Re:The Euthanasia That Wasn’t
by Dylan16807 on Wednesday June 05, 2019 @08:59PM
(#20110607)
Most of the time it's not very hard to figure out if a suicidal impulse is temporary, though. As a basic filter, ask several times over the course of a week and see if they're consistent.
Re:The Euthanasia That Wasn’t
by bubblewrap on Thursday June 06, 2019 @08:20AM
(#20113788)
A week??? You can't be serious.
Re:The Euthanasia That Wasn’t
by Dylan16807 on Thursday June 06, 2019 @02:34PM
(#20117561)
You have to explain why you object or I can't respond properly.
But I think you're saying a week isn't enough to determine things for sure? If so, you need to read what I said more closely.
I said a week is a basic filter, that can figure out an urge is temporary most of the time. It won't tell you an urge is not-temporary. It either says "temporary" or "unsure".
Re:The Euthanasia That Wasn’t
by bubblewrap on Thursday June 06, 2019 @04:25PM
(#20118740)
OK that wasn't clear. But then it also doesn't seem useful for the goal to determine if somebody is permanently serious and should be left alone to their suicide. But I don't think I agree with that approach, anyway.
Re:The Euthanasia That Wasn’t
by Dylan16807 on Thursday June 06, 2019 @06:22PM
(#20119819)
I think it's a good first step. It also gets them talking with a psychologist, ideally.
The trouble is when this idea becomes circular, e.g. "anyone who would choose to kill themselves even though their life doesn't seem that bad to me must be in the temporary throes of delusion and irrationality."
In other words, to apply your proposal would require determining whether someone is "in the temporary throes of delusion and irrationality" without knowing or factoring in whether they are suicidal. That's probably easy enough in the two obvious examples you listed, but accidental deaths due to intoxication or recklessness are already a less tricky issue than what we normally refer to as "suicide."