Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Ikea_Man t1_jc78aii wrote

think it's wild that it's even a debate if we should be allowed to do this or not. why is bodily autonomy SUCH a hotly debated topic in the US?

it's my goddamn body, if i want to die, see ya

253

rideontime87 t1_jc78kp6 wrote

society is build on the misery of the underclasses and we can't let them know about the cheat code to escaping it 🙃

138

0rvilleTootenbacher t1_jc7dgzc wrote

The elite wouldn't have any wage slaves if they all checked out early.

51

Wireless_Panda t1_jc7vxog wrote

“Hey please give me a better quality of life”

Nah

“K I’m gonna go kms”

Wait shit

41

MelancholyMushroom t1_jc8irj0 wrote

You joke but that is exactly that. Rich people have options to kill themselves. Easier to hide and get away with. Us? Not so much.

13

CrittyJJones t1_jc9nvpx wrote

This isn’t the reason for this. Someone who is terminally ill is most likely not in the workforce force. It’s more religious dogma.

3

SlackGhost t1_jc9rbp4 wrote

Also making some groups of people a lot of money. (I hate that I felt I had to type this.)

2

Judgementpumpkin t1_jc9pn2d wrote

It is, it’s the ultimate: “You clocked out 15 minutes early, that’s a strike and you’re stealing company time!1!1!!1”

3

Vegetable-Language45 t1_jc8ebay wrote

A lot of states criminalized suicide because the logic was you are destroying the kings property.

13

Williamplimpy t1_jc8ibbl wrote

Rich people also succeed or attempt to kill themselves, and as with most suicidal people, it’s usually out of irrational depression, not the calculated pain that the article is about.

In the standard suicide case, a majority of people say who survive say they do not wish they had died.

Don’t try to shove everything into a class framework; there is inequality, there is exploitation, but to ignore the direct causes of things is madness.

−5

desubot1 t1_jc7mnn1 wrote

>it's my goddamn body, if i want to die, see ya

you see thats where you are wrong kiddo. not to certain groups of people.

otherwise abortion, gender affirmation, lgbtq and every other hot button issues wouldn't be an issue in the first place.

34

Ikea_Man t1_jc7mure wrote

for sure, i'm saying it's a shame it has to be this way

"certain groups of people" are awful and i wish they did not vote

13

iowaman623 t1_jc7nff0 wrote

Seems like a good thing for situations like this. One big hurdle that needs addressing if it is to be legal (in a widespread way) is how to determine if someone can make that decision.

A concern here is coercion. Is the person of sound mind and do they want to go through with it. Is there outside influence pushing for this outcome? Is there an inheritance that family members are seeking? Parents that don't want to be parents, ie what age is okay to be able to invoke this legal right.

It looks like this is how it is currently deploying throughout states is for people w/terminal illness etc. where there is a lot less doubt about what decision they wish to make. This is a good starting point for informing policy about making laws like this more available/widespread if needed.

11

calm_chowder t1_jc8tqqc wrote

Currently most death with dignity laws require a sort of hearing where not only is the person themselves examined/evaluated but their doctors have to also testify that the person is suffering and that suffering can't be alleviated, and that the person is of sound enough mind to understand the decision they're making. People don't just walk into suicide booths like in Futurama and end it on a whim.

In fact that's exactly why death with dignity laws exist. So suicide is available with oversight to those who truly need it. Not wanting to raise you kids or your heirs wanting an inheritance would never, ever, ever pass an oversight board. Most (if not every single one) of your examples is completely absurd and shows your absolute ignorance.

If you don't know fuck all about a topic you know you can just not comment, right?

7

iowaman623 t1_jcag3or wrote

Thank you for the information! That's great to hear.

0

ElderWandOwner t1_jc9r1q7 wrote

It's such a hotly debated topic because roughly 40% of the US wants to control the bodies of everyone else.

4

[deleted] t1_jc81l6t wrote

[removed]

−15

Ikea_Man t1_jc82ryc wrote

could probably revise to: "should be able to do what i want with my body as long as it doesn't affect anyone". killing yourself to avoid an illness doesn't affect anyone

>I don’t support the idea that suicide should be legal more broadly.

well that industry is thriving with or without the legality of the act really being involved.

should just give people more options so it's a bit more dignified

19

BrownEggs93 t1_jc85s2o wrote

> Essentially the same concept as putting a pet down, it should be done to end incurable suffering.

