Discussion How do you think the world would have to change for assisted suicide to be legalised and accessible to most people?

[Forever Sleep]

I suspect we will see assisted suicide being available to terminally ill, maybe chronically ill people one day. I can even see it becoming available for the more debilitating cases of mental illness. I wonder if it will ever be accessible to relatively 'healthy' people who simply want out. I suspect not but, sometimes I wonder what would have to change for that to change.

I think it would have to be something huge that shakes capitalism/ consumerism at its core. That makes life so miserable for everyone- including the ruling classes and parents that, they start to see the sense in letting troublesome/ burdensome people escape.

Sometimes I think about AI. Let's say AI comes in in a big way and swallows up a lot of jobs. The ruling classes will presumably still be ok. They have the money to buy and develop all that stuff. Presumably, they still earn their money by selling stuff to others. What about the people who can't find jobs now though? They can no longer pay for it- which I imagine would lead to extreme poverty, rebellion etc. In which case- maybe they will start to let people leave early. Maybe they're willing to support a percentage of people with welfare but, it surely won't extend to masses of people. Maybe an extreme global warming disaster or attack by aliens could also make life difficult for everyone.

It's kind of depressing really. Trying to figure out a situation in which it would benefit and make sense to them to start letting people leave humanely. I suppose the scary part is, it could start to resemble a holocaust of sorts. It wouldn't exactly be targetting a group of 'undesirables' but, their lives would perhaps be allowed to become so shit that they'll be queuing up to leave.

I suspect another problem we're bound to run up against soon is an increasingly aging population thanks to the wonders of modern medicine. More and more people taking out of the money pot at the end of their lives and maybe not enough coming in at the other end. I don't know much about economics. Does anyone here? What do the statistics look like? Are enough young and middle aged people earning enough and paying their taxes to support their grandparents? I'm sure the money men in our governments would probably welcome a culling of our old folk.

What do you think? Do you even waste time thinking about this sort of thing when it all seems so unlikely and so far off? If it ever happens. Likely not in our lifetimes. Seems like we will either have to wait till our lives have become so terrible that even doctors think we're a lost cause or, we take matters into our own hands.

 

[Darkover]

it would require a deep reevaluation of how society views life, death, suffering, and autonomy, as well as ensuring there are structures in place to protect vulnerable individuals from coercion or abuse.
A large portion of society would need to view assisted suicide as a legitimate and compassionate choice, especially for those suffering from incurable illness, chronic pain, or extreme mental suffering

As for the aging population, you're absolutely right—this is a problem many economies are facing. In countries with high life expectancy and low birth rates, fewer young workers are available to support older generations through taxes and social welfare systems. If healthcare and pension costs for the elderly balloon, governments may struggle to fund these programs. Some experts are already warning about potential intergenerational conflicts, where the young might resent the financial burden of supporting a growing number of elderly people. This could influence future debates about the rights of older individuals to choose assisted suicide, especially if economic resources become strained.

 

[schrei_nach_liebe]

I think religion needs to be abandoned, which is pretty unlikely here in the US, and many other places. You've got so many lobbyists too. You brought up AI, I think of AI and the death of the internet insofar as being a place where you can somewhat identify content and find things you're looking for, now if you try to use a search engine they're all basically broken because of all the vapid slop being mindlessly generated for clicks by AI. I'm also thinking about the inevitable next financial crash. I think if things continue to head down this road people might start thinking like me that there really isn't any sanctity in human life, human life is an unfortunate accident of nature, there's no point to being here, we're going to continue to get less and less out of life compared to what we put in.

Something lots of people don't realize is that medicine is not chiefly controlled by the government here, but rather boards of nursing and other boards for MDs, who are probably controlled by insurance and pharmaceutical corporations directly or indirectly. Those boards are pretty opaque to citizens and the parasites in the government and on Wall Street. It doesn't matter whether we vote for incompetent crooked socialists (I'm talking about the politicians) or libertarians. Religion is the first uncrossable red line. Socialized medicine just isn't possible here, the country just isn't set up that way. I'm in healthcare, and I'm from a socialized medicine country, it just can't work. The quality of healthcare in America is atrocious and I feel wrong calling it healthcare without putting "healthcare" in quotes. But I know the healthcare everywhere else is appreciably worse and even less accessible in spite of everyone having the right to it and it being of maybe lower cost, but usually not in total. I think out of all the systems I've seen and actually used, the German healthcare system is probably the only framework that could feasibly be implemented here, but that's still a hell of a stretch. The US would be better off being dissolved and broken up into independent countries, there's just too much to muddy the water with how large the government and how opposite people's values are, and how the individual states are set up, and so many other things.

