this post was submitted on 16 May 2024
452 points (97.5% liked)

World News

32367 readers
580 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (27 children)

Don't really agree with this. If you look at it on an individual level, there's a case for it, but on a social level, it's dangerous. Individualist societies look for individual solutions even if the problem is social. There are problems that can't be solved with any sort of medication, therapy, etc, because the cause of the problem isn't with the individual. It's impossible to know for sure if any kind of social change would fix her problems, but if suicide is simply the go-to answer when such a problem is encountered, then we will never know. And once this becomes normalized and people start accepting it as a viable solution, then it's going to be a lot harder to materially improve things for people in these situations. Often it's only when people see that there is no individualist solution that they start thinking in terms of systemic changes, and if there's any kind of "solution," no matter how horrid it is, they'll turn to that first. I don't want to create a future where, "I've tried everything I can to fix myself and I still feel like shit," is met with a polite and friendly, "Oh, well have you considered killing yourself?"

Suicide is violence. Self-harm is harm. It's nonsense to describe a process that kills you as "safe." I understand that many people view it terms of rights or personal wills because those are prevailing ways to look at things, in individualist cultures. But life is inherently valuable and if someone thinks otherwise about their own, then they are wrong. I would make an exception for someone with severe, incurable physical pain, but while mental pain is just as real and valid as physical pain, the way it functions is more complex, and so I'm skeptical that it could be declared "incurable" to a sufficient standard, especially if solutions aren't limited to the individual level.

The fact is that we ought to be striving to accommodate as widely diverse minds as possible. Both because it's the right thing to do, and because diversity is valuable, and people who see things differently may notice or understand things that others don't. If the diversity of minds starts to narrow, I'm concerned that it will continue to narrow until neurodiverse people are effectively eliminated from society, or be isolated without community, as more and more pressure builds against anyone who doesn't fit the mold of a productive worker.

[–] efstajas 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don't really see why you say you'd make an "exception" for strong and lasting physical pain (which by the way are of course the vast majority of assisted suicide cases), but not for mental health reasons. In this case multiple doctors concluded that the patient is unlikely to improve, and no progress has been made in over 10 years of therapy.

especially if solutions aren't limited to the individual level.

What do you mean by "not limited to the individual level"?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

What I mean by that is that there are some problems that affect individuals which are not caused by anything wrong with the individual, but by the world at large. For example, climate change. It can't be solved at the individual level, and it may be possible to shut out and ignore it, but that's not really a proper way of handling it. No amount of therapy or drugs will make climate change go away.

I'm not saying that the woman in question is killing herself for that reason. But I am saying that how much things like that can affect people's mental health is something that is difficult to study and prove. One example that does have evidence though is social support for gender transition - trans people with social support generally have much better mental health than those without, but addressing this issue can require changes to society as a whole and not just the individual trans person's behavior or mentality.

My concern is that people will overlook potential social changes to accommodate people, if they view the issue as solved by means of assisted suicide.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Self-harm is harm. It's nonsense to describe a process that kills you as "safe."

Safe to her? No. Neither option can boast that.

Euthanasia is safer to everyone else around her. And tidier.

Get it?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (25 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


A 29-year-old Dutch woman who has been granted her request for assisted dying on the grounds of unbearable mental suffering is expected to end her life in the coming weeks, fuelling a debate across Europe over the issue.

Zoraya ter Beek received the final approval last week for assisted dying after a three and a half year process under a law passed in the Netherlands in 2002.

Her case has caused controversy as assisted dying for people with psychiatric illnesses in the Netherlands remains unusual, although the numbers are increasing.

An article about her case, published in April, was picked up by international media, prompting an outcry that caused Ter Beek huge distress.

“I knew I couldn’t cope with the way I live now.” She had thought about taking her own life but the violent death by suicide of a schoolfriend and its impact on the girl’s family deterred her.

“I was on a waiting list for assessment for a long time, because there are so few doctors willing to be involved in assisted dying for people with mental suffering.


The original article contains 837 words, the summary contains 180 words. Saved 78%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›