• 0 Posts
  • 32 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle







  • xxd@discuss.tchncs.detoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldtl;fp
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Yeah, I agree with all of that and that’s all valid! And I know that it’s not their actual train of thinking, I just think that this leaves on a weak argument and that just feels kind of… defeating, you know? I’m all for blocking fact and logic-resistant people, I just really don’t want to give them the feeling that they’ve won the discussion. But I guess you’re right and with people like these you just can’t end on a high note.


  • xxd@discuss.tchncs.detoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldtl;fp
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    4 months ago

    I generally agree with what you wrote, but just saying “I ain’t reading all that, free Palestine” is a bad way to phrase it. Only a few days ago, someone posted this which boils down to the same phrasing, but arrives at the conclusion “trump 2024!”. Saying something like “this is obviously a manipulative and false narrative” would be way better imho.










  • I don’t think your distinction makes sense.

    You’re saying most mental health/suicide cases have hope, and thants probably true! But the article wasn’t “every suicidal person granted euthanasia approval”, it was approved for one very extreme case of mental suffering with no indication of improving. That would be like saying “most cases of pain still have hope”. Yes exactly, they do, but there are rare, chronic cases where euthanasia may be a valid option, right? And just as much as suicidality is just ‘a symptom of something’ else, isn’t pain also just a symptom of something else?

    And obviously we should help suicidal people to improve their mental health, but in her case she has been struggling since childhood with no indication of improvement. So how was this “the wrong decision” for her?



  • Have you read the article?

    Under Dutch law, to be eligible for an assisted death, a person must be experiencing “unbearable suffering with no prospect of improvement”. They must be fully informed and competent to take such a decision.

    After 10 years, there was “nothing left” in terms of treatment. “I knew I couldn’t cope with the way I live now.”

    In the three and a half years this has taken, I’ve never hesitated about my decision.

    How is this a temporary and overcomable problem? It seems clear that it is not temporary and no kind of treatment worked for her. As per the law, there must be unbearable suffering without prospect of improvement, and during the multiple stages of this process, apparently no one came to the conclusion that that wasn’t the case for her. So how can you make that assessment?