Live data from Hacker News

The Euthanasia That Wasn’t

politico.eu

21–30 of 131 posts

Re: The Euthanasia That Wasn’t

#21
post #14

“The so-called ‘psychotically depressed’ person who tries to kill herself doesn’t do so out of quote ‘hopelessness’ or any abstract conviction that life’s assets and debits do not square. And surely not because death seems suddenly appealing. The person in whom Its invisible agony reaches a certain unendurable level will kill herself the same way a trapped person will eventually jump from the window of a burning high…

If your happy but very drunk friend wanted to tapdance on the edge of a tall building, would you restrain them if necessary? Or if someone high on shrooms was trying to drink bleach? A suicidal mind is often one caught in the temporary throes of delusion and irrationality, even if it comes from internal wiring going haywire instead of external substances. Preventing someone from killing themselves is in their best in…

> A suicidal mind is often one caught in the temporary throes of delusion and irrationality

The trouble is when this idea becomes circular, e.g. "anyone who would choose to kill themselves even though their life doesn't seem that bad to me must be in the temporary throes of delusion and irrationality."

In other words, to apply your proposal would require determining whether someone is "in the temporary throes of delusion and irrationality" without knowing or factoring in whether they are suicidal. That's probably easy enough in the two obvious examples you listed, but accidental deaths due to intoxication or recklessness are already a less tricky issue than what we normally refer to as "suicide."

Re: The Euthanasia That Wasn’t

#22
post #20
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your happy but very drunk friend wanted to tapdance on the edge of a tall building, would you restrain them if necessary? Or if someone high on shrooms was trying to drink bleach? A suicidal mind is often one caught in the temporary throes of delusion and irrationality, even if it comes from internal wiring going haywire instead of external substances. Preventing someone from killing themselves is in their best in…

Part of personal agency is being free enough to opt out of rationality. It isn’t the purview of second parties to assume what we may or may not want in the future. If I sign a DNR, it isn’t the place of anyone else to say “but he didn’t mean it like that”. Same for (what are assumed by observers to be temporary) suicidal ideations. This strikes at the very core of personal autonomy.

And yet, I suspect the law has some provisions for determining the validity of a DNR based on the condition of the person at the time of signing it, in the same way it does for a will and testament.

Re: The Euthanasia That Wasn’t

#23

This story kinda reminded me about Mark Rife: > “Last Thursday, a guy I went to college with, Mark Rife, committed suicide. As I understand the story, three years ago his wife Sarah died due to complications from a fall off a 75 foot waterfall. She fell; he dove in after her. Against all odds, they thought she had recovered. Life had returned to some degree of normal; but then six months later, she died in her sleep.…

Is there an archive somewhere?

Re: The Euthanasia That Wasn’t

#24
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your happy but very drunk friend wanted to tapdance on the edge of a tall building, would you restrain them if necessary? Or if someone high on shrooms was trying to drink bleach? A suicidal mind is often one caught in the temporary throes of delusion and irrationality, even if it comes from internal wiring going haywire instead of external substances. Preventing someone from killing themselves is in their best in…

There are many people for whom life is a living hell with no hope of escape other than to end it. Insisting they live amounts to serving as their warden and torturer. If it isn't someone you are personally willing to take some responsibility for, as you did with your wife, then I think it is wrong to insist they live. I'm quite open about my long history of being suicidal and the various underlying reasons why. Peopl…

> If it isn't someone you are personally willing to take some responsibility for, as you did with your wife, then I think it is wrong to insist they live.

Exactly. People, even kids, kill themselves because of "lack of perspective". Lack of a (reasonable) future. Lack of any reasonable hope for change. People aren't stupid and mental illnesses (the non-medical ones) don't actually prevent thinking. That means the first thing to realize is that a desire to kill yourself isn't illogical. Maybe it's a mistake but maybe it isn't.

