Why? There is no more personal thing than your own life. Why should not we be able to choose when to end it? People will be doing it anyways, just in all the gruesome ways it is usually done. Hopefully this container doubles as a coffin that can be either buried or burnt.

Because we cannot even define what "clear state of mind" is in a way that an AI would be able to determine.

Sucide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

Usually, atleast a few other methods should be used to help, before deciding on suicide (with a notable exception of being close to a very painful, inevitable death, and just wanting to shorten the suffering).

Without being at all patronising, you're lucky to be able to have such a binary view of mental and physical health.

There are so many non-temporary conditions that people live with that can lead to wanting people, very rationally, to speed up end of life.

Sure... but they should atleast try some kind of therapy, before deciding to end it all permanently.

Please advise: what therapy could help the terminally ill father of a friend of mine? Stage 4 lung cancer. Talk to a psychologist? The only thing that "helped" him were large doses of opiate painkillers.

What's wrong with large doses of optiate painkillers, if you're terminally ill? Addicition isn't a worry, certainly.

The side effects of most pain killers can also be extremely unpleasant. You'll have more time, but you'll be miserable or marginally conscious for most of it.

And they don't always work. Look up intractable pain.

In case of opiates, what side-effects are you thinking of? Constipation is an easy fix. Assuming proper use and dosage, opiates are way safer than NSAIDs.

Yes, this is the exception i put in the braces in my previous post.

But being physically ok, but having depression is something that can be solved by therapy.. or atleast should be tried before ending it

Presumably most if not all people who end up doing an assisted suicide have tried one or more methods to ameliorate their issue before they go to the more extreme approach. Do you have some reason to believe they do not?

I still think there should be a human safeguard to verify that everything else has been tried.

A few questions and an AI box is not 'that'.

What kind of therapy ought someone consider before deciding to end it because their terminal illness is excruciatingly painful?

Studies of psychedelic therapy for terminally ill patients have had some super interesting results, there’s a section on the topic in Michael Pollan’s book How to Change Your Mind which I found fascinating. Seems there is a lot of potential for helping people deal with the existential dread and get more enjoyment from their remaining time with friends and family. Here’s an article for reference: https://nyulangone.org/news/mental-health-benefits-one-dose-...

That said I’m a Swiss citizen and knew someone with a terminal illness who used the “Exit” program and it seemed extremely humane and a positive thing overall and I fully support having it available to everyone in that situation.

Yes, this is the exception i put in the braces in my previous post.

But being physically ok, but having depression is something that can be solved by therapy.. or atleast should be tried before ending it

That’s nice and all, but but in the real world, those things aren’t always available (for any number of reasons, not just financial). In the absence of other solutions, sometimes the best choice may be to end a life rather than continue suffering.

Curious as to why you see parent as lucky to hold a binary view, if you care to say. I would say holding such a view is unlucky. Perhaps I’m missing something important.

The use of the cliche "Sucide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem" demonstrates binary thinking, as though there is only one temporary problem and no compounding factors.

It's also a pretty shitty thing to say. It's designed to make people who may want to die feel worse about themselves by calling their feelings merely "temporary".

I was asking weego why they consider ajsnigrutin lucky to hold the binary view you outline.

Sure, but publicly, and I had a response (as I was thinking the same thing).

The part you didn't respond to is why they are "lucky" to be able to hold a view...

My guess is that if you have such a binary view of the world, you might have lived a simple or sheltered or privileged life.

Ah, I see, my mistake. I agree with your guess.

Suicide is a permanent solution. Sometimes it’s a solution to a temporary problem; other times to a permanent problem.

That is just a silly quote/generalization.

As an example: Old age is a permanent, and worsening, problem. Why should one be forced to live to an old age where they are dependent on others, IF they don’t want to?

Many old people just stop eating

So, what harm is it to try a few talks with a therapist, try to fix the problem, and if it doesn't work, you can still kill yourself?

Even buying guns in some states has a 3 day cool-off period.

