Dave K
Distinguished member
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2015
- Messages
- 196
- Reason
- Other
- Country
- us
- State
- .
- City
- .
When can we, or should we, restrict online speech? Should cyberbullying be a crime, like it is to shout “fire” in a crowded theater or to yell “jump!” at someone poised on a ledge? What if the online message is written with compassion, but has the predictable effect of tipping someone over the edge? Does it matter that the intent of the message was to help, not to hurt?
Occasionally I see a post in the general discussion forum in which a CALS suggests it may be a good option for a PALS to hasten their death, which is an ugly message no matter how hard you try to spin it with words of compassion or freedom of choice. Whenever I see posts like these, I worry about the PALS who visit this site when they are in the midst of a depressive episode. Words can make or break a vulnerable person at a vulnerable time.
In a civilized society, when a person--any person--talks about hastening their death, there is no duty to talk to them, but anyone who does choose to talk to them has a responsibility to try to help them so they do not feel that is a good option. This is just as true for talking to a PALS as it is for talking to anyone else who talks about hastening their death.
It is well known that many PALS think about hastening their death, but then, after an adjustment period, they recover their sense of life satisfaction. Studies also show that CALS routinely underestimate the quality of PALS’ lives. Therefore, no matter how we perceive or predict their quality of life, we CALS need to give every online PALS the benefit of the doubt that they will live to see a better day and refrain from suggesting the option of hastening their death. Otherwise, we would not be treating them equally as we treat others. We would be saying to them, in effect, "I agree your life is no longer worth living." That is a message that no one should ever have to hear, directly or indirectly. This forum, in particular, should be a safe place.
So what are we supposed to say to a PALS who talks about hastening their death? How can we help them so they do not feel that hastening their death is a good option and at the same time support their right to make their own end of life decisions? What I would say is, “First, I want you to know that if it were up to me, I would choose to have you here with me as long as I can have you, because my life is better with you than without you. But what you’re talking about is a deeply individual decision, and I will stick by you and support any decision that you make about your own life. In the meantime, you need to know that, while caring for you is hard, it is not too hard, and your family and friends will always try to help you make the best of things.” It doesn’t work just to say the middle part (“I will support any decision you make”). And it certainly doesn’t help to say “If you’re unhappy with your life, don’t forget you always have the option of hastening your death.” Regardless of any compassionate intent, the message is effectively no different than cyberbullying in that it risks tipping a depressed stranger over the edge when they could live to see a better day if words they read were more carefully chosen.
Again, words can make or break a PALS. We should treat a PALS just like we treat anyone else and always refrain from suggesting the option of hastening their death. Please, folks, when a PALS brings up the topic of hastening death in the general discussion forum, ask yourself, “could this be a PALS who is suffering from treatable depression?” and “could a PALS who is suffering from treatable depression ever open this page and look at what I am writing?” Then think about what you write before you hit “enter.” You might just save someone’s life.
Occasionally I see a post in the general discussion forum in which a CALS suggests it may be a good option for a PALS to hasten their death, which is an ugly message no matter how hard you try to spin it with words of compassion or freedom of choice. Whenever I see posts like these, I worry about the PALS who visit this site when they are in the midst of a depressive episode. Words can make or break a vulnerable person at a vulnerable time.
In a civilized society, when a person--any person--talks about hastening their death, there is no duty to talk to them, but anyone who does choose to talk to them has a responsibility to try to help them so they do not feel that is a good option. This is just as true for talking to a PALS as it is for talking to anyone else who talks about hastening their death.
It is well known that many PALS think about hastening their death, but then, after an adjustment period, they recover their sense of life satisfaction. Studies also show that CALS routinely underestimate the quality of PALS’ lives. Therefore, no matter how we perceive or predict their quality of life, we CALS need to give every online PALS the benefit of the doubt that they will live to see a better day and refrain from suggesting the option of hastening their death. Otherwise, we would not be treating them equally as we treat others. We would be saying to them, in effect, "I agree your life is no longer worth living." That is a message that no one should ever have to hear, directly or indirectly. This forum, in particular, should be a safe place.
So what are we supposed to say to a PALS who talks about hastening their death? How can we help them so they do not feel that hastening their death is a good option and at the same time support their right to make their own end of life decisions? What I would say is, “First, I want you to know that if it were up to me, I would choose to have you here with me as long as I can have you, because my life is better with you than without you. But what you’re talking about is a deeply individual decision, and I will stick by you and support any decision that you make about your own life. In the meantime, you need to know that, while caring for you is hard, it is not too hard, and your family and friends will always try to help you make the best of things.” It doesn’t work just to say the middle part (“I will support any decision you make”). And it certainly doesn’t help to say “If you’re unhappy with your life, don’t forget you always have the option of hastening your death.” Regardless of any compassionate intent, the message is effectively no different than cyberbullying in that it risks tipping a depressed stranger over the edge when they could live to see a better day if words they read were more carefully chosen.
Again, words can make or break a PALS. We should treat a PALS just like we treat anyone else and always refrain from suggesting the option of hastening their death. Please, folks, when a PALS brings up the topic of hastening death in the general discussion forum, ask yourself, “could this be a PALS who is suffering from treatable depression?” and “could a PALS who is suffering from treatable depression ever open this page and look at what I am writing?” Then think about what you write before you hit “enter.” You might just save someone’s life.