 

[ijustwishtodie]

I think it's like you said where it has to be something that makes life so miserable for the majority of people to where they can finally understand and empathise with us. After all, in most cases, it takes one to know one. Unfortunately, I don't think that this would ever be possible even if the quality of life of the average person reduces tremendously. At the end of the day, some people are just more resilient than us and will tolerate hardship way more than we can. I believe that people in third world countries go through way more suffering and hardship than the average first worlder but you don't really see many third worlders wanting to kill themselves. Because of how most people would still enjoy life even if their quality of life were to decrease, I think that it's impossible to change people's attitudes regarding euthanasia. They'll still think that life is worth the effort no matter what

 

[Alexei_Kirillov]

I think there would have to be a major cultural shift in the extent to which we value individual life (or maybe more accurately, in the criteria that we deem makes a life "worth living," which right now is boiled down to simply "existence," regardless of things like quality of life). Two thousand years of Christianity hammering home the point that every soul has irreplaceable and equal value is not so easily undone, no matter how secular your society becomes. In fact, this viewpoint seems to just be getting more and more entrenched because we've forgotten where it came from, and that it is in no way "self-evident," that, like other beliefs, it was manufactured to serve a purpose.

And admittedly, upholding the value of each individual life has served the Western world very well up until now, but there comes a time when one has to critically examine their beliefs and decide whether or not they still hold water. I'm sure many people would perform such an evaluation and still come out the other side believing in the sanctity of life, but many others wouldn't, and once a critical mass of people recognize that belief for what it is (ie. as a product of faith, not something objective/self-evident/proven), it would no longer hold enough cultural sway to impede MAID policies.

 

[Plato'sCaveDweller]

I think first, religion has to either go the way of the dinosaur (an impossibility, given humans natural tendency toward religious thinking even in atheist worldviews), or modified to be less life-affirming. Many religions are the center piece of what drives the average person's view that life has value and must be protracted at any cost, as well as the idea that your life is not yours to do with as you wish. Religion can also be what prevents others from committing suicide, as scriptures and words of priests will tell you that a hell awaits you (Catholicism, Christianity, Islam, to name a few examples). So religious people will do all they can to prevent you from turning your back on God with such a poignant life renouncing act.

Second, cultures need to become much more comfortable around death. Western society, of which I have personal experience with (I can't speak on other cultures), treats death and by extension suicide as boogeymen. Sometimes even the mere mention of these things can be like mentioning Voldemort's name, though with the rise in dark humor this has lessened a bit. People joke about suicide all the time, which opens the door to talking about it more in a serious context. Death is seen as this far off event that isn't worth considering or pondering on; some go as far as to think they won't die, for technology will save them and they'll live forever (some of the more extreme techno-optimists). I happen to agree with ExistentialGoof (a Right to Die advocate on Reddit, X, and his blog schopenhaueronmars.com), people are afraid of others making these decisions for themselves for multiple reasons: One, your suicide would cause them to seriously question and examine their own reasons for living, and they may be worried that they'll consider suicide a valid option (and since suicide is such a boogeyman concept to be ran from, this is obviously bad for them). Two, your act of suicide directly rejects and denounces everything they feel is good. Schopenhauer mentioned this, albeit in the religious context but it's still highly relevant, "May it not be this—that the voluntary surrender of life is a bad compliment for him who said that all things were very good? If this is so, it offers another instance of the crass optimism of these religions—denouncing suicide to escape being denounced by it." So your act of suicide is essentially an insult to everything they hold dear, and in order to avoid it they'd rather denounce the denouncement of it to escape being denounced. Three, people are generally too attached to others like family, friends, and pets (though most people are gracious enough to their pets to euthanize them when the suffering becomes too great, fortunately!). I happen to have an idealistic and unrealistic view of love, where if you love someone you should love them enough to let them go. Your concerns shouldn't be about you, as is often the case between two parties when one of them is suicidal ("oh, but what about me?" "how do you think this makes me feel?" we've all heard that bullshit, you know how it goes), but about the other individual who wants to die. If you listen to them and take into account the suffering they experience, you should be entirely accepting and allowing of them taking their leave. You don't have to like it, but actively interfering by getting them involuntarily held, confiscating their methods, and supervising them is not the way to go about things if we are to treat each other as ends themselves rather than mere means to an end. I would never request that my last friend and remaining family stay so I can avoid some soul searching. It is THEIR lives, and I don't dictate what they do with them. I love them, but I would never want to violate their bodily autonomy and right to self-determination. I don't get super attached since this would be a threat to that ideal. Again, as I said, I have idealistic standards of what love should be.

