When is Assisted Suicide Justified?

[Mickey]

yet, after you die, you won't even be able to feel that your life was wasted. so it doesn't really matter what could have happened after you die.

What does "feeling" have to do with making a justified decision?

Psychopaths don't feel empathy when they murder people, but it certainly doesn't make that right.

 

[Reshma]

Just a bit out of topic. What about those who engage in self-destructive acts? Like I know one person who slit his wrists with a razor. I don't think he was attempting suicide because there is no way that could have killed him. I have read a lot of people who engage in self-destructive acts which are not severe enough to kill them. Any ideas why people do that?

 

[TuviaDaCat]

What does "feeling" have to do with making a justified decision?

Psychopaths don't feel empathy when they murder people, but it certainly doesn't make that right.

you were saying that there is a loss in suicide, or it might be, since there is a possibility for a good life, though loss means nothing to a dead man.
doenst really matter wether you live or die.. no loss no gain, just a choice of one.

 

[TuviaDaCat]

Just a bit out of topic. What about those who engage in self-destructive acts? Like I know one person who slit his wrists with a razor. I don't think he was attempting suicide because there is no way that could have killed him. I have read a lot of people who engage in self-destructive acts which are not severe enough to kill them. Any ideas why people do that?

they enjoy physical pain?

 

[Mickey]

you were saying that there is a loss in suicide, or it might be, since there is a possibility for a good life, though loss means nothing to a dead man. doenst really matter wether you live or die..

I think you just contradicted yourself. You said loss doesn't matter to dead person, (ostensibly meaning that it matters to a live person), but that it doesn't matter whether you live or die. Which is it? Clearly, loss matters to a live person, it must matter to a live person whether he lives or dies.

If it didn't, it sounds like you would already consider such a person dead.

 

[Gelsamel Epsilon]

If they enjoy physical pain then they're masochists. If they cut themselfs to manifest their emotional pain into physical pain then they're emo.

 

[TuviaDaCat]

I think you just contradicted yourself. You said loss doesn't matter to dead person, (ostensibly meaning that it matters to a live person), but that it doesn't matter whether you live or die. Which is it? Clearly, loss matters to a live person, it must matter to a live person whether he lives or dies.

If it didn't, it sounds like you would already consider such a person dead.

erg, i hate words, for they are inacurate...

i meant that if u are a live and u want to live, then live.
if u want to die, and sure about is, then die.

and when you are dead you would feel no loss for it.

 

[arildno]

Just a bit out of topic. What about those who engage in self-destructive acts? Like I know one person who slit his wrists with a razor. I don't think he was attempting suicide because there is no way that could have killed him. I have read a lot of people who engage in self-destructive acts which are not severe enough to kill them. Any ideas why people do that?

In my opinion:
Basically, to prove to themselves that they really are worthless. In the moment of doing it, the find some source of despairing joy, but fundamentally, they are only consolidating the rule of self-hatred in themselves.
Less extreme versions of this can be found in over-eating, habitual uncleanliness and untidiness.

In effect, they cannot allow themselves to appear in a more flattering light than their self-hatred allows; many will feel "fake/false" and extremely uncomfortable if they try to act as "normal humans".

Note that a more normal check on behaviour is never to allow oneself to appear less worthy than one's self-esteem tells that you are in possession of.

In self-haters, there is an upper limit to acceptable behaviour, whereas in normals, there is a lower limit of acceptable behaviour.

 

[arildno]

Well, I wasn't talking about potential suicides. I was talking about habitual self-molestors, which was what I understood Reshma to ask about.

 

[metacristi]

When is suicide justified?

The final decision to suicide is a purely personal decision (though it may be influenced strongly from exterior) and does not even require a clear argument behind indeed but this does not mean that it is futile to talk of rational justification in this case. It has to be observed that no rational argument ‘pros’ life will ever convince a suicide as much as he does not want (or cannot) be rational. So as much as the suicide does not really have the ability to be rational we are never in a position to consider his act as being rational (and usually we can infer his rationality / irrationality from his past, knowing that he had some severe mental disorders for example does not qualify him as a rational person).

