Suicide and Euthanasia

[dizzydoll]

Edited to add: You can cast your vote privately without commenting on the thread if you wish.

I was just wondering, perhaps some of you know a friend or family member who has committed suicide. Its very sad for those who are left behind, but I have to wonder... doesn't one need a lot of courage to take ones life? Personally I don't think I have that kind of courage. Or do you think suicide is a weakness?

Then we have euthanasia, would you consider it if you are an emotional and financial burden on your family or friends? Should euthanasia be legalized? I mean abortions are legal in many areas in the world, so could euthanasia fall into the same category, for those who want to pass away peacefully with dignity?

Is suicide considered a sin religiously? I think I was told once, that somewhere in the bible it says that committing suicide is not considered a sin. I am not sure how credible my source was on this. Anyway I have been wondering what all religious and belief systems feel about taking ones life. I have noticed its not a subject which is talked about that often, and many people will not feel comfortable disclosing if this untimely death has affected them personally.

In some cultures suicide is considered an honor, for example Kamikaze pilots knew they were going to die before they got on board the plane, as did those who flew into the Twin Towers. Some people are committing suicide slowly by killing their liver with excessive alcohol abuse. Others are smoking themselves to an early grave, is that not suicide?

I can fully understand euthanasia under certain circumstances. What do you think?

[BienvenuJDC]

I would consider suicide an action for one who is weak. I do not agree that it takes courage. Consider Hamlet's soliloquy for a moment. His option was to take the easy way out or to "take on a sea of troubles." Of course he chose the "sea of troubles" because he wasn't sure about what was to come in the afterlife. I personally think that life itself is too valuable than "the burden" that people are concerned with.

As far as "sin" goes, people often quote the passages that address, "You should not kill." I don't think that those passages are referring to suicide. I don't think that God wants people to kill themselves, but I don't think that it's really a "sin" issue. Usually those who are considering suicide are dealing with a burden. There are only a couple of in the Bible who committed suicide, King Saul and Judas Iscariot to name two. But their SIN was not in the suicide, but the conduct in their life while they lived.

[OrphanPip]

I support voluntary euthanasia completely. Someone with a terminal disease has the right to choose death as an option instead of palliative care. I would not support involuntary euthanasia, which would be the deciding of whether to kill or not by doctors or family members unless their right to make such a decision was otherwise stated in a will.

Suicide in general is a trickier matter because of mental health issues. It is easy to understand why someone dying of a painful disease could make a logical choice to end their life, while it isn't as easy to understand why someone who is mostly healthy would. I don't think it's possible to make a sweeping statement about all cases of suicide. We can't know if it was a good or bad decisions, if it was weakness or strength, without knowing the circumstances.

[ktm5124]

I would consider suicide an action for one who is weak. I do not agree that it takes courage. Consider Hamlet's soliloquy for a moment. His option was to take the easy way out or to "take on a sea of troubles." Of course he chose the "sea of troubles" because he wasn't sure about what was to come in the afterlife. I personally think that life itself is too valuable than "the burden" that people are concerned with.


I think this is a rather naive statement. Mental illness is a complicated issue, one that people often downplay. To draw an analogy - I assume you would not consider a terminally ill patient who is suffering to be weak if they decide to opt out of suffering by euthanasia. This is effectively suicide, but it does not make the person weak. Now, consider a person who is mentally ill. The brain is an organ just like any other; like the heart, liver, kidneys, it can be diseased. There are some people who are mentally ill who cannot find any relief through treatment. These people often undergo years of treatment without any relief. They suffer, just like the terminally ill patient. What is so different about these two cases? In my opinion, suicide is not so far removed from lobotomy. And yet there is not the same public reaction against lobotomy as there is against suicide.

Of course, this is not to say that I believe suicide is a solution for those who are mentally ill and cannot find relief. I think it is an unwise decision, as there is always the possibility of a new successful intervention, new medicine, change of environment, etc. However, at the same time I do not think that the decision to commit suicide necessarily makes a person weak. On the contrary, many suicide victims must have had a lot of strength to have dealt with their suffering for so long.

And while Hamlet is a great play, and its playwright a great genius, these mental health issues were not so prevalent or problematic in Elizabethan England. Life was very different back then. I do not think that Shakespeare was familiar with the mental illnesses that can cause people to commit suicide today.

[keilj]

I support voluntary euthanasia completely. Someone with a terminal disease has the right to choose death as an option instead of palliative care. I would not support involuntary euthanasia, which would be the deciding of whether to kill or not by doctors or family members unless their right to make such a decision was otherwise stated in a will.




There are a couple of countries in Europe now (the Netherlands perhaps - I can't remember for sure), where they legally have places where the terminally ill can die in a peaceful and dignified setting.

[hillwalker]

I agree with ktm. For someone who is so desperate that suicide is the only option left them (whether completely 100% 'sane' or otherwise) it has to be a tremendously courageous act. If death is the only release left them, just think of the agonies involved when they are weighing up the practicalities of how to commit the act. 'Weak'? I think not.

True, it is also seen as selfish (particularly towards those who are left to grieve) but for many people life itself is a battle, and choosing to make the final exit before summoned is not an act of weakness.

Hamlet's flaw was that he did not have the courage to act on his feelings - his love for Ophelia, his disgust at Gertrude's marriage to his father's murderer, and finally his self-disgust. Which is why even contemplating suicide was a trial - and performing it far beyond his courage.

