Been Thinking a lot about Suicide and Death Recently

That's kind of the rationale for why "mental health professionals" commit their patients to an involuntary hold in a psychiatric ward, if the patient says that they have imminent plans to commit suicide.



Uh....let me see...NO. You can talk earnestly, but the person on the end of the phone only has one stock answer, which is that you shouldn't kill yourself. And most suicide hotlines will sic the police on their callers as well at the drop of a hat (Samaritans being the one exception that I'm aware of). Empathy and compassion is not having a standardised answer that applies to all people, and it certainly isn't empathetic or compassionate to betray a vulnerable person's trust by calling the police on someone who already felt that they couldn't trust anyone enough to talk openly about their feelings (thus confirming that they couldn't trust anyone).



The fact that someone had a different outlook on life at an earlier time, and could potentially have a changed outlook again at some future time does not warrant depriving such a person of their bodily autonomy and imprisoning them for thoughtcrimes against your pro-life philosophy. I believe that people should have the right to access whatever help they want to get through their negative frame of mind and suicidal ideation. The fact that people deserve the right to the help that they desire and feel will benefit them does not entail that nobody should ever have the right to commit suicide.



Other people are other people. Having a different disposition from another person who shares similar circumstances is not a pathology, and having a more pessimistic or negative outlook in light of a change in life circumstances or access to new information is not a pathology.



The general preference for remaining alive over dying is something that obtains as a consequence of evolution, it isn't objectively more rational than wishing to cease existing (and there is a good case for saying that it's actually irrational). Behaviour which demonstrates an aversion to death obtains also in animals that don't have the cognitive capacity to weigh up the benefits and debits of remaining in life; it isn't a product of reasoning, it exists because organisms which did not avoid death would not have made for successful specimens, and therefore those lineages died out. There's certainly nothing there which warrants the thoughtcrime laws that you wish to continue to see imposed on people who have decided that death would be preferable. 

It's fairly natural for one's sense of optimism and exuberance to fade as one ages, and as one is exposed to new life experiences and new information, so I don't see how the fact that they were previously unsuicidal is proof that the suicidal phase is always a symptom of madness. And right, it's possible to reindoctrinate people back into the cult of life, especially if they were emotionally suicidal but not intellectually and philosophically committed to suicide. And those who have 'survived' a suicide attempt would also know better than to vouchsafe that they felt that they were acting rationally when they attempted suicide, because they know that any such admission would see them incarcerated again, or at the very least would cause those around them to monitor them more closely.



You don't owe it to anyone to charge them with a thoughtcrime, and if the person accepted the 'help' and still decided, after a long period of treatment and introspective reflection, that they wanted to die, then you'd seek to have them re-imprisoned, because you believe that your philosophy is objectively true.



Why is it worth the risk, when a completed suicide can never result in regret or deprivation? If we were to imagine a scenario where everyone could have access to a painless and safe method of suicide, what would you be protecting people from by denying them access to this? Do you believe that there is an immaterial soul which continues on after death and then floats about the ether moping about how they had been deprived of seeing the Mets win the World Series, and all for the want of well meaning meddlers who know best infringing their liberty by imposing thoughtcrime legislation?





I haven't stated that they should be denied the opportunity to accept whatever help you think should be given. I've only stated that ultimately, they should have the right to choose for themselves without interference from those who think that they know better. I also think that it would be a lot easier for people to readily accept therapeutic help if they didn't fear being imprisoned and closely monitored 'for their own good', and if the psychiatric establishment respected freedom of choice. 

I'm fine with you thinking that my views are "inhumane, and needlessly cruel". I think that your views are also inhumane and needlessly cruel (I'd also add in the adjectives "atavistic" and "cowardly") and contribute to the fact that many people are too afraid to speak about their problems and attempt/commit suicide in gruesome ways without ever having the chance to confide in someone else without worrying about it being used against them to curtail their liberty.