Should assisted death/suicide be legal?

1. not sure. 2. not sure 3. not sure. 4. not sure.

In some cases it's not really a choice between life vs death. The choice is a speedy death or a slow torturous death where they let you die of dehydration. Generally I think it's good to be legal, edge cases and what-if's aside. There are already negative "what-ifs" under the status quo, such as people being left to die of dehydration. Even pet dogs get a more merciful death.

1. yes. In general, society exists to serve a collection of individuals, not as an end in itself, so in my view, society cannot unduly infringe on the rights of individuals. Considering that a person may generally end their life without assistance, but not reliably, I'd place suicide in the 'inalienable rights' category on which society may not infringe. Also, this gives others some vague say on whether you "suffer enough". They don't have your experience, I don't think they get to say "you don't suffer enough" based on apparent lack of suffering from a serious illness. I can't conceive of anything that gives others the right to judge that.

2. Yes. Same as above.

3. Yes. Same as above.

4. I don't think I understand the question.

I'm guessing I would be interested in what makes you unsure if the rest of your comment doesn't cover it all. In all seriousness I think we all have a death we're destined to experience. So I sort of approach the topic as an evolution question for how we can experience death compared to if our exact genetic makeup to make us came earlier in time of a less evolved society. Maybe that makes sense?

4. Qualified professional, or oneself. The former to ensure it is done correctly both morally and medically, the latter to prevent suicides being so negative. Though there should be a legal obligation to intervene where possible in a suicide and a legal protection from intervention when the professional is acting.

3. Yes; though only conditions that result in a loss of mental capability or communication should be part of an advance request. Reason: an advance will reduce the standard of investigation required by the professional to "do they meet the conditions of their advance directive", but at the time the directive is made it is unlikely that the person is a valid suicide candidate, so fewer checks and balances can be in place.

2. There should be no white or blacklist to assisted suicide. The person should only have to meet certain criteria along the lines of - they have tried to live with their reason, they have no realistic positive treatment options, etc.

1. As 2

The overarching reason is that your life is your own. But this is tempered by the fact that people are all limited in experience and knowledge, and as a society we should act to help each other make the most out of it.

This is why, despite being wildly in favour of assisted dying and suicide in my own country, I am a lot less keen to see my unrestricted flavour in other countries, countries who do not look after the other members of their society; countries who have debtors prisons and predatory medicine are places where open suicide laws will be used to escape the hell of their tormentors instead of overthrowing it.

For me, the problem is death is final, while our experience of life is always changing.

Reminds me of that documentary I watched about a police officer that was working on that bridge, not sure which, in CA I believe, who have seen a lot of people jump and die. The few that survived (and who were badly hurt result of the jump) explained that as soon as they threw themselves in the void they immediately regretted doing it, and later on, in the hospital, with broken bones everywhere they were happy to have survived it and were pretty much cured of their death wish.

Life is so full of unexpected turns.