H

[keilj]

I agree with ktm. For someone who is so desperate that suicide is the only option left them (whether completely 100% 'sane' or otherwise) it has to be a tremendously courageous act. If death is the only release left them, just think of the agonies involved when they are weighing up the practicalities of how to commit the act. 'Weak'? I think not.



thanks for saying this



In some ways, suicide is an insistence on human dignity

[Niamh]

My Mams best friend had manic depression and some other mental health issues including hearing voices.She attempted suicide on many occasions and was in and out of hospital. She jumped in front of a train because she couldnt handle it anymore. I dont think that was weak. She was finally free of her mental torment she'd delt with for years.
Terry Pratchett has alzhiemers and wants Euthanasia legalised so that he can have it done. He doesnt want to loose his mind and be remembered for what he became.
People with terminal illnesses who are in pain everyday who commit suicide to end their suffering that killing them anyway are putting an end to their own suffering and the suffering their illness is causing their families. Sometimes although its tragic, suicide can be the end of a lot of suffering and heartache. It takes a lot of strength to make that decission and a lot more to do the act.
Suicide pacts on the other hand i dont agree with. There have been some cases that are heartbreaking. One family in county Wexford went and ordered their coffins before killing their children and commiting suicide because they couldnt cope. Why did they have to kill the children though? So innocent.

[Helga]

suicide takes more guts than we can imagine I think, I can say for me that for a long time it was the only thing on my mind but I was just to scared to do anything and just hurt myself a little, just as much as I could. Sometimes it's just because your at a point of no return your so far into depression or whatever is going on and you know you have caused pain and this is a way to stop it... but it's a subject everybody needs to figure out for themselves this is just how I feel.

euthanasia on the other hand, I work in a home for the elderly and I watch them in so much pain and so depressed and there is nothing I can do about it. I know of some people who just stop eating and they die very quietly and calmly. being able to just go to sleep when you are in so much pain and there is nothing to do except drugs and no life ahead I think it should be allowed to help people get that sleep. I have always said that this is one thing that animals have that we don't. and I know that when my dogs dad died it was clear in his eyes that he was ready very old and very sick. he just wanted to sleep. I know many people at work wish for the same thing and some even beg us to let them just sleep but we can't. if they try to eat less we just give them more vitamins and minerals. everything to prolong their life.

[hillwalker]

@ Niamh - you make a very good point about suicide pacts. There have been stories in the press about one estranged partner killing him/herself and his/her children to 'get back' at the other partner. Such suicides are horrifically cruel and unjustified. Suicide can only be 'justified' when it is a private matter - one person choosing to end one life.

@ Helga - what a sad story you tell but you are fortunately here still to tell it. Some young people seem to go through a phase in their lives when they view suicide as an easier option than living. Personally I think that is a damning indictment on society - that we turn our backs on our young people so callously that they feel abandoned enough to seek an escape for good.
I have no knowledge of your personal situation nor would I intrude, but some 3 or 4 years ago an entire community in South Wales suffered a series of teenaged suicides. Most of the authorities assumed it was a hysterical reaction to a single young girl's decision to take her own life. Some suicides posted their intentions on social networking sites. It begs the question why do young people feel so isolated from 'normal' life.

As for euthanasia to avoid a lingering death - personally I am all for legalising it.

[BienvenuJDC]

I think this is a rather naive statement. Mental illness is a complicated issue, one that people often downplay. To draw an analogy - I assume you would not consider a terminally ill patient who is suffering to be weak if they decide to opt out of suffering by euthanasia. This is effectively suicide, but it does not make the person weak. Now, consider a person who is mentally ill. The brain is an organ just like any other; like the heart, liver, kidneys, it can be diseased. There are some people who are mentally ill who cannot find any relief through treatment. These people often undergo years of treatment without any relief. They suffer, just like the terminally ill patient. What is so different about these two cases? In my opinion, suicide is not so far removed from lobotomy. And yet there is not the same public reaction against lobotomy as there is against suicide.

Of course, this is not to say that I believe suicide is a solution for those who are mentally ill and cannot find relief. I think it is an unwise decision, as there is always the possibility of a new successful intervention, new medicine, change of environment, etc. However, at the same time I do not think that the decision to commit suicide necessarily makes a person weak. On the contrary, many suicide victims must have had a lot of strength to have dealt with their suffering for so long.

And while Hamlet is a great play, and its playwright a great genius, these mental health issues were not so prevalent or problematic in Elizabethan England. Life was very different back then. I do not think that Shakespeare was familiar with the mental illnesses that can cause people to commit suicide today.

I am sorry. I did not address the terminally ill patient situation. My comments about suicide being a weakness, I would not apply to a terminally ill patient who either wants to escape suffering or wanted to take a burden off of their loved one.

I was really referring to someone (like Hamlet) who had a lot of problems that needed dealt with, who was looking for an escape. Mental illness on the other hand, I would not pass any judgment at all, since the mind's state in completely unknown. Many people in that situation are not acoutnable for their actions.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[ktm5124]

I am sorry. I did not address the terminally ill patient situation. My comments about suicide being a weakness, I would not apply to a terminally ill patient who either wants to escape suffering or wanted to take a burden off of their loved one.

I was really referring to someone (like Hamlet) who had a lot of problems that needed dealt with, who was looking for an escape. Mental illness on the other hand, I would not pass any judgment at all, since the mind's state in completely unknown. Many people in that situation are not acoutnable for their actions.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

But it seems like you are blaming the suicides of mentally ill people on them "not being accountable for their actions". You are excusing them on a false premise; you are basically accusing all mentally ill people of insanity. But many people who commit suicide because of their mental illness are quite sane, quite accountable for their actions.

For instance, David Foster Wallace committed suicide because of his depression. Do you think David Foster Wallace was not accountable for this decision? It's not as if he was psychotic... he was very much accountable for his decision. But should we blame him for it, and should we call him weak? Of course not.

[BienvenuJDC]

But it seems like you are blaming the suicides of mentally ill people on them "not being accountable for their actions". You are excusing them on a false premise; you are basically accusing all mentally ill people of insanity. But many people who commit suicide because of their mental illness are quite sane, quite accountable for their actions.