Perhaps it could work with a much more extended cool-off period. Over the course of a year, the person needs to affirm they want to go through with it on the last day of each month. If over the last 12 consecutive months they have said yes 12 times, then assist them, otherwise no.

Yep, with therapy in between... Of course, the inevitable painful death being an exception, that can be done a lot faster.

Anything is better than AI in a 3d printed box.

I’m personally biased towards hope. Meaning that I keep thinking that things will be better and that I will reach a point where things will be meaningful. I call this a bias because I can remember the past and how long I’ve been in this state of mind without it panning out—it’s a false hope more often than not.

If average people are anything like me then I would think that they are more likely to think that a permanent problem is a temporary one rather than the other way around.

Suicide causes permanent state change. Life and all of life’s problems are temporary state.

That’s such an absurd point of view. When the duration of the problems is comparable to your expected lifespan, it is permanent for all intent and purposes. Sure, an incurable illness is not permanent in that it has to end when the person die. That’s not a useful point to make.

> all of life’s problems are temporary state.

Not all. Incurable disease is just one example.

Can you agree that there's some threshold where the time required to endure the temporary state is untenable?

How can anyone except myself decide what that threshold is?

Until one dies anyway.

What a neat slogan. Also misleading.

Life itself temporary, hence the death-is-permanent thing. Hence all things in life—pain, happiness, pleasure, suffering—are temporary. Suicide is just the shortening of all of these possible states (or potential states—for the hopeful). Thus a shortening of a bunch of temporary states.

Doesn’t sound as menacing and dramatic when you put it like that. And it’s equally true.

This suicide capsule concept is clearly targeted for people who have made a well thought out decision on their life. Heat-of-the-moment suicides, won't happen with rare specialty devices but common tools/environments/drugs/poisons that are found all over.

It would be a weird assumption to think that a person who carefully plans their suicide in advance, and orders a specialty device for it, hasn't considered options other than suicide. Most likely such a person has tried everything else already.

It's a good point about the rollout strategy. Is this a specialty device you must order? Or is there a row of them on display at the mall next to the massage chairs?

> Sucide is a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

This quote is supposed to be used in the correct context of the specific situation, *if* it's truly temporary. Not just as a generalisation.

And what of the excruciatingly painful existence that doesn't come with a near-term "inevitable death". What you're advocating is long-term inescapable torture.

You can also be against the act of suicide and for the freedom to commit suicide. The two ideas don't have to be conflated.

Sometimes the problems are permanent.

> Usually, atleast a few other methods should be used to help

I bet most of people who resort to assisted suicide in Switzerland have terminal disease or incurable pain.

You can already kill yourself if you really want to. Nobody can stop you.

The whole idea of "assisted suicide" is like Bitcoin - invented for the express purpose of finding and abusing loopholes in the current legal frameworks.

There are multiple ways one might commit suicide, it is true. But some are more reliable than others; some leave a terrible mess for someone (perhaps a family member) to clean up; some are more painful than others; some may put other people at risk. The worst outcome is when a person tries to kill themselves and ends up alive but in an even worse condition.

For people who don't have religious prohibitions on suicide, having a reliable, simple, low cost, low-pain, low-mess option sounds great to me.

Yes, someone who is paralyzed from their neck down can easily take their own life, of course. Don't see any issue here.

You have to excuse the sarcasm, but if you really can't think of any cases where taking your own life in a dignified manner is not actually possible, then I'm not sure there's any discussion to be had here

Sometimes legal frameworks are inhumane, immoral, cruel, and ought to be loopholed. I can think of at least 5 examples right now.

I see you haven't had to care for someone with Alzheimer's before.

Its not a terrible idea, as a society we retain some naïve and arguably zealous notions around death which often makes us push towards natural outcomes. Some natural outcomes are different from others in that they're significantly worse for all parties involved. Those outcomes are a subject that should be given more attention and seriousness as opposed to mere emotional rejection.

Care giver here and someone who has directly worked with individuals who have done the MAID (medically assisted induced death). A person with Alzheimer’s would automatically be disqualified for consideration as they lack the mental capacity to consent to such a thing. This will most likely never be offered for that group of people. They typically are not suffering though some do get terrified at times but in general they are just lost in their world with not much insight as to why things are that way.

