Those who arrived at a compelling and uncluttered view on this issue aren’t around to record their views. For most of us, arriving at such a view would oblige us to jump some hurdles before we vaulted that rail: religious dogma, physical fear, emotional attachments, every instinct we possess. We should discount mere cries for help; an unsuccessful suicide is generally just a successful gesture. Those who mean it, do it, either without fanfare or having ensured they can’t be interrupted by other people’s instincts or their own.
We all die, most of us alone and afraid no matter how fit or unfit, old or young, loved or loathed we are when the moment falls. There is no consensus on what awaits us when our last breath rattles its way out of our carcass. Whether we anticipate umpteen talented virgins or oblivion without end, one thing is certain: we will all find out very soon.
So is it really so wrong to hasten this process if logic is on your side? Doctors do so every day, whether we choose to admit it or not. For every court case in which a terminally ill patient kowtows to the judiciary for their suffering to be ended without criminalising anyone, scores of less complex and more critical cases are brought to an informal end with a generous shot of morphine or a DNR notice.
Focussing on those so near to death doesn’t necessarily clarify matters, partly because freedom of choice and the medical profession’s commitment to preserving life overlap unavoidably. It is however instructive that the most vocal opposition to the lethal exercise of mercy tends to come from religious quarters. Supposed creeds of love always manage to find some fire and brimstone dogma to prolong suffering in the name of righteousness, while in centuries past those who had died by their own hand were denied hallowed ground in their local cemetery. Can such callousness in extremis really give the desperate the answers they need?
Should we all have an entitlement to suicide, regardless of age or health? Should the degree of freedom we enjoy include the right to end our own life? As participants in a society, we should come to the rescue of those trying to throw themselves from bridges or under tube trains. Typically, the suicide bid will be a result of depressive illness or huge emotional trauma. The act is patently logical to the subject but their problems are seldom insurmountable. Death might be a cure, but it might not be the right or best cure.
Yet some emotional problems are practically insurmountable. Some depressive illnesses are so profound that misery is a constant and unreasoning companion that cannot be fended off by the most inventive psychiatrists. Some physical illnesses promise their hosts a lifetime of escalating pain with none of the joys most of us take for granted.
Some states of depression have deep and rational roots that cannot be plucked. Following the death in 1985 of 520 people aboard a Japan Air Lines 747 due to a botched repair, maintenance manager Yasumoto Takagi took his own life rather than live with the shame. Such a burden would be positively cancerous for anyone to bear, particularly in a society where the act of suicide isn’t necessarily seen as dishonorable or immoral.
It is a matter of finding a healthy tension. A civilized society values and seeks to preserve life. Yet to dismiss suicide as sinful is unhelpful and irrelevant to anyone desperate enough to be contemplating it. The victim shouldn’t be condemned out of hand; life is finite after all. We should accept that it is not sacred enough to make any burden worth carrying; certainly not if it is only being carried to pander to dogma or moral squeamishness.