But let’s assume that the candidate to suicide has, usually, the ability to be rational. Does this imply that his decision to suicide is (automatically) non rational or even irrational? I don’t think so. Sure it is the moral duty of all others to try to change his decision by argument and by deeds (helping him with money or offering him a decent job for example) but it does not follow from here that the arguments offered to him (based on personal experience and on what society accepts at a certain moment) apply automatically to all people.

I’d say that there are some cases when suicide can be considered justified, of course I begin here from the premise that the justification for continuing to live has a personal basis and is found in the context (if the sense of life is derived from – at least some – religious doctrines suicide never appears justified but such a foundationalism does not have any sort of epistemological privilege currently).

Indeed as much as the legitimate aspirations (not hurting other people, counting basically as the legitimate personal justification for continuing to live) cannot be fulfilled and the right to live a decent life does not really exist then I’d say that suicide appears fully justified as much as the decision is based on a personal, careful and mature, examination of facts and existing arguments ‘pros’ life.

For example, going well beyond those having terminal diseases or homeless people, if someone has Asperger’s Syndrome [a milder form of autism - where persons are in many cases very intelligent, rational but who can have, in some cases, important problems of adaptation to society’s requirements] and possible other health problems and no real prospect for living a decent life in the society as it presents now (due to various reasons, in the poor countries this is especially valid) I find foolish to accuse such a person for deciding to suicide [as much as the society guarantee only on paper the right to a decent life but makes no real attempt to give a fair chance to such people in practice].

I may seem too bold but in my view modern societies should have also a clear mechanism which to allow those having enough justification for deciding to die to do so (by assisting them to die without pains). Too much is too much; too much suffering basically for nothing has no point.

 

[Exitsign]

Its justified in my opinion because, if life has lost point or seems hopeless to someone. And they see that suicide is better then living. It is justified.
I don't think anybody has the right to tell someone that they want to commit suicide for a stupid reason, simple because, values are unique to everyone.

Sure, on your side of the fence you see a guy who is sobbing and over-emotional about his recent break up with his girlfriend. He commits suicide.
Personally I think that's lame aswell. However I still believe his reason for it is justified because to him and him alone, the(his) world was over.

 

[Reshma]

Well, in my opinion, no one really wants to die. But many people can't bear life's suffering, grief, loss of a loved one, despair etc. They want their pain and suffering to stop so they see suicide as an easy option which in my opinion is not correct. There isn't much justification for suicide but unfortunately that doesn't prevent people from taking this drastic step. They want their pains to die, but sadly they end up taking their own lives...

 

[siddharth]

Well, in my opinion, no one really wants to die. But many people can't bear life's suffering, grief, loss of a loved one, despair etc. They want their pain and suffering to stop so they see suicide as an easy option which in my opinion is not correct. There isn't much justification for suicide but unfortunately that doesn't prevent people from taking this drastic step. They want their pains to die, but sadly they end up taking their own lives...

I'd say that while psychological factors have an important influence, there are other reasons why people commit suicide.

For example, Durkheim claimed that a seemingly individual and personal act like suicide, can be viewed as a social phenomenon influenced by various social factors. (see http://durkheim.itgo.com/suicide.html" )

I don't think it's possible to "justify" suicide, and opinion would vary from person to person.

From a legal point of view, in India, any attempt at sucide is a criminal offence. I think that goes to show how vastly misunderstood this subject is here. I don't know what the law is in other countries.

 

[ValenceE]

Hello to all,

I really think that, in an individual’s mind view, the choice to commit suicide follows from having less and less options to choose from, coupled with the suffering and despair that acts as a catalyst for the process to come down with the only possible one; suicide.

However, this could be flawed because what might really happen is that an equivalence system gradually takes over and makes the desire to end the inner suffering equal to the end of one’s life.

This is the illusion of illusion’s and very sadly is most always concocted from a lonely and dark place in the self-blinded sublevel that the person has reached in his quest for love. He/she is just too deep and his mind’s view is too blurred by the soul’s tears, that they can no longer see and follow the faint spark of light that comes from life.