Which of course is terrible and of course absolutely not what society expects of help. Here's this kid. She's broken. Find the miswire in her brain, cut it or something, and bring them back fixed. And then you read the story of the kid. Was "diagnosed" with Autism by a teacher with no psychological skills whatsoever. From that point on systematically increasing repression was used against this kid, and of course as a psychological/social worker you cannot change their situation. That, youth services will not let a psychiatrist do. They need to be fixed and accept whatever "help" other people feel the need to provide, decided by whoever gets put in charge by the government (they "just happen" to never ever be the people who actually take responsibility for the child). That's your only function. Oh and by the way, if you can't do it in 6 weeks (can be up to 16), the kid will be violently taken away by the police, in cuffs, and someone else gets that job. Oh, and if they commit suicide in your clinic, they'll bankrupt you and maybe you'll go to jail. Good luck !

So the problem in this girl's case is not just that her conclusion, that there was no perspective on a better life ... well let's just say it wasn't a particularly stupid or obviously wrong assessment of her situation. The things she didn't have control over weren't getting better over time. And she tolerated being treated like that "for her protection" for at least 3 years ... Do you really feel you'd last that long ? Kids are actually far more resilient than adults when it comes to being suicidal, but enough punishment ("help" provided involuntarily, like in the case being discussed here) will get the better of them soon. Every 3 months you get moved somewhere else, in cuffs, and the next thing is tried on you. That might be good, it might also be 12 weeks in an isolation cell. You just don't know. Hell, because they just take whatever is available right at the moment they move you (because your current placement ends you have to leave, doesn't mean they have somewhere else for you to go). So the social workers, your parents, even the juvenile judge also doesn't know, except perhaps a day or so in advance. Good luck feeling optimistic about your future.

So of course youth services itself was the cause of the lack of perspective. "Safety" for the child, imposing safety on her is what killed her. Escalating to heavier and heavier repression every time. As soon as she worsened in care someone should of course have pressed the abort button, EVEN knowing she was cutting herself or suicidal. Send her home and say she can stay there unless she chooses otherwise. Why ? To prevent doing more damage. To make it clear that her home was still there, and that the situation really is salvageable. But if you as a social worker or psychiatrist take that chance, and the result is that it was too late, and the kid does commit suicide (or worse: their parents or someone they're exposed to back home takes advantage of the situation), you'll be eaten alive by society. So nobody does. Everybody avoids responsibility, and thus taking chances on not treating kids is barely ever done. The odds are actually in favor of doing this. Even people who've tried to commit suicide, only 3% actually follow through with it, meaning the symptom disappears in 97% of cases, which is far better than treatment accomplishes.

About 400 kids are placed (which means locked up against the will of parents and child) "for their safety" for every 1 case of actual abuse in the Netherlands. Social workers build cases against these kids that aren't checked for accuracy (it is an actual policy for them to write down everything they hear, and to never check), there is no defense possible, there are children's rights, but no way to sue child services if they are violated, so there might as well not be. There is no actual appeal process against the youth court (technically there is, but whatever "protection measure" they put forth is always immediately executed, appeal or not, nor is it canceled on a succesfull appeal, it is re-evaluated by the original judge (after, of course, another waiting period). This heavily punishes appeal since if an appeal is filed, no adjustments (such as visitation by your parents, or a friend, or more phone numbers you get to call, or ...) are possible until the appeal is heard, sometimes years later)

It is very clear that at this point the system damages many more kids than it helps.

BUT there is money being handed out. For example, if you have a handicapped kid, and you need help paying for a wheelchair, this is done through youth services, with "pgb" (meaning money that "follows the kid"). Parents can even use this money to pay themselves (very badly I might add, but it's something) for watching the kid if the care required is heavy enough that the kid can't be left alone. Or to get them after school lessons for free. Or ... Also schools, institutions, even things like children's farms can get extra money through the system, if they get "problem" kids assigned to them, and so kids are being forced into it, sometimes by their own parents. But where the real damage is done is where social workers are both being made responsible for deciding on care, and paid for providing care.

The perverse incentive is of course that one can easily see that institutions', schools', social workers', ... optimal strategy is to "treat" kids that are normal to begin with, diagnose them with something like "autism", and "treat" them. How many social workers, how many schools, how many institutions do this ? Hopefully not too many, but it's equally obvious that it's rather unlikely to be zero.

This has resulted in that apparently a solid 11% of Dutch kids have a serious psychiatric problem necessitating professional aid in any one year. Internationally, it's not even 3% (and that number is over 18 years). That number is rising. Just for autism, 2.5% of Dutch kids are diagnosed with it, whereas international numbers are between 0.6% and 1%.