For instance, David Foster Wallace committed suicide because of his depression. Do you think David Foster Wallace was not accountable for this decision? It's not as if he was psychotic... he was very much accountable for his decision. But should we blame him for it, and should we call him weak? Of course not.

ktm....stop putting words in my mouth. I said that "many people in that situation"...I did not say most, or all...my point is that I'm not about to pass any judgment for their decision (or accountability) because I do not know their situation or their mind. I'm not trying to start a fight here. I'm not blaming anyone for anything. My point is that in most cases, I will not pass judgments on suicides. However, I do not think that it takes "courage" to end your life. That is my opinion.

[hillwalker]

It is difficult for anyone who has not been in the situation - where suicide has been considered an option - to appreciate what a huge decision-making leap it must be to finally contemplate transferring thought to action.

Without assuming too much I'm guessing Bienvenu is applying the term 'weakness' to the kind of person who plays around with the idea of suicide in their heads without having the least intention of following through. Hamlet tugging with his inadequacies.

As far as the 'mental illness' issue - this is very emotive. Perhaps taking that final plunge does require one to abandon rationality for an instant (otherwise the reflex action would be to think twice - our survival instinct is very difficult to over-ride I should imagine).

Certainly no-one should be held to blame for taking their own lives (as I have already mentioned in a previous post above - unless someone else's life is also taken in the process).
I think some blame would also apply to those individuals who involve an innocent party in achieving their own death - driving head-on into an oncoming truck, say, or commiting suicide by cop..... It's a difficult topic.

EDIT - apologies if I'm treading on your toes, Bienvenu. I yped this while you were posting your latest response.

[ktm5124]

ktm....stop putting words in my mouth. I said that "many people in that situation"...I did not say most, or all...my point is that I'm not about to pass any judgment for their decision (or accountability) because I do not know their situation or their mind. I'm not trying to start a fight here. I'm not blaming anyone for anything. My point is that in most cases, I will not pass judgments on suicides. However, I do not think that it takes "courage" to end your life. That is my opinion.

I'm sorry if I was putting words in your mouth. I was irritated by the way you came across; it seemed to me that you were trying to discard the cases that didn't fit into your criteria ("many mentally ill people are not accountable for their actions"). Forgive me if this was not the case.

[soundofmusic]

I think the reason there are so few countries that allow euthenasia is that it is really a sticky, complicated issue. Personally, as a hospice nurse, I see terrible suffering; unfortunately, by the time the person decides for themselves they want to die; they no longer have the stregnth or power.

I have sometimes wondered who I would trust to give me that final injection? Sometimes when I see the relatives, greedily looking through the jewelry and stocks...here the hospital ask if the person is an organ donor...

What would happen in a world where we could instantly remove all of the financial hardships that a schizophrenic relative, or an autistic child could cause...

I have voted yes for euthenasia; but only if I can pour my own pills...

[Jozanny]

I do not necessarily believe in suicide, and in fact, though I am getting over the hump, I was somewhat personally pained with the choice David Foster Wallace made. I cannot say why, as I barely knew Infinite Jest existed and he himself wasn't on my writer recognition zone until his obit thread appeared here on the forum; then I paid attention, listened to interviews, read about him, and became angry--and I know how that sounds, so I'm writing about it to sort my reactions out.

But on a personal level, I am not going to be able to beat the system back as a disabled woman forever. I already cannot handle the attendant care system; it nearly drove me crazy, and how much more yet a more regimented environment, to which eventually I will have to concede, as my strength continues to decline. I don't have a good man. I don't have children.

I do have bylines but so what. Vassar Miller was one of the most famous poets with cerebral palsy and her end of life was virtual torture for her writing assistants.

I don't want to allow medical model paradigms to destroy me, either way, by enduring their assaults on my dignity, or by forcing me towards a choice I don't want to make. Don't have handicapped children, as we never asked for our conditions, or from the constraints most of us face in trying to be just like everyone else.

[Cunninglinguist]

I can discern two separate issues you’ve brought up here, the first being whether suicide requires strength or weakness and the second being the moral status of suicide and euthanasia. I will address them respectively but as I am limited on space and time I will only offer a few short words here:
Suicide probably requires a type of weakness and a type of strength simultaneously. But this is true for all actions. When one asks for another’s love, is it not because one is too weak to endure the agonies of loneliness and also because one is strong enough to ask? If one lacks a sufficient quantity of strength or weakness the action will not take place. When a ‘brave’ or ‘courageous’ man patriotically fights for his country, is it not because he is afraid he is too weak to live without it? This raises the question, what is bravery or courage? Is it rooted in weakness?
One could argue that we are all weak in the sense that no one can live in complete isolation. In this type of argument weak would be synonymous with dependent. And, of course, here we’re asking is a person who commits suicide unable to depend upon himself and therefore weak.
The more important question is not whether it requires weakness or strength but whether or not it is morally justifiable. The reason this topic is so difficult is because for most of us we have many conflicting values. I don’t believe that it is right for society to be designed in such a way that leaves many people feeling the agony of anomie and then attempts to justify suicide by saying that people have a right to do whatever they please with their bodies.

[Gladys]

One could argue that we are all weak in the sense that no one can live in complete isolation. In this type of argument weak would be synonymous with dependent. And, of course, here we’re asking is a person who commits suicide unable to depend upon himself and therefore weak.

Those who suicide are weak in the sense that they voluntarily give up the struggle which is life: "Rage, rage against the dying of the light". Of course, the life burden of some is so onerous that few would have the strength to bear it.


Consider Hamlet's soliloquy for a moment. His option was to take the easy way out or to "take on a sea of troubles." Of course he chose the "sea of troubles" because he wasn't sure about what was to come in the afterlife. in the suicide, but the conduct in their life while they lived.

Hamlet, himself, is rather more fascinating than this! His choice is to acquiesce in "a sea of troubles" and live a cowardly and tawdry long life, "Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, | And by opposing end them", which he views as tantamount to suicide. It's suicide to oppose a reigning monarch and, in this sense, Hamlet knowingly chooses suicide. Weak or strong?

