Earlier quoted context omitted.
No I am saying lots of women seem to be struggling with something at any one time Maybe one in five or ten are depressed
Yes, and I would not consider people struggling with depression healthy.
Suicide booths for all
Physically healthy 28-year-old woman schedules euthanasia due to depression
131–140 of 171 posts
Re: Physically healthy 28-year-old woman schedules euthanasia due to depression
#132This one I struggle with. I believe in the right of self determination but I cannot help but ask the question "Have you tried..?" ..because mental can be cured for some. For others it is unassailable. The most natural course is to encourage someone with a mental condition to try these other things first, but I would not ask the same of someone with a physical condition, but with the brain we know very little.
It is a struggle between providing support for a person who has chosen to end their life, and not standing in their way should they ultimately choose to go forward.
Re: Physically healthy 28-year-old woman schedules euthanasia due to depression
#133The Cynic and Stoic schools of anqiue philosophy found freedom in choosing death. It's a big part of why so many big name romans fell on their swords on defeat, metaphorically or literally. Self-determination was seen as a bigger virtue than life, and e.g. Cato killing himself was regarded as a way to rob Julius Caesar of ultimate victory, turning him into a sort of martyr for the philosophy. I am willing to grant th…
All these hinge on a human being having no way out of mistreatment.
Hope is what you may be referring to here. If a person in mistreatment could let go of hope and accept the now as the way it always will be, they would be freed to end their life and have that dignity of self determination. I have read somewhere that kidnappers will give their victims false hope of being released because it makes the victim less willing to fight back.
Re: Physically healthy 28-year-old woman schedules euthanasia due to depression
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It also begs the question, are the people in these situations even mentally fit enough to make the decision rationally? With the limited context I have, I don’t think so. Without euthanasia. A person in that situation can and will choose other means to kill himself/herself.
Any citations for this? That’s an assumption.
Why would this could be assumption? There are suicide cases daily.
Re: Physically healthy 28-year-old woman schedules euthanasia due to depression
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel sorry for her decision as well, but this is not wrong. Think about it for the moment. - She can schedule an euthanasia. - She can throw herself in front of a train. - She can hang herself somewhere. - Many many other "traditional" way. The difference here is, if she schedule euthanasia, the people provide the service will have to finish everything up for her, and they should be less traumatise compare to the t…
So we should go about enabling the "better" committing of wrong acts? A killer set on killing will kill anyway, so maybe we could pair them up and have both happy? The "they will do it anyway" argument is as absurd as it is dangerous. Heh, it's not like it backfired in the past at all, is it?
Yes, I personally think we should enable, but with sufficient difficulty.
If we look at it from a utilitarian angle.
Euthanasia - The one who apply to euthanasia get what one want - Those who assists get paid to do what that person sign up to do.
Other way - The one who commit suicide other way get what they want. - Those who witness got shocked. - Those who "clean up" get paid to do what that person sign up to do, but less amused than those who assist euthanasia.
I am not saying enabling euthanasia for all and granting access to it easily. However, for those who suffer so badly it could be one of the escape hatches.
Re: Physically healthy 28-year-old woman schedules euthanasia due to depression
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course not - no belief is. My point was that it is drastically easier to believe that euthanasia for cancer patients is okay, than for depression sufferers.
So then why did you call it a "no-brainer"?
Because the obvious utility of being able to choose the manner of one's own death, to limit suffering, and to retain a bit of agency in the face of certain death, inconceivable suffering, and the loss of one's own body to cancer makes this choice quite an easy one for many.
Re: Physically healthy 28-year-old woman schedules euthanasia due to depression
#137This one I struggle with. I believe in the right of self determination but I cannot help but ask the question "Have you tried..?" ..because mental can be cured for some. For others it is unassailable. The most natural course is to encourage someone with a mental condition to try these other things first, but I would not ask the same of someone with a physical condition, but with the brain we know very little. It is a…
I'd respond to your question "Have you tried.."? with the question, "who's going to pay for it?". You could spend a fortune on a variety of mental health treatments, but if you're unable to work due to depression, you probably don't have a fortune, and in the US, you don't even have health insurance. And when you find out how much people are really willing to help in the monetary sense (probably not very much), it certainly isn't going to help your depression.
Re: Physically healthy 28-year-old woman schedules euthanasia due to depression
#138Re: Physically healthy 28-year-old woman schedules euthanasia due to depression
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would you think it's preferable to withhold medical services from someone who explicitly requested it, is sound of mind, has unbearable suffering (again, confirmed by two independent doctors whose actions are from the outset considered a criminal offence unless proven otherwise), and where there is no long term improvement possible? Why do you want to withhold medical services in that situation? I read your argum…
Because "medical services" is an euphemism for killing, in this case. You can read my other replies for more context, but what I see as a problem here is that all this will normalise death. By enabling it, we're one step closer of people resorting to this more easily, and having people that could recover just giving up early. And yes, my stance is biased, I don't trust doctors that much.
But... it's not killing. Words matter. It's asking someone to help you die. And the doctors who help you are guilty by default, until proven innocent.
No one healthy and of sound mind will choose to die. It isn't called "survival instinct" for nothing. This will not normalise death, it will not become a fad to die just because it's easy to do so. Despite the US having a very widely available and quick way to commit suicide (guns), the suicide rate in the US is not so much higher than in Germany - where it's more difficult to obtain guns.
I think legalising euthanasia is an act of love. It prevents unnecessary suffering for those who suffer the most, but only if those who suffer explicitly request it and under extremely strict regulations - like they do in the Netherlands.
I think your position about this is typical, but it's also (I think) primarily reasoned from the perspective of society, and not from the perspective of someone who is suffering.