God yes. Have you witnessed a parent go through prolonged suffering? Humans are OK with putting a pet down, but Mom or Dad? No! We will pony up $$$ for treatment after treatment after treatment only to delay the inevitable after lots of suffering. I want out when that time comes for me.

14

FindingMoi t1_jcar409 wrote

I’ve been there for several family members passing in hospice situations and none of it was the peaceful “end of suffering” quiet death you see in the movies. In one case, I watched a family member pass mid scream (he had cancer and died over a holiday weekend so there weren’t any nurses available to come give him iv meds to make him comfortable— but that’s a rant for another time). I think a lot of people who are against it don’t realize how brutal those deaths can be and think that they’ll get more time AND that calm peaceful departure and that’s just often not the case.

1

BrownEggs93 t1_jcas2wr wrote

That must have been tough. We had two peaceful passings, frankly. Asleep and never woke up. But years of expensive medical stuff delaying the inevitable. Someone's lifestyle slipped away and they became bitter and angry at the changes and the family more or less supported it because they were expected to. It was terrible and sad. Caregiver burnout is real.

1

FindingMoi t1_jcauxbm wrote

I’m glad your family had peaceful deaths. I think everyone deserves that.

The expensive part is important to mention too… medical expenses can wipe out money that was intended to take care of family. Not that the money is the most important thing but when the difference is between family being left with enough to cover final expenses vs being in crazy debt (which can happen in states like mine, PA, where children are on the hook for those expenses), we should let the person decide what they want.

My only concession to those against it is that I agree there should be plenty of safeguards, particularly when there is money involved. But there’s no reason why safeguards can’t be put in place and people can’t get the dignity they deserve.

2

SheepishSheepness t1_jc8foxf wrote

This is a false equivalence; bodily autonomy only concerns matters specific to your body. Driving a car affects the bodies of people around you, putting them in danger. When people argue for bodily autonomy, they want the right to make decisions about their body which don’t infringe on the material well-being of others.

14

[deleted] t1_jc8id07 wrote

[removed]

−7

[deleted] t1_jc9osz9 wrote

End the stigma then. A person in so much pain that they wish to die shouldn’t have to worry about how cousin Johnny might feel about their decision.

1

calm_chowder t1_jc8vii1 wrote

Bodily autonomy does NOT mean "you can do whatever you want with no limits" and it doesn't mean complete immunity from the law, it means each individual has the right to choose what is and isn't forced on their body, generally in a medical or psychological sense (such as the gender you identify as). That the person controls was is and isn't done to them. It doesn't mean speeding as fast as you want or unfettered access to regulated prescription medication or the ability to do literally whatever you want in larger society with no limitations.

This thread is full of such ignorant, uninformed, absurd takes where the commenter clearly doesn't have any clue what a term actually means. I mean I get that this is reddit but how in tf can you be so ignorant about a simple concept like bodily autonomy especially when it's in the news so much lately? Too much right wing media lying to you about how scary giving people bodily autonomy would be or just stupid?

3

xxBurn007xx t1_jc8d0wf wrote

As a person who's sister took her life at 34, I will never be ok with this. You can't tell me that it was ok to do. The loss of someone you love in that way....I would never want anyone to feel loss in that way.

−18

calm_chowder t1_jc8wqtc wrote

That's a tragedy and I've also dealt with the suicide of a loved one, and they were only 18.

What people don't seem to realize is death with dignity laws are not suicide booths anyone having a bad day or suffering a treatable mental illness can just show up at on a whim and die. They involve panels and hearings involving the person and their doctors to ensure only those who are suffering with no prospect of alleviation have the option to (as the term says) die with dignity.

You can be anti-suicide and still support death with dignity, if you'd just take the time to educate yourself instead of making completely wrong assumptions based on your personal tragedy. It's terrible your sister committed suicide but she would absolutely not be eligible for "death with dignity" end of life care, she would be directed to services which could help her even if that means inpatient care.

Seriously, the number of people in this thread who have absolutely no clue what death with dignity actually is but have strong opinions against it due to their own ignorance is fucking embarrassing.

5