Third, Society would need a restructure, or at least a modification to how it currently functions. Right now, there are numerous reasons besides the religious one as to why people do not recognize the Right to Die. Tax revenue, consumer spending, service use, procreation, productivity, etc. I don't know if this is necessarily possible either, but society would need to move away from essentially treating their population as chattel slaves, and more as free-willing participants.

I'm beginning to lose my train of thought here and my brain is running on steam, so I'm gonna leave it here. Sorry about that. But a lot would need to change for a Right to Die for all to be implemented. It is a multifaceted issue with much nuance.

 

[Praying 4 a Miracle]

I honestly believe that all we really need to do is stand up for ourselves (those who are suffering). I also believe either way that it w.ill eventually happen, so we really just need to speed up the process. It would happen remarkably fast if all who are severely suffering would speak up for themselves.

I think what we really need is a "pied piper" to rally everyone together, and organize the situation. We know that the compassion is there, lying just beneath the surface, because NO ONE wants animals to suffer. It'll happen if we speak up, and much sooner than anyone could imagine.

Keep in mind that this is a global problem, and the world is quickly becoming a global village. I'm a Canadian, and we are already sitting right on the edge of major improvements to the system. It would not take much for our globally united voices to bring this cruel and inhumane worldwide insanity to an end!

 

[TAW122]

All the replies in this thread mentioned really good points, especially about religion, AI, and the economy. I would like to add an additional point, which is the reform (if possible or probable) of the mental health and psychiatric industry as well. In many countries around the world even in the US, the act of suicide has been heavily stigmatized (and still strongly is) as well as the over-pathologization of illnesses and labels that are thrown around haphazardly to people who don't fit society's norms, or whenever there is a difference of opinion. That is a major roadblock in terms of getting people's views on assisted suicide to change, which are:

1) the notion that wanting to die or suicide is not indicative of a mental illness, and also that
2) mental illness, mental suffering is also NOT indicative of the lack of soundness of mind/clarity of thought.

It is much easier said than done, but these thorns in the masses' logic and view on the particular issue would need to be overhauled before meaning progress can happen. I do have upmost respect to existentialgoof (EG) on Reddit as well as other platforms he is on to raise awareness, challenge and combat these views that pro-lifers have with regards to the right to die, but of course, it is not an easy road at all. I do fully disagree that many mental health professionals and even the pro-psychiatry crowd tries to utilize these labels, and assertions in efforts to suppress, discredit, dismiss, or otherwise undermine legitimate points of views and perspectives that don't align with theirs, which is not only unethical, [intellectually] dishonest, and disrespectful towards people who were harmed by said institution. They are also stifling any meaningful progress towards shifting the attitudes on the right to die as well as legitimate suffering of individuals who not only have been harmed by society and the socials ills that plague day to day life in society, but also the psychiatric and psychotherapy industry.

As for what Praying 4 a Miracle said, I want to add onto his/her point. In countries (particularly Canada, Netherlands, and Belgium) perhaps starting from there and expanding it to include more than the terminally and chronically ill may eventually (or at least ideally) trickle down to other countries such that in countries that don't currently have the right to die/assisted suicide, may eventually have them for the terminally ill. Yes, while it is still far from ideal, at least that's a start to allow people who otherwise wouldn't have any assisted suicide get access to it, then more and more countries may start to change and become more tolerant of the idea.
In the US, while only about 10 states + 1 territory (Washington D.C.) has death with dignity laws on the books and solely for the terminally ill, it may evolve in the coming years to include more states that legalize such laws and even one or few states (Oregon, Washington State, California, etc.) to expand their current death with dignity laws to more than the terminally ill (to those with chronic, but non-terminal conditions).

 

[wren-briar]

I do fully disagree that many mental health professionals and even the pro-psychiatry crowd tries to utilize these labels, and assertions in efforts to suppress, discredit, dismiss, or otherwise undermine legitimate points of views and perspectives that don't align with theirs, which is not only unethical, [intellectually] dishonest, and disrespectful towards people who were harmed by said institution. They are also stifling any meaningful progress towards shifting the attitudes on the right to die as well as legitimate suffering of individuals who not only have been harmed by society and the socials ills that plague day to day life in society, but also the psychiatric and psychotherapy industry.

(emphasis added)

From everything else you stated (e.g. the "are also stifling" seems to indicate an additional agreement) did you really mean that you "disagree" or is that a typo (or bad autocorrect) where you actually meant "agree"?

 

[TAW122]

Good catch, yeah I meant to type 'agree' instead of 'disagree' (sorry spellcheck doesn't really highlight or catch wrong words, diction can be difficult to spot at times). As for the other sentence, "they are also stifling" refers to how these mental health professionals are impeding or preventing any meaningful, constructive progress towards destigmatizing the topic of death, CTB, and such. I hope that addresses the typo/mistake my in post.