4 ms·
I wish I could be as bothered by the suggestions as you. I have someone in my life where it would be a humane option, and arguably the only humane option. The
by chrsig 4y ago
I wish I could be as bothered by the suggestions as you. I have someone in my life where it would be a humane option, and arguably the only humane option. There are some situations that cause a person to experience a life of permanent suffering.
I don't think I agree with the suggestions, but I certainly understand them, and often find myself contemplating what a better societal solution could be. The solution space varies by cause, in some cases there's only room for marginal improvement, if any, from changing the society. That's not to say that they're not worth pursuing, or there aren't changes that would massively benefit many people...just that it's a murky ethical grey area without any obviously correct solution.
I hope you can take a minute to consider that viewpoints like the above aren't always stemming from disregard for human suffering, but through an abundance of heartbreaking empathy.
- TechBro8615 4y agoIf someone really wants to do it, they don't need a government-run apparatus to hold their hand. And if they do need that, then they don't really want to do it.
- bobsmooth 4y agoWhat if they're so sick they're literally incapable of holding someone's hand?
- chrsig 4y agoYou're certainly entitled to that opinion. I can see a counterpoint to it being that there could be value in having an option to ensure they don't have a failed attempt, only to suffer more after. It's probably better to avoid telling someone they don't really want to do it, and erring on the side of believing they do, even if you think you happen to have evidence to the contrary.
- TechBro8615 4y agoThat’s basically how I feel. Suicide is not the ideal outcome for anyone, but nobody can stop somebody from doing it. They already have the option for it, because it’s their “God-given” right to take their own life. So the government does not need to give them this option. And it cannot prohibit it. Assuming the government wants to “do something” about it, that leaves them with two possible policies: facilitate it or mitigate it. In my opinion, mitigating it is the clearly correct choice, because facilitating it would lead to suicides of people who would counterfactually eventually regret it. Whereas mitigating it would at least lead to “false positives” that are failures to prevent someone from suicide, rather than failures to save someone from it.
- morsch 4y agoYou evidently have strongly held opinions about something you know very little.
- Meltiono 4y agoThey might want to have official support / professional support to do it proper and not somehow. Right now this option is blocked by governments around the world. And due to the problem, that the government can't just legalize it without save guard around it, this makes a quite good case that there has to be some government involvement.
- throwaway742 4y agoIt's really hard to override the innate biological need to live. I have a lot of respect for those who have the force of will to actually pull it off. Even if your life is full of nothing but misery it is hard to actually do.