Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- euthanasia:start [2022/04/17 19:39] – old revision restored (2022/02/28 05:58) 154.54.249.194
+++ euthanasia:start [2022/05/17 14:50] (current) – old revision restored (2022/04/17 19:39) 216.244.66.245
@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 If it's really about autonomy/freedom/choice/control, why should we //ever// prevent someone from committing suicide?
+  * Is it really about autonomy? Or do we only say that when we agree with someone's suicidal thoughts, when we agree with them that they might actually be better off dead?
+  * Doesn't offering prevention to some and assistance to others reveal a judgment that some lives are worth living but other lives are not worth living?
+    * It's not really about autonomy them, or else we'd never intervene to prevent suicide. Isn't it about a judgment call that some people are better off dead?
-<note>This section plays on the tension created with this untenable position. Some people might jump towards Position 1 instead of Position 3 to resolve this tension. This is not a problem, but a step forward in the conversation, because it's a recognition that Position 2 is untenable -- if we move someone from Position 2 to Position 1, then all we need to do is respond to Position 1 to get them back to Position 2, which they already recognize as problematic.</note>
+<note>Some people might abandon Position 2 for Position 1, or jump back and forth. This is a positive sign, a step forward, even if it seems like they're jumping further from the pro-life position. It shows they recognize that Position 2 is problematic and they're forced to choose between Position 1 and 3.</note>
+==== Social Science: Being suicidal is always a symptom of some other unmet need ====
+FIXME transient will to live
+FIXME Oregon data and disability issues
+==== QUIT Ablism ====
+FIXME These are fundamentally disability issues.
+  * Quality of Life
+  * Unbearable Suffering
+  * Incurable
+  * Terminal (?)
+Dialogue techniques:
+  * Wheever someone brings up terminal illness, ask them about a non-fatal disability
+    * ASA: "Well, if someone is terminally ill, I think they should have access to assisting suicide because of unbearable suffering"
+    * PL: "What about if someone is suffering from a disability that's not terminal, should they have access too?"
+      * People might agree as a first instinct, but as you tease out the ablism, this is actually quite powerful for people when they realize their initial instinct was so ablist
+  * When ever someone draws up a specific case, ask about the exact same case without the disablity:
+    * e.g.
+      * ASA: "Well, what if someone was a quadriplegic with early onset Alzheimer's?"
+      * PL: "What if someone had early onset Alzheimer's but wasn't quadriplegic?"
+    * e.g.
+      * PL: What if someone was wheelchair-bound, and wanted assisted suicide because they found life unbearably isolated and difficult?
+      * ASA: Well, maybe they should have access too, they shouldn't be denied
+      * PL: What if someone wasn't wheelchair-bound, but wanted assisted suicide because they found life unbearably isolated and difficult?
+      * ASA: I mean, you have to ask why they're feeling that way, try to get to the root of the problem
+      * PL: Why would you treat someone differently in the same situation just because they're in a wheelchair?
+==== Human Right to Prevention ====
+Any attempt to offer suicide assistance to some and suicide prevention to others is fundamentally ablist, it's discrimination against a class of people. If you're able-bodied and suicidal, we'll step in to prevent you from harming yourself. If you're facing disablity issues and suicidal, we'll help you kill yourself.
+The overall point is that everyone has an equal right to suicide prevention. Everyone deserves to be prevented from harming themselves. Suicide is the ultimate self-harm. And we can see that suicide is always a symptom of some unmet need, even for the terminally ill. Our duty to other people is to meet this need, to support people in finding meaning in their lives amidst suffering rather than validating their despair and aiding their self-harm.
 ===== Position 1: Everyone deserve assistance =====
-  * Is there //ever// a case where we should prevent suicide?
+**Key question:** Is there //ever// a case where we should prevent suicide? (If yes, back to Position 2)
-    * If yes, back to Position 2
+  * Is suicide //ever// a tragedy?
+  * [[D = S - M]]
+  * Up until now, suicidal ideation has been a diagnostic criteria for depression. How are we supposed to distinguish between being rationally suicidal and being suicidal as a symptom of depression?
+  * How can suicide be rational?
+    - "sound mind" (subjetive)
+    - good reasons (objective)
+    * How do you determine whether or not someone has a sound mind or good reasons? The only way you could see them as being rational is if you're already made a judgment about whether or not they're actually better off dead (back to Position 2)
+  * What is your responsibility to your fellow human beings?
+    * Do we have a responsibility to decrease the will to die?
+    * Is mercy killing about releasing the person who is suffering from suffering, or releasing the people around them from responsibility?
+    * Peter Singer: love > his philosophy