Re: The Euthanasia That Wasn’t

#25

This story kinda reminded me about Mark Rife: > “Last Thursday, a guy I went to college with, Mark Rife, committed suicide. As I understand the story, three years ago his wife Sarah died due to complications from a fall off a 75 foot waterfall. She fell; he dove in after her. Against all odds, they thought she had recovered. Life had returned to some degree of normal; but then six months later, she died in her sleep.…

Is there an archive somewhere?

Nope. IIRC it was like a private diary and he only published it at the end just before he ended his life, so there wasn't time for it to get archived or cached before Tumblr deleted it.

Re: The Euthanasia That Wasn’t

#26
post #22
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of personal agency is being free enough to opt out of rationality. It isn’t the purview of second parties to assume what we may or may not want in the future. If I sign a DNR, it isn’t the place of anyone else to say “but he didn’t mean it like that”. Same for (what are assumed by observers to be temporary) suicidal ideations. This strikes at the very core of personal autonomy.

And yet, I suspect the law has some provisions for determining the validity of a DNR based on the condition of the person at the time of signing it, in the same way it does for a will and testament.

Giving second parties control over the bodily autonomy of a first party because of second party opinions (with the notable bright line exception being first party acts of violence toward others) is not part of any society in which I wish to participate.

Re: The Euthanasia That Wasn’t

#27

“The so-called ‘psychotically depressed’ person who tries to kill herself doesn’t do so out of quote ‘hopelessness’ or any abstract conviction that life’s assets and debits do not square. And surely not because death seems suddenly appealing. The person in whom Its invisible agony reaches a certain unendurable level will kill herself the same way a trapped person will eventually jump from the window of a burning high…

Thank you.

The day I kill myself it will be a long thought out choice.

Not many people can handle that without disrespecting the perspective, or worse, wanting violence applied against my will.

The arrogance of some people to think they know best for me is amazing.

P.S. I'm not suicidal now, it's a family condition that will mean (likely) one day I'll be deteriorated to the point I will want to check out.

Re: The Euthanasia That Wasn’t

#28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many people for whom life is a living hell with no hope of escape other than to end it. Insisting they live amounts to serving as their warden and torturer. If it isn't someone you are personally willing to take some responsibility for, as you did with your wife, then I think it is wrong to insist they live. I'm quite open about my long history of being suicidal and the various underlying reasons why. Peopl…

> If it isn't someone you are personally willing to take some responsibility for, as you did with your wife, then I think it is wrong to insist they live. Exactly. People, even kids, kill themselves because of "lack of perspective". Lack of a (reasonable) future. Lack of any reasonable hope for change. People aren't stupid and mental illnesses (the non-medical ones) don't actually prevent thinking. That means the fir…

[deleted]

Re: The Euthanasia That Wasn’t

#29
post #2

I have said this more than once here, and hate how much it defines my life so imagine people might be annoyed by seeing it again, but I have been suicidal for a long time because of medical errors and the ensuing heath/life issues. I don't want to be. Nobody who is wants to be. Some people SAY they want more than anything to be gone but at the end of the thread, if you pull hard enough, they just want the suffering,…

As a guy who felt suicidal, the abysmal abusive treatment of the authorities has forever negatively affected my life.

Sorry you had to experience that. It is not uncommon from talking to lots of people in this situation.

Re: The Euthanasia That Wasn’t

#30
post #2

I have said this more than once here, and hate how much it defines my life so imagine people might be annoyed by seeing it again, but I have been suicidal for a long time because of medical errors and the ensuing heath/life issues. I don't want to be. Nobody who is wants to be. Some people SAY they want more than anything to be gone but at the end of the thread, if you pull hard enough, they just want the suffering,…

Just wanted to say that I respect your freedom. Life can be far more cruel than most people can imagine. Life for most people seems to be really happy-go-lucky, and anything else is an existential threat that must be blocked out. I see your plight, and I give you the freedom to feel how you feel (not that you ever needed it from me...)

Nail on head. For the majority of people, if it makes them feel afraid, threatened, confused...then it is something to be ignored or attacked. That's a sad truth I have learned through this experience. The empathetic and caring people are, despite most people imagining themselves as one, are not the majority by a longshot.
Post reply on HN