> A person with Alzheimer’s would automatically be disqualified for consideration as they lack the mental capacity to consent to such a thing.

Which is part of the reason that people who have seen it with their parents often want to submit their consent in advance. If I get Alzheimer's, please fucking kill me.

Currently the law does not support that type of advanced directive. You can say do not leave me in a vegetative state after a car accident but not for Alzheimer’s.

What if you had an advanced directive that explicitly called out that scenario? Not saying the law would cover that, but it plausibly could.

In Canada, yes, advanced directives can be written.

Not for assisted death and something like Alzheimer’s. That directive is for something like you are in a car accident and are on life support. You can have it say no life support. You can not currently say if I get Alzheimer’s I want to die it is not legally possible at this time.

Yes, you can. That legislation passed right before covid as a modification to the original legislation.

The original bill didn't allow it, but it got challenged in court and the government was given a deadline to add that clause.

> They typically are not suffering

How on earth did you get such an out-of-touch callously asinine idea?

It is the most mentally debilitating state one can possibly be in. Their depth of recollection comes and goes. There is a persistent growing and waning sense of confusion. Their grasp on reality is in a shattered state. They recollect details out of context or in false connection to current events. I seriously fail to understand how you could underplay this disease.

I used to work in a facility with the highest rating of care required for Alzheimer’s and dementia like conditions and typically if well looked after they are not suffering. Yes some do get scared and confused but with medication and skilled workers you can minimize that type of suffering. What ends up often happening is family feels guilty placing their loved ones in such a facility and instead struggle and eventually burn out. At that point they may already be short with the person and yes they truly are suffering. But a well trained staff can really help reduce such interaction through distraction and conversation or music and medications. There are even now in the world dementia villages where people don’t actually know they are in a facility and they can wonder around because the entire thing is fenced off but looks normal with shops and places they can go to. Usually the person who is suffering is the family who can no longer manage the 24/7 care required. And that is not a poor reflection on them it takes a lot of mental drain to deal with a person ask you the same thing 300 times a day.

I apologize for my pointed accusation. I did indeed experience the difficulties of at-home care, it can be too much for a few loved ones to manage. The training isn't there. I think you paint the overall picture well from experience. I'm glad to hear that the average case of dementia, when properly looked after, can be milder on the person than I imagined.

No need to apologize I can tell you experienced a heavy burden caring for your loved one. Alzheimer’s is an evil disease. It is unfair. It can take the most loving person and test them to the limit. I now advocate for anyone in a situation of caring for an Alzheimer’s patient to really be honest to themselves if they are feeling burnt out and to seek help before things get too bad. When I was in that job I got to go home at the end of my shift and unwind but for many that is not an option. The cost of care where I worked started at $4500 per months something not everyone can afford. It truly is a horrible situation but there are some of us who really did our best to provide some peace to patients and families. I wish you well today and hope you realize you are a good person. That is why it was so hard for you because it is truly hard to see a loved one in that state.

I want to thank you sincerely for the care you provide to patients and for the solace you afford families. You are appreciated in what you do by many.

I would also like to ask - based on your experience, is there a piece of hardware or software that doesn't exist that would improve the lives of the patients and families? Voice activated, visual UI, thermal sensing, motion sensing, etc, anything you could think of. Any human-machine interaction paradigm.

Could you elaborate on what parts you find terrible? It seems like a peaceful way to die for some.

Giving AI the power to approve suicides?

Well I don’t know the details but I don’t think this is a suicide booth just anyone can use you would still need to have a doctor verify you had a terminal illness and then I could be left with you to use at the time you were ready. The AI is simply making sure you are of sound mind at the time of death. Which means you can answer a few questions and it wouldn’t be that hard to determine if someone was if sound mind there are plenty of mental state exams that a computer could give.

Why? If I ever get dementia I would like the opportunity to end my own life before it progresses too far.

Then don't use it.