Venting The lack of acceptance of the right to die leads to CTBs (with additional quotes and examples)

[TAW122]

I've written an article before titled "The Inevitability of Breadcrumbs… (pertaining to CTB)", which was about how people would not (even if they wanted to) open up or reveal their intention to CTB due to the risks and consequences of doing so prior to the (presumably successful) attempt. Therefore, the survivors would often find out after the fact, or otherwise the aftermath of one's CTB and being 'surprised'. This is due to society's attitude towards CTB and the ever growing paternalistic and tyrannical State (the government) when it comes to preventing CTB at all costs.

However, in this thread, I've just found two good posts (which I've put into the boxes in italics and bold) on the suicidebereavement subreddit that further reinforce my points.

The first quote in the thread, by an unknown or deleted user:

Of those who survive, they're going to be more likely to say they're glad that they didn't succeed, for a variety of reasons, cognitive dissonance being one. Then there's conditioning; these people know that if they don't provide the "right" response when asked, their freedom will be limited. There's social pressure; not wanting to make someone feel bad. Even if someone has legitimate reasons for why they would be better off dead, and they're willing to talk about it, the anti-suicide folks are going to try to censor them and shut them down. Including on reddit.

Second quote by the user, ScorpionT16:

Often people don't seek help from others or speak out because the advice is the same old given over and over. Things like it will pass, stay strong, we're here for you, don't worry, etc... They often feel life isn't in their hands and that brings forth spiraling thoughts. The one thing at that moment they feel is in their control, is whether to live or not. And if help is seeked, people will rightfully say not to end their life, which further makes them feel less In control of their life.

With those quotes in mind, I would state that from my previous thread about the inevitable breadcrumbs that someone who is determined and serious to CTB, they wouldn't ever open up and thus, for the people who experience the loss, it would inevitably be a 'surprise' and there would be breadcrumbs due to the fact that one simply cannot open up about their (true) intentions without risk of intervention, possibly exacerbating their existing predicament. So as long as society and the State continues to have the anti-CTB stance, CTB prevention at all costs, including tyrannical and paternalistic means of temporary deprivation of one's freedom under the guise of help and insiduous benevolence, then there will always be people who end up following through (some successfully) and the bereaved (survivors of those who known someone who has CTB'd) will be left to pick up the pieces. Finally, I do want to say that for those who ended up being bereaved, yes their pain is valid as well and I don't want to discount that, but also society collectively needs to change their attitude on the right to die and CTB if they wish to reduce the amount of potential CTBs in general.

 

[Kurwenal]

Very eloquently written, as I have come to expect from you. I respect deeply your acknowledgement of the pain of those left behind. Meanwhile, the cogs of a society where 'death is never the answer' keep on churning.

Of those who survive, they're going to be more likely to say they're glad that they didn't succeed, for a variety of reasons, cognitive dissonance being one. Then there's conditioning; these people know that if they don't provide the "right" response when asked, their freedom will be limited. There's social pressure; not wanting to make someone feel bad.

This one hit me very closely. I distinctly remembering a psychologist telling me some statistic (made-up on the spot or not, I couldn't say) of how large a percentage of suicide attempt survivors were glad that they survived, that they could then turn their lives around, so on, so on. I genuinely believe there must be some out there who do feel that way. Perhaps most likely those for whom suicide was an impulsive decision driven by a sudden event or change that just 'snapped' something within them, and in that moment, they saw no way out. For the people who attempted suicide, survived and were truly, actually happy to live afterwards, I am glad. I am glad that they were able to find a path afterwards. But I would agree that social conditioning will play a role in who is happy they survived and who is stuck pretending they are happy they survived. My counterargument to the psychologist in question was that she didn't have statistics on what percentage of successful suicides were glad to have escaped the prison of their lives. I knew then that it was a stupid thing to say, and I know now that it is stupid too. But really, we don't know. My personal belief and sincere hope is that those who succeeded found the peace they so desperately needed, in the form of an endless nothingness.

I really don't see society's stance on suicide changing in our lifetimes. I think the fear of death is very hard-coded into humans, and the drive to project that fear onto others so they are the same as you is also very strong. People don't like different. People don't like it when you look different, when you think something different. They want us all to fit the mould. Unless something drastic can change that, I can't see society broadly coming to terms with accepting suicide as an option for those in endless physical and/or mental anguish.

 

[_Gollum_]

Thank you for bringing this point up.

One of the main reasons suicidal people are discouraged from ending their lives is due to the pain of bereavement. However, it somehow doesn't occur to a lot of people that a significant portion of this pain is due to the circumstances of the death, not the death itself. Namely, that it came as a surprise, and that they are left with questions that will never be answered.

But if suicide was accepted as a valid, dignified option, the circumstances would be entirely different: everything would be out in the open, so family and friends would have time beforehand to let the reality sink in, spend time with their loved one, and ask any questions they may have. I'm not saying that would entirely do away with the pain, but it would certainly alleviate it, both for the ones left behind and the one CTBing. One of the questions that comes up the most on this forum is about how to make things less painful for their families; though some see us as selfish, this is in fact a major concern for a lot of suicidal people, including myself. For some of us it even stays our hand for years, or decades even.

It would be to the benefit of us all for suicide to be destigmatized and treated with respect.

 

[TAW122]

@Kurwenal Thank you once again for the compliments and yes, I do think it's very unlikely to see significant enough changes in society to where they would be accepting of death as a valid option. Though I think if a major step towards accepting suicide/death as an valid option not just for the terminally ill, but those who have neverending, physical or mental chronic conditions, that would be a big step in the right direction.

