4 ms·

This comment is irking me for some reason. It sounds very unsympathetic to her situation.

by OctopusLupid 4y ago

feet 4y ago
Yes, the peasants must be happy living in their boxes with roaches and no sunlight
- lrvick 4y ago
  I lived in a car for years and upgraded to an abandoned rotting trailer with no running water. I know what poor is like, and it is still no reason to end your life. Took me 10 years to build marketable skills but I eventually became a bay area home owner. Can everyone do that? Probably not. You can still win from a bad starting hand in life if you are simply more stubborn than everyone else. Also dead cockroaches is still better conditions than a lot of people in third world countries get.
  - feet 4y ago
    That's some pretty palpable survivorship bias
- dang 4y ago
  Would you please stop posting unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments? We've already asked you this and you've continued to do it repeatedly. We end up having to ban such accounts. I don't want to ban you, so if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
cool_dude85 4y ago
It's the attempt to draw a line between "psychiatric" and "real", at least for me. Isn't a psychiatric condition a real condition?
- jfengel 4y ago
  I don't think the OP disagrees that a psychiatric condition is a real condition. I think they're just asserting that they should be properly assessed for that psychiatric condition before euthanasia. That goes for any condition: they want to have at least tried courses of treatment that might fix the problem. This is complicated by the fact that some psychiatric conditions make themselves difficult to treat. They compel the patient to avoid treatment. This is a thorny ethical issue under ordinary circumstances, and even more so when the outcome is terminal. If the patient believes that their condition is debilitating enough to merit ending their life, it is a matter of law that they should at least have to have a doctor's affirmation that it it has not responded to the standard of care. That means treating a psychiatric condition on a par with physiological ones.
  - lrvick 4y ago
    This is a much better take at what I was trying to convey.

This comment is irking me for some reason. It sounds very unsympathetic to her situation.

feet 4y ago

Yes, the peasants must be happy living in their boxes with roaches and no sunlight

lrvick 4y ago
I lived in a car for years and upgraded to an abandoned rotting trailer with no running water. I know what poor is like, and it is still no reason to end your life. Took me 10 years to build marketable skills but I eventually became a bay area home owner. Can everyone do that? Probably not. You can still win from a bad starting hand in life if you are simply more stubborn than everyone else. Also dead cockroaches is still better conditions than a lot of people in third world countries get.
- feet 4y ago
  That's some pretty palpable survivorship bias
dang 4y ago
Would you please stop posting unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments? We've already asked you this and you've continued to do it repeatedly. We end up having to ban such accounts. I don't want to ban you, so if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

cool_dude85 4y ago

It's the attempt to draw a line between "psychiatric" and "real", at least for me. Isn't a psychiatric condition a real condition?

jfengel 4y ago
I don't think the OP disagrees that a psychiatric condition is a real condition. I think they're just asserting that they should be properly assessed for that psychiatric condition before euthanasia. That goes for any condition: they want to have at least tried courses of treatment that might fix the problem. This is complicated by the fact that some psychiatric conditions make themselves difficult to treat. They compel the patient to avoid treatment. This is a thorny ethical issue under ordinary circumstances, and even more so when the outcome is terminal. If the patient believes that their condition is debilitating enough to merit ending their life, it is a matter of law that they should at least have to have a doctor's affirmation that it it has not responded to the standard of care. That means treating a psychiatric condition on a par with physiological ones.
- lrvick 4y ago
  This is a much better take at what I was trying to convey.