[keilj]

But on a personal level, I am not going to be able to beat the system back as a disabled woman forever. I already cannot handle the attendant care system; it nearly drove me crazy, and how much more yet a more regimented environment, to which eventually I will have to concede, as my strength continues to decline. I don't have a good man. I don't have children.



I don't want to allow medical model paradigms to destroy me, either way, by enduring their assaults on my dignity, or by forcing me towards a choice I don't want to make.

You've articulated one of the main points. In the United States, the health care/nursing home system is pretty fraught with an astonishing lack of compassion, and a pretty heartless rigidity. This, added to the already torturous nature of some physical illnesses, can make a pretty good case for voluntary suicide at some point. And it is quite troubling that the U.S., whose health care system creates these kinds of conditions, would be very slow to ever allow voluntary suicide.

[dizzydoll]

I don't want to allow medical model paradigms to destroy me, either way, by enduring their assaults on my dignity, or by forcing me towards a choice I don't want to make. Don't have handicapped children, as we never asked for our conditions, or from the constraints most of us face in trying to be just like everyone else.

Joz, I am so sorry to hear of your pain, and pain is one of the reasons for bringing this subject up to start with, but this isnt about me. While we are able to philosophize about life easily enough, we seem to ignore or be unable to philosophize about death.

If you look at Music's comment, none of us want to go there:

I think the reason there are so few countries that allow euthenasia is that it is really a sticky, complicated issue. Personally, as a hospice nurse, I see terrible suffering; unfortunately, by the time the person decides for themselves they want to die; they no longer have the stregnth or power.

I have sometimes wondered who I would trust to give me that final injection? Sometimes when I see the relatives, greedily looking through the jewelry and stocks...here the hospital ask if the person is an organ donor...

I must agree, it would be easier to allow someone else to give that final injection, but the choice is not theirs its ours. But something inside us compels us to go on, we dont know what that is for sure, all we know is our inner self that wants to go on. Like all of us, Joz you have to find a way to make peace with your inner self and feel the comfort in any decision you make.

I have been told those who are dieing are more concerned about leaving their kids behind, thank your lucky stars you dont have that problem. I would recommend you read Eckhart Tolle's works. Now I know there are some bad reviews so please dont judge him by the way he writes or that he includes a bible verse, the publishers could have just as easily left those out as they have no bearing on his ultimate message . He is such a patient, thoughtful compassionate man, he has gone through difficult times himself which he bravely shares with the reader. You can even listen to his works on CD, [read by him] if you prefer. If you watch some of his YouTube videos he's like a little comedian, so cute he is.

In the end Tolle can help everyone to find peace within themselves, his message is comforting. I highly recommend [I]A New Earth and The Power of Now. Here is a link to some of his stories on a LitNet thread: The Lost Ring]

Watch out For (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52439)

I had a brother who committed suicide and it literally broke me, even now, 3 years later I feel the gap from this loss. He had damage to the stem of the brain so really, if I think about it logically -- this was no life for him --, he was an angel put here to teach us. Perhaps if I had thought about his death beforehand, it might have been easier to accept. I felt the trauma of his death more than that of my fathers death, or other family members for that matter. I take this to mean we are kindred spirits who will see each other again.

Whatever our decisions when faced with death I believe we'll find the support we need, judging by this poll. This has been a very difficult comment to write, but it helps my healing too. It was one of the reasons for bringing up this topic to begin with, sometimes I do have my serious side too.

P.S. If you can listen to Wayne Dyer's work on CD or YouTube, he offers truly remarkable inspiration. I have his Change your Life, Change your Thoughts CD. Now you will definitely read or hear bad reviews about him and his lifestyle... whatever..., ignore it all. Have fun.

[dizzydoll]

I don’t believe that it is right for society to be designed in such a way that leaves many people feeling the agony of anomie and then attempts to justify suicide by saying that people have a right to do whatever they please with their bodies.

I'm not sure what you mean by this, please can you rephrase.

[Jozanny]

Sound,

This will not make much sense, perhaps, but I do not believe in making peace, or coming to acceptance. I have had some huge struggles, some of which I alluded to, which in the end, seem a bit cheesy, and make me look a bit comic, even in my own eyes--but for the chronically disabled to attempt suicide, and I say attempt because the disabled most often fail, if their ability is impaired to that extent, means the bigots win, means the oppression won, and I'll be damned if I give society that satisfaction--but that said, I cannot sustain what Vassar Miller was willing to endure in her 70's either, or some of my friends, for that matter. It is not optimal, which is not to say we're not all going to die, or at least, most of us through say 2030--although biologists today do not think human life is sustainable beyond a benchmark 120 or so--just that I am not dying with stomach tubes inserted to feed me, and catheters, and IV bags.

As to Wallace, I don't buy the medical model explanations, despite the fact that I can read his ability to make acute pain seem to be an almost unspoken character within his work. He was a very privileged, gifted man, and apparently selfish to the point of committing a monstrous evil. Who the hell is he, with everything the rest of us endure, to have done this, despite his insights and awareness of human nature, to have hung himself, so terribly wounding his family, probably affecting his students, if the impact my instructors had on me is any indication?

Suicide for a just cause is one thing, but suicide because your joy juice isn't working is something else, at least in his case. Like yourself, I have been around clinically hopeless conditions, and those I will not judge, but some people would do well with a good thrashing, as far as I am concerned.

[ktm5124]

Sound,

This will not make much sense, perhaps, but I do not believe in making peace, or coming to acceptance. I have had some huge struggles, some of which I alluded to, which in the end, seem a bit cheesy, and make me look a bit comic, even in my own eyes--but for the chronically disabled to attempt suicide, and I say attempt because the disabled most often fail, if their ability is impaired to that extent, means the bigots win, means the oppression won, and I'll be damned if I give society that satisfaction--but that said, I cannot sustain what Vassar Miller was willing to endure in her 70's either, or some of my friends, for that matter. It is not optimal, which is not to say we're not all going to die, or at least, most of us through say 2030--although biologists today do not think human life is sustainable beyond a benchmark 120 or so--just that I am not dying with stomach tubes inserted to feed me, and catheters, and IV bags.

