 |
 |
"........that is the question". This well known contribution to the discussion of the merits of suicide was written +/- 500 years ago. The discussion has been going on for as long as humans have had a life to dispose of and a language to use for the discussion; so I don't think we are going to resolve the issue on this list at this time. The subject is however one that many (possibly even most) individuals faced with a chronic, debilitating disorder will need to resolve for themselves at some point. An open, hopefully non judgemental, discussion is essential in the process of making an informed decision. With that in mind I offer the following thoughts. 1. There is a clear destinction between suicide as a result of clinical depression, and the suicide of a non depressed person faced with an intolerable situation (though in each case the reprocussions may be similar). 2. In the first case suicidal thoughts, possibly culminating in the actual act of suicide, are a symptom of the disorder. As such they are no more subject to moral or ethical judgement than is tremor or bradykinesia. In this case trying to argue against suicide by talking, for example, about the devistation it causes in the surviving family makes as much sense as asking an 'off' PWP to hurry up. The death by suicide of a clinically depressed person has, in my view, the same moral weight as death by heart failure. Whilst deeply regretted neither is subject to praise or condemnation. Equally it is to be hoped that in each case every step that can be taken to prevent that outcome has been taken. 3. It is the second case which is subject to moral and ethical review. There may be some who argue that there is no second case and that no-one 'in their right mind' would kill themselves (the implication being that anyone committing suicide is by definition depressed). But the phrase ' not in their right mind' does not necessarly mean depressed. A person trapped by a fire on the 20th floor is almost certainly 'not in their right mind' as the flames approach, neither are they in their 'right situation'. The change of circumstances imposes a change of criteria and a decision that makes no sense under normal circumstances(ie to jump from a 20th floor window) may be perfectly undestandable under the threat of being burnt to death. People with a chronic, debilitating disorder, are faced with just such a criteria altering situation and consequently should have the right to discuss the pros and cons of suicide without being shouteddown or accused of cowardice, moral or otherwise. Those in this situation cannot, however, avoid the fact that they do not operate in a vacuum and that whatever their decision is it is going to effect other people. Escaping pain and suffering in this way seems to enevitably cause it in those nearest and dearest us. In one case I know of, a death by suicide in 1946 is still affecting the lives of great grand children in 1998. That is a terrible legacy to leave and I believe one would need some powerful motivation before choosing to leave it. The debate still rages as to whether or not we have the right to end our lives at a time of our own choosing. Whatever the outcome we will still have the resposibility and duty not to inflict unneccessary pain and suffering on our families. I guess the debate will still be raging when 'Hamlet' reaches +/- 1000. Dennis. ************************************************** Dennis Greene 48/11 [log in to unmask] http://members.networx.net.au/~dennisg/ **************************************************