@_Gollum_ Very true. Yes, I do fully agree that if suicide is seen as a valid, dignified option, there would be much less skirting around in secrecy, planning, acquiring, and even going about the actual attempt itself, and it would certainly ease a lot of pressure if it is no longer seen as a pathology and illness, but as an actual choice. This would perhaps even allow some people to hold off on potential CTB as that would allow them to be able to express themselves without being shutdown or threatened with temporary loss of civil liberties (under the guise of help).

 

[-Link-]

I believe it's unrealistic to anticipate any civilized society would ever agree to just idly stand by while someone ends their life outside the confines of a medically-supported, legally-structured process. If this is what's being asked of the general public, then I believe the argument is lost before it even begins.

On the topic of MAID (medical assistance in dying) and the argument for its expansion to include those with non-terminal illness (including the mentally ill), phraseology will be an important factor in any context in which the goal is to persuade the skeptical.

Suicidality will be a disqualifying factor for MAID, so the word "suicide" (and its ilk, eg. "CTB") is ideally omitted altogether from the discussion.

"Suicide" could be reframed as "medically assisted death."

"The lack of acceptance of the right to die leads to higher suicide rates," could be reframed, "Access to medically assisted dying services paradoxically promotes continued life."

I'm also dubious of the phrase "right to die". While it's technically accurate, it's also crude and negative-slanted. Depending on context, this could be reframed as "freedom of choice", "the right to choose", "access to MAID", "the right to end one's suffering", etc.

If we want to be heard and if we want to see change, then we must account for this being a particularly controversial topic that tends to provoke an emotional response in people. We need to bear in mind the perspectives of our audience and think about what they might need to hear (and how they might need to hear it) in order to minimize the risk of alienating them and to give them the best chance to see it from our point of view.

 

[WhatCouldHaveBeen32]

Don't forget, although this isn't true for everyone, if assisted suicide was legal and you'd be able to choose to go whenever you want and there was overwhelming positivity regarding your choice, you might even begin to have second thoughts about going through with it.

That maybe for the moment, given that so many people respect your choices and are eager to give you the option of a peaceful death, that they actually understand and respect your choices; at that point some might be inclined to try and live as hopeless as it is just for the fact that they are not as alone and misunderstood as before.

This is proven by the fact that the mere OPTION of CTB for many people alleviated the need to go through with it as soon as possible and delayed their suicide plans for quite a bit.

 

[TAW122]

@-Link- Yes I think what you stated is true about a civilized society, especially in modern times. However, the lack of MAID (medical assistance in dying) for most of the world (and even in jurisdictions where it is available, the eligibility criteria is very narrow, hard to access and with so much bureaucracy) is also part of the reason for people who would attempt to end one's own suffering by one's own hands be it successful or not. Though with that said, yes, if to change society, one of the first steps would be to expand eligibility for MAID to include those who are not necessarily terminally ill (with six months or less to live) but also those who have permanent, chronic conditions that will not abate and one suffers until natural causes. That would be a major step in the right direction and may start to alleviate some of the more impulsive acts of suicide.

Of course, to try to get the audience, especially the majority of people to at least open their minds to consider the position of legalizing MAID for places that don't have it as well as expanding eligibility for more than just terminal illnesses, yes the rewording of such terms would be important to get them see our point of view. While it may still spark outrage and hostility by some people who are close-minded and hard to change, at least the more open-minded and reasonable populace would perhaps start to see our point of view as more reasonable and at least become more tolerant. I do believe that ultimately, while it is unlikely to see a modern society (even within our lifetimes or beyond) that would openly and without any opposition towards one's ultimate act of self determination by one's own hand, at least MAID could be more widespread in places where it was previously not legal and in places that have MAID to at least become more liberal in their eligibility critiera.

Speaking of that, I'm hoping that in the UK that the assisted dying bill will pass either end of 2025 or into 2026 and become official law, which would be a major step in the right direction for those living in the UK. Additionally, in the US, just in May 2025 (this year) Delaware became the 11th state to legalize medical assistance in dying and 12th jurisdiction in the US (which includes the District of Columbia).

@WhatCouldHaveBeen32 This is an really interesting position and I do think it's possible for such a scenario to be true. In most of human history and even in modern days, especially in present day, there has been a lot of repulsion towards anything related to death or dying, especially self-termination by oneself. Since self-termination (suicide) has been made so taboo, heavily stigmatized, and even more so with the ever growing paternalistic policies and measures set to scope out, prevent, and even make it more and more difficult to do so effectively, reliably, those who really want to go are often left with taking additional (unwanted) risks and even resorting to less reliable means (due to having fewer and fewer options of reliable methods). So in a sense, the world we live in presently is where people are always, by default, pushed and forced to live and if they even 'try' to exit on their own terms, especially unsuccessfully, they are punished with detentions, temporary holds, sectioning (if severe enough), and other consequences. Therefore, people would be reluctant to live life because it is constantly forced upon at every sentient moment and society and government does all it can to make sure that one is unable or makes it extremely difficult to exit by one's own hands.

If the inverse happens as you presented, where in an world where assisted death was legalized and readily accessible, even more liberal than in it's current state, yes, there are people who may even decide to live an additional month, a year, a few years, and longer because they know they have the option to go at a moment's notice. They would be more at peace instead of dreading a reliable exit, acquiring and planning such an exit, or even taking unnecessary risks to do so (attempts). Mainly the urgency (for those who are determined to go and wouldn't give any hints or avoid revealing their true intentions) comes from the fact that death is denied or made very infeasible and difficult to get, hence the result is a lot of people who plan, acquire, and act in secrecy do so with risks and often aren't able to do so cleanly or peacefully, taking unnecessary risks with varying results.