Hacker News Reader

Comment by tetha | Hacker News Reader

> Do people really think that if they restrict access to methods of suicide people will magically get better? If that's all that a society is doing then they're simply delaying the inevitable or condemning the person to continue suffering.

I will say there is a difference between very impulsive attempts at ending ones own life during a dark episode and more pre-planned attempts.

In the impulsive case, even minor obstructions can cause the immediate impulse to fade, avoiding a very final decision. Hence why many impulsive survivors don't attempt twice. For these cases, keeping knowledge contained is a good thing in my book. This kind is also why guns are terrifying. Guns are one millisecond of impulse for an eternity of consequence.

On the other hand, if someone is an incurable pain patient for 20 years and eventually decides to not be a pain patient anymore... there is very little you can do about it.

View on HN

> In the impulsive case, even minor obstructions can cause the immediate impulse to fade

This is the reasoning behind the limits on pack sizes of paracetamol (acetaminophen for Americans) in the UK, for example (you can buy only 32x 500mg pills at a time, and pack sizes are limited to 32 in pharmacies and 16 outside of pharmacies). There are about 10 shops within 10 minutes walk from each other near me that'd all sell it, so it's not like it'd be a barrier to someone desperately wanting a larger number of pills.

The decision followed investigation that showed that a lot of the time suicide attempts with paracetamol didn't even involve buying more, but simply consuming whatever was already in the house, and so even reducing the typical amount people would have available to them was seen as a potentially worthwhile.

It does appear that it had some effect:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK374099/

Though of course how many of those people go on to find another way is another question.

Just to add to this: Tylenol/paracetamol/acetaminophen can be a tragic method, because many people whose attempts fail in the short term, and who might otherwise recover, end up with liver failure and requiring a liver transplant.

Incidentally, its capacity for destroying your liver is also why this drug is especially dangerous for treating hangovers or for people who frequently drink alcohol.

Absolutely. It's pretty scary how little over the recommended doses you can go before you're in dangerous territory.

Ironically, the best way to combat paracetamol overdoses is to make it well known just how horrible a paracetamol death is.

I agree, but I don't think victims of suicidal impulses are negatively impacted by resources being out there.

They're probably not going to impulse search for a suicide method, impulse read pages of instructions, impulse order the necessary equipment, impulse prepare said equipment and then kill themselves.

Instead they'll likely just use a firearm, as you said, or a rope, both items that are immediately accessible to most people.

Suicide isn't always an 'I need to die right now' thing.

People can suffer with severe depression over many years despite trying multiple treatments, others mays want to end their own lives to avoid the most painful stage of a terminal illness. They want a fairly peaceful and painless way out, and don't want to leave a horror movie scene for somebody to clean up afterwards. They may consider their options over a fairly long period, and may research or even discuss methods online.

Sure, but these people should have that option, right? I'm just saying that removing resources about proven suicide methods does little to prevent impulsive suicides, while forcing those who thought long and hard about it to take a messy and less surefire way out.

Ideally, we'd have legal and well-regulated euthanasia, and those who are genuinely suffering with no real hope should have a better way out than 'blowing their brains out'.

But Canada's experiment with this is showing the potential dangers of that, of offering euthanasia as a 'solution' to poverty in old age.

> of offering euthanasia as a 'solution' to poverty in old age

Nobody needed Canada for that. That option has always been on the table and plenty of people have taken advantage of that. It's not as if Canada was keeping disabled people out of poverty before euthanasia was an option. I don't think very many people are saying that Canada shouldn't improve conditions for people just because poor could simply die with government approval instead of dying illegally they way they always had been.

Hm. I think about that the other way around.

If you make information about effective and readily available ways to end ones life available, people harboring bad depression will read that, acquire these tools and use them on impulse during a dark episode. And we can discuss control over one's own life and body more, but if depression forces a person to take their life because today was worse than yesterday, are they in control of their own situation? Those people need help to sort their own being out, not help to choose death.

And that is very different from someone overall committing to end their existence on their terms, because there is no way for it to become better. Knew a guy in chronic pain who spent half a year socializing their pets with a few friends, gave away all their equipment in a sport, canceled all contracts, wrote down his last will, setup a call to emergency services two days after and then went to a long sleep.

> If you make information about effective and readily available ways to end ones life available, people harboring bad depression will read that, acquire these tools and use them on impulse during a dark episode.

If you don't make that information accessible, people harboring bad depression wanting to kill themselves on impulse during a dark episode will just jump in front of traffic or off the nearest bridge or try whatever pills they can get their hands on or any other means they can find in total ignorance.

It's not about helping people choose death, it's about making sure that people who have already made the choice have access to the information they need to get their affairs in order and can end their lives as peacefully and assuredly as possible.

> I will say there is a difference between very impulsive attempts at ending ones own life during a dark episode and more pre-planned attempts.

I'd argue that the people who are seeking out and participating in online forums looking for tips or directions for building devices to allow them die on their own terms aren't "very impulsive attempts at ending ones own life"

Nobody should make the decision to end their life impulsively, and preventing people from being able to access information on the topic may actually cause people to act without due consideration. I'd much rather have people taking the time create accounts, reading posts from others who are struggling, and gathering information on what to do or not do then going over that information as they evaluate their options.

"keeping knowledge contained" could mean people doing whatever comes to mind the moment it enters their head.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com