It's probably better to avoid telling someone they don't really want to do it, and erring on the side of believing they do, even if you think you happen to have evidence to the contrary.
In my opinion, mitigating it is the clearly correct choice, because facilitating it would lead to suicides of people who would counterfactually eventually regret it. Whereas mitigating it would at least lead to “false positives” that are failures to prevent someone from suicide, rather than failures to save someone from it.
Right now this option is blocked by governments around the world.
And due to the problem, that the government can't just legalize it without save guard around it, this makes a quite good case that there has to be some government involvement.
I don't think I agree with the suggestions, but I certainly understand them, and often find myself contemplating what a better societal solution could be. The solution space varies by cause, in some cases there's only room for marginal improvement, if any, from changing the society. That's not to say that they're not worth pursuing, or there aren't changes that would massively benefit many people...just that it's a murky ethical grey area without any obviously correct solution.
I hope you can take a minute to consider that viewpoints like the above aren't always stemming from disregard for human suffering, but through an abundance of heartbreaking empathy.