Right to Die

[abaris]

Do you stop them and restrain them, if you are able? It's a matter of personal liberty versus social responsibility. Let's say talking them down isn't an option for simplicity.

I would certainly try and stop them. What's the alternative? Stand by and enjoy the show? I guess, noone with any shred of decency left would stand by witnessing something like that.

[Excited Penguin]

Do you stop them and restrain them, if you are able? It's a matter of personal liberty versus social responsibility. Let's say talking them down isn't an option for simplicity.

I would certainly try and stop them. What's the alternative? Stand by and enjoy the show? I guess, noone with any shred of decency left would stand by witnessing something like that.

I am deeply disgusted and disturbed even at the idea of letting someone "go through with it".

[SteelCurtain]

It'd probably just be easier to list the things you're not disturbed and disgusted by, EP.

[Losty]

So...lack of reading comprehension it is...good to know.

18 people voted this : Yes, anyone should be able to end their life for any reason

I responded that no, it's not ok to allow people to kill themselves for any reason.


Where is the lack of reading comprehension?

Well if you didn't read anything at all but the poll, then it's just a lack of reading altogether lol. I don't believe that to be the case considering you started out saying its a lack of deep thinkers then after a few more comments added in that it must be a lack of thinkers instead. You read at least some of the comments and were either incapable of realizing that they agreed with you or you chose to ignore them because you love being a drama queen.

[Edwardo Piet]

Yeah... Or some other ickle penguin thing he needs to stop worrying his adorable little excited waterproof head about.

[Losty]

Rob I cannot respond to your scenario within its rules because I can't think of a real life reason why attempting to talk them down would not be an option. As a single mother with three kids, though, I can't think of a single time I would ever try to physically restrain a person with a knife who wasn't trying to hurt myself or someone I love.

[robvalue]

Fair enough

Well, we could say you've tried to talk them into not jumping, and they're ignoring you and poised to jump. You let them, or you grab them.

Yes, the alternative is to respect their decision and let them go through with it. That's true personal liberty. Stopping them is a form of... I don't know what you'd call it. Enforcement. I wasn't suggesting either option are right or wrong, it's just a question. I would stop them by instinct, and I'd consider that the morally correct action on balance.

[abaris]

Yes, the alternative is to respect their decision and let them go through with it. That's true personal liberty. Stopping them is a form of... I don't know what you'd call it. Enforcement. I wasn't suggesting either option are right or wrong, it's just a question. I would stop them by instinct, and I'd consider that the morally correct action on balance.

So, without knowing anything about them, their history or their motifs, it's their personal liberty to top themselves? I certainly wouldn't stand by and think, well I tried talking with them, so go on, jump already, so I can be on my merry way. The only question is, would I be in danger preventing them. That would have to be taken into consideration, but nothing else on my part.

[robvalue]

Fair enough, I'm not stopping you answering that way!

I'm just pointing out that the extreme of personal liberty would be letting them jump, yes. I'm not suggesting that's a good thing. I'm noting that there's always going to be a balance, and it's about where you draw the line.

Many people chose option 1, so it seems relevant. They don't "have the right" to kill themselves for any reason if you're gonna rugby tackle them and stop them.

[Losty]

Yes, the alternative is to respect their decision and let them go through with it. That's true personal liberty. Stopping them is a form of... I don't know what you'd call it. Enforcement. I wasn't suggesting either option are right or wrong, it's just a question. I would stop them by instinct, and I'd consider that the morally correct action on balance.

So, without knowing anything about them, their history or their motifs, it's their personal liberty to top themselves? I certainly wouldn't stand by and think, well I tried talking with them, so go on, jump already, so I can be on my merry way. The only question is, would I be in danger preventing them. That would have to be taken into consideration, but nothing else on my part.

Seems like an unnecessary thing for you to say. I don't think anyone would think that.

Hypothetically I like to tell myself if I've tried to talk them down and they seem completely calm and don't appear to be psychotic or drug impaired...hypothetically I wouldn't stop them. It's not my place. I don't think I would appreciate having to fight some stranger after having made such a difficult decision as to end my own life.

In reality I don't know if I could resist the urge to stop them.

This is the whole reason we need to change these laws. When people are going to make a choice to end their lives, they should have their loved ones there to support them (when/if possible) they should be given the opportunity and resources to explore every other option. They should have a path to saying goodbye in a dignified manner that won't be shocking or devastating to their family.

To me, in discussing the right to die there is one thing more important to discuss and it has nothing to do with death. The terminally ill or those who endure unbearable inconsolable pain are a given. The ones up for debate are those who are not terminally ill or do not have some illness that causes unbearable pain. For this reason, the state of mental health care and the stigma around it is a much more important discussion than the right to die.