensure that this doesn't conflict with other rights.

This sounds simple enough, but let's look at an option that's currently legal in most countries: a Do Not Resuscitate order. Under this order, medical people should not take extreme measures to preserve your life. Like any legal document, it assumes that you have agreed to it of your own free will (that you are not under duress).

But what if it's suggested to you by your family -- is that duress? Under what conditions is it acceptable? Under what conditions is it not?

Sodfather,

As I said in the beginning this is not about suicide. Nevertheless, if I happen to be in a bath with slit wrists and somebody happens to notice it then governments will rush in to rescue me. Hence, suicide is not considered a right. Nor should it be for many reasons I posted above. If I really have a wish for my death, I shouldn't be forced to go to a hotel, run a hot bath & slit my wrists. There should be options to fulfill my wish, if bona fide, in a less traumatic environment both for me as for the ones I leave behind.

You dislike my post, what can I do?

GuidoNius

Geoff,

Interesting but I don't buy it - I am ambivalent as you are, after all it's not like I didn't want to commit suicide before & wasn't happy afterwards that I didn't (it's really interesting to observe that the person wanting to commit suicide would've deprived the person that's happy now of a life, we're not one & the same person throughout our lifes).

Nevertheless, I don't buy it since this is (if one accepts to some extent a right to die outside of traditional euthanasia debates) primordially a procedure debate, & the process background you sketch doesn't cut it in my opinion.

The right to live is essentially a right not to be killed. It does not infer any right to do as you please with your life as is shown clearly by the actual legal treatment of suicide.

On the same basis, the right to die would essentially be the right to decide to stop living. True, a number of things you say on such a right needing to be ensured as not degrading into a license to convince people to commit suicide, is pertinent. It's however necessary in my view to elaborate such measures in the context of right to die. Elaborating them in the context of the right to live will be messy for reasons as quoted above.

Sorry to throw the book a bit but I am convinced that one needs to be very clean in this type of thing. Also because - mainly because - the right to die would, in fact, lead to alleviation of many societal issues such as increasing spending in pension & social security.

GuidoNius

[Sgt. Rock]

Why does anyone need a right to die? If a person is going to end his/her life why ask for permission? If I were so inclined who could stop me and what could they threaten me with if I did accomplish the act? Are they going to dig me up and put me in jail?

[Lava]

I find this all just odd. It seems obvious that we do have the right to die. Anyone who wants to kill themselves can do so, its not that difficult. Therefore we have the right to.

The saddest bit comes with those terminally ill people who are in such a state they are unable to carry out suicide, and may be in dreadful pain, with no hope of improvement or survival, and yet it is _illegal_ to offer them any assistance whatsoever with their final wish for peace, rest, release from torture, and dignity. Those people do not have the right to die, and it seems quite inhumane.

But the rest of us can die any day we choose, if we're capable of reading and buying a few simple supplies. As Sgt Rock pointed out, what the law says about that is somewhat moot. (If someone needs the permission of the law to decide to die, I would doubt they were really serious.)


Regards, Lava!

PS suiciders frequently do care about those they leave behind, but at some point life gets too painful to be able to handle it any further. As with any other area of ife, there is inevitably a fair range of different suiciders.

[kellbing]

Lava,

I agree with you completely. I have long wondered about the unfairness of the law in regards to the terminally ill. If you have an animal that is suffering cruelly, you euthanize it. It is called humane. If you have a person who is suffering cruelly, you force them to stay alive as long as possible regardless how much pain they are in or how horrible their quality of life is. To me that is decidedly inhumane.

It all boils down to selfishness. We want to keep the people we care about around as long as possible no matter what. Or religious people argue that "only god should decide when someone will die". I say grow a backbone and start making decisions on your own, not based on what a book tells you. Besides, if "god" doesn't really want someone to die, won't he keep them alive regardless of whether or not we try to put them out of their misery?

[sixmillman]

I always have a gun at my bed side. When I awake each morning I look at it not to contemplate suicide, but to remind me that everyday and everything I do is a choice from that point on.