As to Wallace, I don't buy the medical model explanations, despite the fact that I can read his ability to make acute pain seem to be an almost unspoken character within his work. He was a very privileged, gifted man, and apparently selfish to the point of committing a monstrous evil. Who the hell is he, with everything the rest of us endure, to have done this, despite his insights and awareness of human nature, to have hung himself, so terribly wounding his family, probably affecting his students, if the impact my instructors had on me is any indication?

Suicide for a just cause is one thing, but suicide because your joy juice isn't working is something else, at least in his case. Like yourself, I have been around clinically hopeless conditions, and those I will not judge, but some people would do well with a good thrashing, as far as I am concerned.

I think you are downplaying his depression, which is a disease like any other. People with depression like that literally have a chemical imbalance in their brain - in particular, decreased serotonin activity. It is not at all a fault in one's attitude, willpower, or worldview; it has a very substantial and proven chemical basis.

[Jozanny]

ktm,

I know all about depression, just as I am sure Wallace did, even better than I myself, his perceptions carry the astuteness of a razor's edge; depression is part of my *adjustment disorder* which in layman's gargle means I have depression and anxiety but neither state is major enough for a sustained course of treatment, and although I am repeating myself, as a disease depression ranges from crippling interference to everyone has it but can function with and/or chemical assistance and counseling.

If I am being hard on Wallace one it is more just my problem as he is dead, but two, I don't care how much pain he was or wasn't in, he knew this was a self-involved and transient state; he knew, too, about disability, and the contradictions inherent in both its oppressive caste and self-inflicted cruelty, and in his case, what he did was selfish, wrong and not worthy of compassion, not on the basis of the public reasons offered.

I don't think it was because his medication lost its effectiveness. I believe he acted thinking he would experience what he wrote about and somehow overcome that, and he lost, and I'd smack him upside his head for it too if I could manipulate history.

Life is about suffering, and in the majority of cases, the human spirit overcomes. That is what it is to be human.

[Gladys]

People with depression like that literally have a chemical imbalance in their brain - in particular, decreased serotonin activity. It is not at all a fault in one's attitude, willpower, or worldview; it has a very substantial and proven chemical basis.

If depression has a proven chemical basis, will we establish someday a chemical basis for a fault in one's attitude, a lack of willpower, or a faulty worldview? If the basis for these is not chemical, is it physical, electrical or, perhaps, supernatural?

If depression is not a fault in one's attitude, does this imply that depression is one's destiny: independent of one's state of mind, dietary, exercise, social and sleep practices? Which comes first: a chemical imbalance in the brain or self-defeating attitudes and behaviours? Surely the depressed individual bears some responsibility for his attitudes and actions and, ultimately, for his brain chemistry.

Not everyone attempts suicide.

[Virgil]

ktm,

I know all about depression, just as I am sure Wallace did, even better than I myself, his perceptions carry the astuteness of a razor's edge; depression is part of my *adjustment disorder* which in layman's gargle means I have depression and anxiety but neither state is major enough for a sustained course of treatment, and although I am repeating myself, as a disease depression ranges from crippling interference to everyone has it but can function with and/or chemical assistance and counseling.

If I am being hard on Wallace one it is more just my problem as he is dead, but two, I don't care how much pain he was or wasn't in, he knew this was a self-involved and transient state; he knew, too, about disability, and the contradictions inherent in both its oppressive caste and self-inflicted cruelty, and in his case, what he did was selfish, wrong and not worthy of compassion, not on the basis of the public reasons offered.

I don't think it was because his medication lost its effectiveness. I believe he acted thinking he would experience what he wrote about and somehow overcome that, and he lost, and I'd smack him upside his head for it too if I could manipulate history.

Life is about suffering, and in the majority of cases, the human spirit overcomes. That is what it is to be human.
I have not read through this thread and just stopped here for a moment and noticed this post. Jozy that is beautifully said.

[ktm5124]

If depression has a proven chemical basis, will we establish someday a chemical basis for a fault in one's attitude, a lack of willpower, or a faulty worldview? If the basis for these is not chemical, is it physical, electrical or, perhaps, supernatural?

If depression is not a fault in one's attitude, does this imply that depression is one's destiny: independent of one's state of mind, dietary, exercise, social and sleep practices? Which comes first: a chemical imbalance in the brain or self-defeating attitudes and behaviours? Surely the depressed individual bears some responsibility for his attitudes and actions and, ultimately, for his brain chemistry.

Not everyone attempts suicide.

Of course, everything is biochemical. But it is much simpler to pin down the chemistry behind depression than it is to ascertain, say, the series of neurological impulses (over many years) that led to a particular worldview. The difference here is that the former is very much a question of gene expression, whereas the latter is a question of experience (the restructuring of neural connections over formative years).

A lot of people hate to admit it, but we're just a bunch of cells, genes, and proteins. Everything is biochemical - even experience, which is simply, to repeat myself, the restructuring of neural connections. But what does it matter if everything can be scientifically explained? This does not guarantee determinism. There is also no reason it should take away any joy or meaning from life.

So, to answer your question (if the answer is not clear from this mash of ideas) things like attitude, worldview, lifestyle, etc. are all products of experience. It is the sum of a series of decisions. But when it comes to the serotonin levels in our synapses, we have nowhere near the same level of conscious control. There is no decision-making there.

This post may sound coldly scientific (I realize I must come across an automaton) but I think this is an issue that is very much in need of indifferent scientific explanation. There are too many preconceptions, misconceptions, and religious stances hovering about like flies.

