Bitter Irony: Washington Suicide Prevention Program Recognized
Here's a bitter irony: A suicide prevention program from the State of Washington has been nationally recognized as an effective resource in saving lives. From the story:
A Washington curriculum for suicide prevention has been recognized by a national resource center as a model program.Too bad the state's voters decided that terminally ill people don't qualify under the category of "every living person." No, for those people who become suicidal, facilitation, rather than prevention, was legally declared a right and proper course. Talk about sending the kids a mixed message!
The Help Every Living Person curriculum teaches high school students about suicide prevention. It helps students learn to recognize if a friend is thinking about suicide and helps them work on communication skills. The program was created in 2006 by the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction with $100,000 from the state Legislature. Washington 9th and 10th graders have been using the curriculum for the past few years and now kids around the country are being exposed to the program.
Labels: Suicide. Assisted Suicide. Suicide Prevention. Washington State.
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 4:02 PM
8 Comments
8 Comments:
Well we send them mixed messages with "wonder drugs" that are supposed to alleviate depression and instead make it worse, and make them suicidal. None of this inconsistency is surprising considering the logical flaws in humans' self-image.
What's sad is that the people who voted for this don't see the irony becuase they, of course, don't want any healthy, young people to do themselves in (except, perhaps, if they have a disability that is causing intolerable suffering), they want people who are sick and prfoundly disabled to relieve us all of the burden of their existence and kill themselves. Young, healthy suicide victims could turn out to be tax payers, you know.
Well some guy in a low-priority radio talk show slot was just saying how could anyone want to interfere in how anyone else would choose to die, and how interesting it is that those who choose assisted suicide turn out to be not those who can't afford health care and fear less good "end of life" (I am so sick of that phrase and those who use it) care, but rather those more affluent. And the guy is -- a doctor. A doctor with a radio show in a low-priority time slot, who gets to whoever's listening the concept that assisted suicide is ok.
We can't have it both ways. We can't say that it's OK to off yourself if you're suffering physically, but not OK if you're suffering mentally. Or that some physical suffering is inherently bearable for all individuals and doesn't qualify.
Personally, I find it to be no one's business if, why, when or how someone wants to end their own life. At least be consistent about it, though.
It's not ok to end one's life or to end someone else's life (which is what the suicide "assister" does). If a person does it on their own, not much anyone can do about it after the fact. But assisted suicide is accessory to suicide, or murder, and can be penalized if the crime it's accessory to (at the least) is illegal. What's so terrible about making suicide illegal? So we can't send them to prison after they're dead, but having it on the books anyway is profoundly important. I'd like to think it's no one's business if someone wants to end their own life, but in terms of the life force, and spiritually, it's everybody's business. Whether we like it or not. I've yet to see a non-human do other than lemmingism, and the other animals are, in the things that are important, light years ahead of us.
Animals routinely starve themselves when they feel suffering is imminent. They also, often, crawl away to starve or dehydrate alone, without anyone around. So yes, animals do choose their own way to die.
Becky: Yes but they don't have other animals making the decision for them, and in controversion of their own desire to continue to live, as happens all too often when someone is helpless and at the mercy of medical and other people who are supposed to care for them in various ways but instead take over and starve and dehydrate them, deny them life support or continued life support, etc. That's why the concept of "self-determination" is actually dangerous to others whose self-determination is denied in a world in which "end-of-life" has become a concept, a "field," and a catchword.
Yes suicide should have been illegal all along. I was surprised to learn that it hasn't been. Does anyone here know if it ever has been? This is something that should be addressed in law schools; if it is, as I'm sure it is, I missed it; it will be, if it isn't already, course subject matter, but I don't think that is, or will be, unbiased the way things are going. It's an extremely important concept. Homicide, suicide, both are killing. The state has an interest in all its citizens staying in possession of their lives. Assisted homicide isn't legal, is it. Some things need to be on the books even when there is no remedy for them, as a matter of principle that is intrinsic to the values of the society whose laws they are.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home