In this already very close to death place, it does’nt take much to leap into it.


Anyway , this is my take on the suicide topic. Is it justified ? it sure seems to be, from that person’s perspective.


VE

 

[cliowa]

Well, the interesting question about a suicide (besides "what leads to it?") is not really it's justification, it's rather whether it's a responsible thing to do or not! (at least in my opinion) As an individual you're given life without that you need to justify or even could justify this very fact. So why should you need to justify undoing your creation? It might seem unnatural, in-understandable, but that's a different story.

I have seen/heard about or encountered situations where the suicide seemed to me a coward's decision. I felt that in many cases the person trying to kill himself / herself did not really take into account that what he/she was ruining wasn't really their own lives, but rather the lives of their colleagues, friends and family, if they had any.

I sometimes felt angry because of that kind of egoism. If you suicide, that's just it. But the really hard part, all the questions about the why, the doubts and the pain remain for those who are still alive.

 

[cliowa]

For example, Durkheim claimed that a seemingly individual and personal act like suicide, can be viewed as a social phenomenon influenced by various social factors. (see http://durkheim.itgo.com/suicide.html" )

That's not much of a surprise, is it? Animals suicide in masses, but nobody would argue that that's an "individual" or "personal" act.
It seems quite obvious to me that the environmental (that includes social) situation has a large influence on one's happiness with life, and therefore on
the personal well-being and will to go on living.
I think the statistics support this point of view. Countries, where it's dark for half of the year, not many people around with nothing to do, have high suicide rates. Of course this only covers one part of the issue.

 

[Ki Man]

life is precious. Even if you had absolutely nothing left to live for, you could still do something with your life.

like joining the army or helping others like you.

 

[Reshma]

A quote from "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand which I found appropriate here.
I swear by my life, and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.

 

[Mk]

It looks to me like the air around here says that suicide isn't so bad and people are free to choose to do whatever they want with their life, including ending it.

It seems to me normally the people who commit suicide aren't always thinking so straight—emotions easily inhibit rationality. Should we still leave them be?

 

[AKrausse]

I think suicide is neither justified or unjustified, its just a part of someones life (or end of life). Its like anything else you have to make a choice on. If you're set on something, well you're set on it you need justification from anyone. Besides who can really know what the person is feeling when he or she decides to commit suicide. If some of you really knew you probably wouldn't think it was something that would merit killing yourself over, but it all depends on the person and their ability to handle life situations. Not everyone is strong enough to go on past certain things.

 

[physics girl phd]

hmm... as a "survivor of suicide" (my dad and a friend) and also knowing both a friend who attempted and being engaged to someone who attempted... I guess my thought is that suicide is only justified when the person can justify to themselves that all potential is lost. THAT is a hard thing. Can anyone justify that? Both my friend and future husband are very glad that thing did not work out as intended... would Dad have been? Would my friend have been? They denied themselves potential for things they didn't know. Things that nobody will ever know. Hmm... I was left to forgive... To to continue to forgive. That's the "survivor" part I guess. But yeah -- what about decendents... about grandkids my Dad will never know. They are survivors too. That's well... hard... but things are never easy.

 

[raolduke]

If you commit suicide it doesn't mean you've lost anything you just want to gain everything.

 

[Marghk]

While I think suicide is the ultimate act of stupidity, I find it morally alright. It's basically just giving up, when you give up you go nowhere but where you left.

Suicide is avoiding the future, it's giving up all the possible opportunities and good things that can happen to you. Suicide is when someone has nothing to lose, hence why they kill themselves.

In another sense it's like playing a hand in a game of poker and you don't need to bet. You have nothing to lose when you're that desperete, so why fold?

 

[Evo]

I can see suicide as a rational decision if you are terminally ill, deteriorating and in increasing pain with no hope of recovery. It would be irrational in this case to want to continue to suffer, knowing there is no hope. What would be the point? I know I would not want to continue to suffer.

People that have a temporary hardship that think there is no way out, or decide that the way out is not something they want to do, only they can make that decision. Sure, if they don't kill themselves they usually see that the problem wasn't as bad as they thought.