[kiki1982]

Yes, well suicide... I find it incredibly selfish if people come up with the argument of 'you leave people behind'. If a person thinks that his life is no longer worth living then it is probably no longer worth living. We as friends, family members and acquaintances can try to make him understand that it is not that way, but ultimately, will you as a person be happy because other people are happy that you are there? Probably not. And believe me I have had someone in my circle who actually tried. It is sad, but you can really not do anything about it. Fine, some people get through that phase (including that person I talked about), but others are kept in it for years by accident. Is it really worth seeing the agony of such a person because he is not allowed to go?

Euthanasia:

I come from Belgium where euthanasia is allowed provided that the person in question has had a document made up by a notary when he was still compus mentis (with it) sying that 'in the event of such or such' he wants to die. Apart from that, family members can decide to turn life suport machines off if there is no chane of recovery at all or if the person will end up a plant. But this is only for respiratory machines and not for food and drink.

In the event of Alzheimer's, I find it a little tricky, but seeing some of those people, I wouldn't want to be in that position. I could face possibly being brought into a coma because of cancer, because eventually I will die because of that cancer and I wouldn't last long, but becoming a hundred and not being able to find the toilet, not being able to feed myself and getting fruit compote to eat so I can do it with a spoon, not being able to say how many children I have, not being able to recognise my next of kin really... I don't know. Mind you, I wouldn't go as far as Hugo Claus (a famous Flemish writer) did and killed myself under the pretence of 'euthanasia' when I was still able to put a proper sentence together.

But I concede, in the spectrum of Alzheimer's and its counterparts, the line is difficult to draw. When is the person too far gone? When does he no longer realise that he is in the world as such? Is it when he can no longer control his urine flow, or is it when he can no longer eat with a knife and a fork, or is it maybe when he can no longer put a sentence together, or maybe even when he has ceased to talk altogether? That is the big problem. But I supprt Terry Pratchett in his battle. I think it is for everyone to decide on his own when he wants to die if he deteriorates mentally.

[Gladys]

So, to answer your question (if the answer is not clear from this mash of ideas) things like attitude, worldview, lifestyle, etc. are all products of experience. It is the sum of a series of decisions. But when it comes to the serotonin levels in our synapses, we have nowhere near the same level of conscious control. There is no decision-making there.

Aren't "serotonin levels in our synapses" a function, in part, of long term "attitude, worldview, lifestyle, etc"?

Our rather primitive knowledge of serotonin and its effects is substantially driven by the financial interests of pharmaceutical giants. They have less motive to research the impact of one's state of mind, dietary, exercise, social and sleep practices. The paltry research that has been reported on these life-style factors frequently correlates with depression and suicide, for instance.

[Lokasenna]

I think euthanasia should be a basic human right. In many ways, it's rather ridiculous that it's still illegal in this country, as 90% of GPs have admitted in anonymous polls that they've carried it out. Some people argue that its legalisation would put too much power in the hands of doctors, and would lead to moral gray areas; that said, the hippocratic oath did nothing to stop a monster like Harold Shipman, and think if the system were more open, then there would actually be more scrutiny.

As for personal experience, I have two stories to relate. Firstly, there was my grandmother, who passed away at the respectable age of 88. She was already weak from cancer, and she took a nasty tumble down the stairs that resulted in her being bed-ridden. While I have no proof, I am nonetheless convinced that one of my cousins, who is a paramedic, eased her passing, which allowed my grandmother to die peacfully at home, surrounded by family, rather than slowly in some hospital somewhere. As a family, we don't talk about it, but I think we're all grateful to my cousin for intervening.

Finally, one of my father's worst childhood memories (that haunts him to this day) is his final visit to a dying uncle of his. His uncle had advanced spinal cancer. He was lying face down on the bed, the skin of his back rotted away to point that his spine was actually exposed. The air reeked of death and decay, and as his uncle had by now completely lost all bladder and bowl control, the bed was rank with urine, feces and blood. The pain was so intense that his last days were spent screaming and vomiting. As for what he was screaming (and this had the most profound impact on my father), he was begging, pleading for someone, anyone to kill him. Over and over begging the doctor and or his family to kill him. Whether the attending physician eventually did something or not, we'll never know, but I really hope so.

Out of the two deaths, which was better? I personally know which I would prefer to go through.

[Jozanny]

I think the right to control how we die is a somewhat different cup of tea than committing active suicide over non-terminal issues, and this is the distinction I am making, though these are, of course, not hard and fast categories.

One of our local, and prominent activists has been having strokes and seizures for the last three years or so, and while it is not as graphic as what Loka describes, I do not give a high holly for the disability credo here: I draw the line at living like that when the body is telling you otherwise. This man, like his soldier who just passed some weeks back, is basically in and out of the hospital, has basically lost his mind, though he could once keep up with me; he is not particularly literary but as a woman had completed his doctor's internship before his disease took hold--that is all gone and it is probably fortunate that he can remember my name.

His partner is an extremist and believes in life at any cost. In his opinion pieces he thinks Terri Schiavo was murdered; I do not, as the autopsy evidence indicates her brain had basically shrunk to death beyond its functional ability. I am ashamed of what havoc the activists wrought in her case, and my then editor simply whimpered, "I always said we should have never gotten involved."

I have little more than contempt for that reasoning, honestly.

End of life is not easy, by far, but here I think the activists hurt themselves, as in some manner some forms of existence are worse than death.

[kiki1982]

Yes, euthanasia should not be extended to helping people to die if they are depressed... However, that's also a problem because it excludes epople with bipolar who nearly always end like that. One would for less.

If it comes to people like Terry Schiavo, I would have preferred her to be 'killed' by an overdose of morfine or whatever than by turning her food off. I mean, would you like to be starved to death? Well, actually just left without drink until you finally pass on. I find that... well, just a little 'I can't be a**ed to do anything more effective'. I mean, what they use in Switzerland, you drink it, someone stays with you, you fall into a gentle sleep and you are gone within half an hour where you were still walking around an hour ago. That is how it is done. I find turning off machines a little cruel actually.

