• Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    6 days ago

    Which is why people should also have safe, reliable options to terminate their lives, when they no longer want to exist. Or is that the bridge too far?

    • inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 days ago

      Or is that the bridge too far?

      I certainly don’t think so. The right to live as you please should also extend to not live as you please. However just as we should make knowledgeable medical professionals available to those seeking gender or reproductive care, we should do the same seeking of life care.

      I get regular blood tests to ensure medication is working as intended, so mental health screening should be applied to those suffering from depression or other mental health issues to ensure that their given adequate alternatives. While still remaining available to those suffering chronic conditions that significantly affect quality of life. I am also a disabled person who live in persistent pain without a clear end date. Who is to say when exactly another person life suffering should be extended purely for the sake of extending life irrespective of the quality?

      At the end of the day, bodily autonomy is the ideal but informed consent given by medical professional about risks and alternatives is the method.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      They prefer to make it harder on these people…

      You wouldn’t want to lose a perfectly exploitable wage slave.