I had someone commit suicide because of me. He was only 18. It was stupid, but I guess at the time he could not see a way out of the pain. His death is something I always think about, how senseless it was.

 

[raolduke]

Suicide is impossible to justify. I recall an All Too Human quote, something to do along the lines that the victim never takes into account his/her family’s or friend’s reputation.

 

[alexsok]

I wonder... if we could live forever and weren't afflicted with any permanently debilitating maladies such as terminal diseases, loss of loved ones, etc but were simply unhappy say for 80 years. Some people here suggested the waiting it out in these "milder" cases is the way to go and others said that if you're suffering mentally for any prolonged periods of time with no hope in sight then suicide is justified. But if we had lived forever, would the eternity suffice to offset any depressive moods?

Evo

I had someone commit suicide because of me. He was only 18. It was stupid, but I guess at the time he could not see a way out of the pain. His death is something I always think about, how senseless it was.

Love? that's the sort of suicide I never understood... i know what is emotional suffering and unrequired love and it does feel awful and unbearable at times, but to off myself because of that... is an ill-conceived decision. Any sort of suicide is justified, just like any other type of decision, but you've got to wonder whether separation from a precious person (your gf/bf whilst they are of course still alive) and being terminally ill or somesuch are in the same category and can be rationalized using the same criteria - I think not.

I believe that in the future, after we manage to permanently instill incredible emotions in every human being through tinkering with chemistry (the pills would be benevolent and not addictive), no one would ever even think of committing suicide, but we probably have 10-20 or more years to go until that happens.

 

[Huckleberry]

An individual can certainly justify the act of suicide. There is no doubt of that. What is not justified is forcing someone to live against their will.

A person did not request to be alive and they need not request to end their life. A person has the responsibility to behave according to the standards of the society that they choose to live in. If they do not desire to or are unable to function according to those standards then they have the option to end their life. The only exceptions I can think of are the responsibilities of children, marriage and sometimes religion. These are all life-binding arrangements normally chosen willingly. One should honor their responsibilities, especially in the case of children, whos life the person is directly responsible for.

I find it very ironic that in western cultures there is such a strong negative reaction to suicide. I say this because I've seen how society is disgusted by people that, for one reason or another, are unable to live up to the social standards required of them. When they become depressed and exhibit negative emotions they are shunned with little real attempt at understanding the individual. I see very little social concern for the individual. Then when someone commits suicide people call them stupid, irresponsible, wrong, etc. when they have absolutely no compassion for, or understanding of, this person's suffering. We choose to leave their fate up to some social service and ignore any social responsibility from one individual to another. I think we are rather cowardly, insecure and selfish as a society.

Realize that many of the prejudices we have towards suicide are just what we have adopted from the society that we live in. There are no rational reasons for many of the reactions we have. Consider that in Japan suicide, under certain circumstances, was regarded as an honorable death. Was their society barbaric and irresponsible? What would they say of our society? Who would be correct?

 

[baywax]

Most accidents are a form of suicide.

Accident or Suicide? Destruction by Automobile: Norman Tabachnick, Ed., Charles C. Thomas, 1973, 254 pp.
Review by: Seymour Perlin

The Los Angeles Suicide Prevention Center has not only pioneered in the response to self-destructive behavior but has contributed to its study. Tabachnick and his collaborators further such contributions in Accident or Suicide? Destruction by Automobile. The book revolves around a “specific theory of the etiology of accident—namely, that in many, perhaps even most accidents, suicide or suicide-like factors are in evidence.”

The importance of the problem may be conveyed by loss of lives, over 50,000 each year in accidents; and the two million who are disabled each year for one or more days.


In an exemplary manner, the authors clearly state their research strategy, development and identification of hypotheses, criteria for selection of the sample, results and accompanying qualifications.


Basically, the report evaluates and compares self-destructive factors among three groups of subjects: a critical accident group, a critical suicide group and a post-append

(This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.)

http://www.pep-web.org/document.php?id=JAA.002.0389A

 

[raolduke]

This is going into existential angst and the point/less-ness of life. Was it Socrates who said that life is an ailment and the physician is death?