I don't know what I would do if there was a family member in that state. I'd probably prefer them to go as well, but turning off the machine, I find so cruel. Still, if I had no choice, I'd have to.

What Lokasenna tells of was to somewhat lesser extent the case with my grandmother. She didn't go to the hospital when she discovered a lump in her breast, let it get bigger until it got to her lymph nodes in her armpit, then got a swollen arm and eventually lay in the hospital with a lot of pain barely conscious. But, Catholic Hospital, they didn't do anything but keep her alive after the lymph got onto her lungs which made breathing vey hard. Fortunately she died before she really started to decay or so like Lokasenna's great-uncle. Still, they could have made it easier forher, poor woman.

Worst thing is, now that there is a law in Belgium to allow these things, there need to be two doctors who agree on euthanasia. But Cathonlic hospitals refuse to cooperate because of which people are still left in the lurch. The single doctor who is compassionate cannot do it because he can legally be accused of murder, and frankly, you can't really drag your family member off to another hospital just so they can get euthananised can you?

So really, sometimes, it is better that there is no law. It happened in Belgium as well like in Britain. I was quite shocked when I saw in a soap series two nurses discuss the fact that 'they would probably kill her if [they] moved her' and then did it so she didn't have to suffer any longer. Certainly medical personnel had a certian freedom (though some abused it) which they have now no longer. And it has come to the point where in Belgium, before certainly doctors did it if family members asked for it, and now, they refuse, because if the corroner finds out he can be prosecuted; Before, as euthanasia didn't 'exist', there was no prosecuion involved if the process wasn't right. Now, there is defined process. So, even if the doctor feels compassionate, and even if the family want it, they cannot because the person didn't make a document or the two doctors cannot agree...

[OrphanPip]

The Quebec government is trying to decriminalize euthanasia, but the legality of it is questionable. The provincial government doesn't have the power to overturn the criminal code. A bill to legalize euthanasia was tabled in the federal parliament last year but failed to past.

[dizzydoll]

His uncle had advanced spinal cancer. He was lying face down on the bed, the skin of his back rotted away to point that his spine was actually exposed. The air reeked of death and decay, and as his uncle had by now completely lost all bladder and bowl control, the bed was rank with urine, feces and blood. The pain was so intense that his last days were spent screaming and vomiting. As for what he was screaming (and this had the most profound impact on my father), he was begging, pleading for someone, anyone to kill him. Over and over begging the doctor and or his family to kill him. Whether the attending physician eventually did something or not, we'll never know, but I really hope so.

Out of the two deaths, which was better? I personally know which I would prefer to go through.

That is so traumatic just reading that Lok. Like you I would pull the plug and be done with it, no-one deserves to die like that and no-one deserves to have to witness it either. Bless his soul for enduring that.

This poll leaves me feeling better about my brothers passing. I was so torn for so long and couldnt give a voice to my pain, now it'll get easier I hope.

[Jozanny]

kiki,

As difficult as the Schiavo case came to be, and as cold as this may sound coming from a disabled woman with life long discrimination on her back, I do not really think the woman was alive when the *evil* husband won the case to remove the feeding tube.

Now, medically, persistent vegetative states are inexact diagnoses. Doctors have been surprised by patients who woke up after a lengthy period of brain rewiring, and I even saw one remarkable case on tv where a musician made a 100 percent recovery from a brain injury because the family refused to institutionalize, and altered their lives and gave him intense therapy and round the clock support. I have never seen a case like it, honestly, which is why we can never be complacent with the pathology physicians know, but 8 times out of 10, that pathology is accurate.

Terri most likely had minimal brain stem function, such that her lungs breathed and heart beat, but the rest of her brain was dead. This is what the evidence amounts to. She never responded to any neurological therapy, and probably wasn't conscious of starvation.

In the US, passive removal of nutrient and medical technology sustaining devices is legally safer than actively drug overdosing. Now, my editor's partner countered me by saying even if she was legally brain dead, killing her was a lot like killing the disabled with minimal cognition whose limbs shook and had limited body function.

I really cannot argue with that, but I think modern humanity needs to make some hard choices about what quality of life amounts to. Anyone would say putting me to death would be wrong. I can think. I'm relatively smart--but the depth of my emotional pain did not come out of nowhere, and my inability to sustain a career, my social isolation, my constraints imposed by governmental statutory regulation that is insane, no one asks to be born into this, and this in a global superpower. Disabled contacts online have told me that it is as nearly insane in Canada and Europe as well, athough that of course I cannot judge--but we have to get better at the societies we create and stop killing each other slowly with it.

[kiki1982]

You are right about Schiavo. I do not argue that it was wrong to make her pass on... I have only my doubts about turning the food off. Even if she is not really conscious of it, even if it is legally safer (that was probably why they did that of course), still, it gnaws away at my conscience that I would let a creature in this world starve as it were. The same as I treat my plants. Well, maybe with an exception for weeds.

I agree with you as well about disabled people in society. I have found that it is better in the UK, from my perception that is, but for the rest, they seem to think that if you don't have any legs, you don't have any brain or something. :confused: As if you cannot do office work then. Even people with reduced learning abilities can do something useful which builds up their self-confidence... But I suppose it is cheaper to make 'normal' Chinese people work for a midget salary than to have disabled people work in the Western world at putting boxes together. Or even better, you buy a machine to do it... I suppose firms resent having to 'adapt' their car parks, their entrances, their inside in order to suit disabled people. That's the problem isn't it?

[Gladys]

... I have only my doubts about turning the food off.

Bedridden, my aged mother probably starved herself to the brink of death before an increased morphine dose killed her in hours. Six month earlier she had lost one leg above the knee and, soon after, the second. Her poor circulation bred bed sores and neither stump really healed, with appalling pain. But did she really want to die? In the end, it seems, the doctor decided for her.

