Hacker News Reader

Comment by stef25 | Hacker News Reader

This has happened several times here in Belgium as well, including for a victim of sexual assault.

Apart from fries and chocolate this is what we're best at ... granting approval for euthanasia :/

EDIT I'm not at all against euthanasia, it's just a bit macabre that this is what Belgium excels at

I didn’t understand why you put a sad face/frowny at the end of your last sentence. IMO, granting the freedom for people to choose to die (with checks and balances) is a good thing. I’m sure there will always be debates on whether the approval for one person was correct or wrong. The discomfort that most people have about other people dying cannot be easily alleviated.

Believe it or not suicide is legal.

> Believe it or not suicide is legal.

Is it thought? If you don't succeed you basically are incarcerated by way of mental institutions (at least in the USA). Obviously they can't hold your un-alived body "accountable" but it sometimes does feel like suicide is illegal.

Depends on jurisdiction probably. Though if you succeeded, there isn't anyone to punish, cause you are... dead.

I don't disagree with you, it's good that we have these laws it's just a bit macabre

My grandfather, from Belgium, suffered from mesothelioma - I flew back to see him and attended the conversations and sign offs, secondary sign offs, etc necessary for him to be able to be euthanized. He was already in a lot of pain and his quality of life was very different than the man I knew growing up. I was already back in the States when the waiting period was over, and we had a final video call prior to him being administered the medications that would ease him in to cardiac arrest -- he had deteriorated so much more in that month. Death was unfortunately the only outcome in his scenario, and giving him the ability to pass away while at home surrounded by loved ones, was a choice he had and took. I am very Americanized, having been here in the States for so long now, and it was a bit surreal going through all this, but, I am very happy he had that option.

If you look at this[1] 2023 report on euthanasia in Belgium, I don't think the numbers are anywhere near a height that it would be something I would say they "excel" at.

[1] https://wfrtds.org/belgium-2023-report-on-euthanasia/

We put way too much value on human life. If someone isn't interested in existing anymore that should be completely acceptible.

There are people who argue that anyone who wants to die is not mentally well enough to decide to die. Can't say I totally disagree...

What if they are in constant mental pain and anguish, but otherwise a sane person?

If that's really true, then perhaps. But those people would probably argue that these two conditions are mutually exclusive. Again, can't say I totally disagree.

If only there was another way... We can't fix it now, but if we could put that person in suspended animation or some other kind of stasis, we might revive them once treatment was available...

This all is really sad and I don't wish anyone to suffer. But I also don't want people to die because they thought their situation is hopeless and it might turn out it isn't...

none of that should even matter. remove morals from the equation. remove religious conditioning. we are all just animals. total freedom and agency would suggest that you should have just as much control over whether you live or die as anything else in your life.

no justification required. you want out? ok, cya bud.

I for one am glad that it's not easy to commit suicide, because my sister tried and failed and after 10 years is finaly better. She has scares on the hands that she's hiding with tattoos. Mental problems can be resolved. Not all of them and not easy but it can work out.

Everybody, just like animals, is able to simply starve. The rest is just an ill mind speaking out of despair.

what is the consequence of allowing someone to die? regardless of the circumstance. there is absolutely zero reason to force someone to live if they do not want to.

a bird hits a glass window of a skyscraper and falls to the ground. no big deal.

a squirrel is run over by a truck. no big deal.

an individual is sick of living and decides to leave, no big deal.

The consequence is that a unique intelligent, sentient being ceases to exist. That's absolutely terrible. And worse, they might die without receiving proper treatment or it might become available soon after.

> The consequence is that a unique intelligent, sentient being ceases to exist.

Why is this such a bad thing? I see no issue here. Forcing another to exist just because they have some kind of untapped value that hasn't manifest yet is antiquated thinking.

Obviously rehabilitation and therapy should be on the table, to try and bring someone back to normalcy - but if that fails we should not falter.

It's a bad thing because I have personal experience with the court taking over my decision making when I wasn't in a mental state to do it for myself. I'm immensely grateful even though I didn't think so at the time, fought it and thought they have no right to do so. I had no idea things can change so much and wasn't thinking clearly, life is beautiful now.

There is usually a religious reasoning behind such people’s opinion/argument, not logical reasoning.

If someone doesn’t want to live, why does the state, or anyone for that matter, get a say? A person didn’t have a say in being born, they should at least be allowed to die on their terms.

BTW, the same states don’t have a problem sending soldiers to their deaths when it suits them.

Usually, but not always. In my case, I'm against religion and my state can't (or shouldn't be able to) send me anywhere - but it has a duty to protect me from myself if I'm unfit to decide.

And how does one decide that you’re unfit to decide?

Well, I lived through that personally. There was a court hearing where they appointed a legal representative (an attorney) and a public defender, and then they argued about it for several hours during multiple hearings. The representative was checking on me, my conditions at the hospital and my treatment frequently and reported it to the court. As soon as they all deemed me to be back in my own head, they gave me my rights back.

I hated that they took my agency back then, but looking back it was fair and all of the people involved tried their best to represent my interests, and I'm grateful they did it.

That is a special case and I agree that in that case authorization is needed since older people can be especially vulnerable to evil relatives.

How about, one is allowed to go to some authority or doctor, 3 times at the space of 10 days, and express their desire. They can always change their mind. At the end of their 3 visits they are given a prescription. This is just an example, there can be other ways.

Edit: to clarify, 3 visits, 10 days apart is 30 days. And, the person has to do themselves so obviously need to be healthy and the person receiving the affidavit/declaration can notice if there are any mental health concerns. Make it 6 visits for total of min 60 days. As long as there is a good and relatively easy process I’m good.

It’s good that the process was thorough but your still left with a process that’s somewhat arbitrary because someone has to decide for you.

I think this is one of those situations where there will never be a good solution. Especially for mental health related issues.

I’m glad to hear it worked out for you though in the end.

Where can I apply to have opposition to all of my opinions recategorized as mental incompetence? Man, things would be so much easier.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com