 

[NeoDevin]

We should maybe start another thread about "When is continuing to live justified?"

Anyways, seriously, one situation to consider is when a person has devoted their life to some cause, and comes to the situation where that cause would be better served by their death rather than continued life (ie. as a martyr).

In the end it's a purely personal decision. An individual will weigh the benefits and drawbacks of their death (the consequences for themselves, as well as whatever consequences they can see for others). I believe that most people who commit suicide do not have all the facts.

 

[NeoDevin]

Also, what if a person has a terminal illness? If they decide to do something that will kill them (like taking a bullet for a loved one), then is that justified suicide? If they are going to die anyways in a day or two? Or a week? A year? 10 years? 100? Can't it be argued that since we are all going to die anyways, that nothing is really suicide, that we're just choosing the manner and time of our death?

If it's something that happens to us all anyways, shouldn't we have that right, the right to choose our own death?

 

[Surrealist]

Losing meaning to life is no reason to end it. Having no meaning to life is neutral, having purpose in life in positive. And personally I think there IS no negative in this situation. There is no "less then no meaning to life", which is why I think suicide is bull**** and why it IS never justified (No, the neutral stance is not a reason, because your death will be of no benefit). And I myself would never give justice to it EVER.

From a purely hypothetical point of view, a life which guarentees future harm to others should score a "negative"; therefore, one would be justified in sacrificing his/her own life in order to ensure the safety of others.

Along those lines, suicide should also be justified when ending one life saves more than one life. This idea shows up as a literary theme throughout religious history. Some examples include sacrificial offerings made to appease dieties, and a very good example is the story of the self-sacrifice made by Jesus. Although Jesus was technically crucified by those who opposed his ideas, it was made very clear by the Gospels of his apostles that he had the option to end his own suffering and death but he endured it for a "greater good".

Here is another hypothetical situation: suppose an "evil-doer" throws a grenade through the window of a nursery filled with infants in cradles. Suppose that the only adult supervising the infants has a split-second decision to make: run out the door and save his/her own life or throw himself/herself on top of the grenade in order to save the infants who are incapable of leaving the room themselves. A suicide in this scenario would be justified.

"The needs of the many outweighed the needs of the one."

 

[baywax]

From a purely hypothetical point of view, a life which guarentees future harm to others should score a "negative"; therefore, one would be justified in sacrificing his/her own life in order to ensure the safety of others.

Along those lines, suicide should also be justified when ending one life saves more than one life. This idea shows up as a literary theme throughout religious history. Some examples include sacrificial offerings made to appease dieties, and a very good example is the story of the self-sacrifice made by Jesus. Although Jesus was technically crucified by those who opposed his ideas, it was made very clear by the Gospels of his apostles that he had the option to end his own suffering and death but he endured it for a "greater good".

Here is another hypothetical situation: suppose an "evil-doer" throws a grenade through the window of a nursery filled with infants in cradles. Suppose that the only adult supervising the infants has a split-second decision to make: run out the door and save his/her own life or throw himself/herself on top of the grenade in order to save the infants who are incapable of leaving the room themselves. A suicide in this scenario would be justified.

"The needs of the many outweighed the needs of the one."

These sorts of acts are not called suicide. They're called "heroism". Suicide seems to imply harm to one's self and others in your way. Heroism implies harm to oneself in while benefiting others.

Holocaust Survivor's Heroism
The Skinny: Virginia Tech Professor Died While Shielding Students From Gunman

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/18/the_skinny/main2697988.shtml?source=RSS&attr=_2697988

 

[Huckleberry]

Those examples aren't exactly self inflicted. There is another person involved with the intent to kill and there is also someone to protect. Those people are not responsible for their own deaths. They were killed by others while attempting to protect something they perceived as more valuable than their own life.

 

[Surrealist]

Huckleberry, it all depends on how you define suicide. If you want to include a phrase in your definition of suicide that excludes acts of heroism, then I suppose you are right. If you don't do this, then you are wrong.

So you see, this whole argument circles around a human-constructed definition.