I was reminded of Simone de Beauvoir account of her mother's terrible death in A Very Easy Death (1964) and Patrick White's The Eye of the Storm (1973).

Would legalised euthanasia have made my mother's final predicament better or worse?

[dizzydoll]

Aren't "serotonin levels in our synapses" a function, in part, of long term "attitude, worldview, lifestyle, etc"?

Our rather primitive knowledge of serotonin and its effects is substantially driven by the financial interests of pharmaceutical giants. They have less motive to research the impact of one's state of mind, dietary, exercise, social and sleep practices. The paltry research that has been reported on these life-style factors frequently correlates with depression and suicide, for instance.

I cant help but agree with you on this score. However I am back to remind us that suicide can also be a slow self-inflicted, destructive curse to some of us who drink or smoke themselves to death. I cant help wondering who on earth would choose such a slow, tortuous, uncomfortable death. And the worst part is they know it, they know their lungs, throats, skin etc were not designed to handle tobacco, and their livers are slowly dieing by any number of diseases, but they carry on regardless putting this filth into their bodies. What a painful death to choose.! So I am here to ask, why would anyone choose to kill themselves slowly like this? Gosh, isnt it better just to pull the trigger and be done with it instead of dragging it out year after year until you eventually croak?

[hillwalker]

Dizzy,

The problem with smokers and drinkers who can't stop even though they know it is wrong is not because they are chosing to kill themselves. It is a common psychological flaw in man - something called 'cognitive distortion'.

Our subconscious is unable to cope with conflicting messages - it's impossible to accept that something is right and also wrong at the same time. So your mind distorts reality to make the situation more logical.

How many times, for instance, have you given yourself excuses to drive above the speed limit? You know it's wrong, but you need to get somewhere in a rush perhaps, or a running late. So if you were to get stopped by a traffic cop you would probably come up with an excuse
- the road's empty
- I'm a careful driver, have an unblemished record
- the car behind me was tail-gating so I had to put my foot down
- I don't know why this section of road needs such a low limit, etc., etc.
We've all done it (those of us who drive).

The same applies to smokers/drinkers - they are fully aware of the medical consequences, but their body craves nicotine/alcohol.
Their subconscious knows that logically it is wrong to smoke or drink to excess but also it is right because doing so gives them pleasure.
So they kid themselves
- I know of people who smoked all their lives and never got cancer
- If I didn't smoke I'd put weight on
- I smoke low-tar so that's ok
- Smokers/Drinkers pay more taxes because they buy tobacco/alcohol so people should be grateul
- I can hold my drink better than other people
- I'm only being sociable
- there's no harm getting drunk on special occasions
- just one more for the road

So the fact is that suicidal feelings don't enter the equation.

[dizzydoll]

There are programs to help people quit smoking and drinking. I smoked all my life from 14 years old... many, many years. More than half my life, I went for hypnosis 8 or 9 years ago and stopped immediately. One of the reasons for doing this was I had this annoying little cough, and the last thing I wished was to bark over some basin every morning for the rest of my life.

Same with drinking, although not my problem I have watched friends kill themselves by drinking... a very painful death. They too had many opportunities to stop drinking but didnt preferring to let it get out of hand, so if they did eventually stop they weren't even allowed to toast at a wedding. But then again, an ex boyfriend stopped drinking many years after we broke up because he was an alcoholic. I often worried about him and was delighted to find out he had kicked the habit. Where there's a will there's a way, otherwise its slow suicide.

These two habits are slow suicide, no getting away from it. Okay, 10% will dodge the bullet, the rest of the 90%... they may as well put one in their head right now if they are to allow either of these poisons to become habits.

[Gladys]

There are programs to help people quit smoking and drinking ... These two habits are slow suicide, no getting away from it.

Most smokers and drinkers are not bent on intentionally killing themselves. So, as Hillwalker suggests, these habits are not strictly 'suicidal'. :iagree:

[hillwalker]

On a similar note, there are other lifestyle choices that could also be considered 'slow suicide' - such as living on junk food, over-consumption of calories in general, couch-potato syndrome, and other forms of drug-taking.....
And in every case the decision to fall into the destructive habit starts off with a bit of 'cognitive distortion' (as detailed in my previous post).

To make matters even worse, advertisers in general play to this weakness. They kid people into thinking that life will be unbearable without their product - be it mouthwash, mineral water, vitamin supplements or probiotic yoghurt for example.

Many medical experts would confirm that all of the above are generally unnecessary under normal conditions and do little to promote healthier living (or oral hygiene for that matter). But the message from the advertisers is so persuasive that many fall for it - telling themselves:

- it's something I don't need, but other people are using it so I'd better try it
- I really can't afford it, but obviously my life will be enriched if I get some for myself
- it's new and exciting, therefore it must be wonderful

It really is a cynical ploy to get people to spend more and more hard-earned cash on frivolities - but of course, that's how the cigarette companies worked their campaigns back in the early days, so none of us should be surprised.....

H

[caddy_caddy]

Our soul is not ours .
God gives , God takes .

[Gladys]

On a similar note, there are other lifestyle choices that could also be considered 'slow suicide' - such as living on junk food, over-consumption of calories in general, couch-potato syndrome, and other forms of drug-taking.....And in every case the decision to fall into the destructive habit starts off with a bit of 'cognitive distortion' (as detailed in my previous post).

Willy Loman, in Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman, is a fine example of cognitive distortion. For Willy, suicide becomes an upbeat solution to a shattered life, a way of achieving the American dream, of setting up son Biff for life. Since Willie scarcely seems to understand the nature of suicide - as we learn from wife Linda's final confusion - can we really call his car-accident death a suicide?

Maybe, many a suicide could be better described as the unintended climax of a distorted dream.