Ethics and rationality of suicide

As a kid, I was sometimes suicidal. I thought I didn't like being alive.

It turned out I just didn't like being a kid. I simply had nothing else to compare it to until I attained and got to try out being an adult. (Which is awesome.)

This wasn't so much about failing to have hope as it was failing to realize that there was a thing to be hoped for. I didn't have anyone telling me that being an adult was really really cool and would make me happy, so I didn't expect it as a kid. So, I guess my statement is that there should be black-swan hope for things no one has bothered to put forth as happiness-inducers.

As a general note to whom it may concern: I consider it (deontologically) wrong to bring mental health professionals into the life of a non-dangerous-to-others person whose sanest available preferences indicate that they don't want such professionals. I am not a professional of any stripe myself, but I am willing to converse with (a non-overwhelming number of) sad people if they want someone to talk to.

(anonymous posting as what I did may be illegal in my locality)

My mother committed suicide a few years ago. Her first attempt failed, and there was about a 2 month period where she was honest with my brother and me about the fact that she intended to try again. I decided to accept her decision and spent the time with her well, instead of fighting with her or attempting to get her institutionalised.

I think her decision to commit suicide was rational. Three years before her suicide, she'd become addicted to pethidine, an injected prescription opiate. She was in a profession that gave her ready access to prescriptions. After about a year of addiction the professional body found out about her abuse, and action was taken against her. Ultimately she failed to comply with their regulations and was banned from practicing her profession.

At the time of her suicide, she was in her late 60s, with no savings, unable to work, and in deep despair over what had come of her life. She was in poor health and had alcohol and codeine dependencies. Her assessment was that she could not see what she had to look forward to. I reluctantly agreed.

I loved my mother, and she achieved a great deal in her life. But a difficult upbringing meant that she always had extreme trouble opening up to people and forming emotionally meaningful relationships. Ultimately I think this was behind her substance problem, and it left her with little in her life.

I know that this isn't the common case with suicide. My cousin also committed suicide. He was 19, and had just failed his apprenticeship. He came from a very middle class family concerned about their social standing, and his sisters were just such fine upstanding citizens. I think he felt like a screw up. He was coming down off MDMA at the time, and hung himself. I think that's how most suicides go: it's that critical moment, and the person really does have so much to look forward to. My cousin was well loved by a great many people.

I do worry that this thread might encourage that second, tragic, kind of suicide. But I hope that this is a place where we can share taboo topics, too, so I'm willing to take the risk. Obviously I can tell few people about how my mother really died. I prefer to be open, so I find this unfortunate.

I was saddened to learn of the recent death by suicide of Chris Capel, known here as pdf23ds.

Fuck.
...
...
Fuck!

I once talked an individual I was very close to out of committing suicide. He had experienced a number of rather terrible situations, with severe psychological and physical issues, that were causing him a great deal of pain. He was utterly hopeless, and firmly reiterated to me several times that there was no way to fix his life.

After getting him to calm down a little bit, I had him talk to me about what his problems were. I asked him why he thought it wouldn't ever get better. We talked for a while, and I realized that there was a solution that had just honestly never occurred to him. It would take several painful months before his life started improving, but there was a third alternative that would almost certainly improve his life drastically. He decided not to kill himself, seeing that this other choice, although it would be painful and difficult, was significantly better than suicide.

Now, in this case, he had mentally searched for a third alternative for months, ever since he first started contemplating suicide, and I genuinely think he would have accepted one if he had found it. He was just not able to find the way out. Chris argued in his post that it is possible for someone to rationally determine that death is the best option. I do agree that it's at least possible. My probability estimate for any one person being able to do that, though, is extremely low. Pain and sorrow dull and slow your mind. I know, I've got a history of depression, etc, and your ability to think drops dramatically when you are suffering from those emotions. If you are hurting enough that you are considering suicide, then you should consider that the pain is probably bad enough that you are not thinking as clearly as someone who was detached from the problem would be. So talk to someone. Find as many truly intelligent people as you can and get them to try to find a way out of your dilemma. Hell, if you don't know anyone, get in touch with me, and I'd be happy to see if I can spot anything you're missing.

Suicide is an irreversible step (unless you get yourself frozen, which I generally endorse). You don't want to do that if you're missing something obvious. Is it possible that you will decide to kill yourself for all the right reasons, and that there genuinely is no better option? Possible, but fairly unlikely. Recognize that you are very emotionally involved at the moment, which probably isn't doing wonders for your level of rationality. I recommend you get someone to check your work.

I can't recall the name of it, but I think there was documentary about people jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge. The filmmakers interviewed a bunch of people who had survived their attempts, and most or all of them regretted jumping as soon as they were airborne. I'm in favor of a right to suicide (not to be confused with thinking it is a good idea in the vast majority of cases) but I think anyone who is really set on going through with it should be encouraged to do so by means of a slow-acting poison that has an antidote, or some analogous method, just in case they discover an unexpected revealed preference for living after beginning to kill themselves.

My gut level ingrained belief that people on the Internet don't die is badly shaken.

This is a troubling thread. The ethical and rational issues raised by the death of poor pdf23s are not as urgent as the practical issues.

There are suicidal folks and badly depressed folks more generally who read less wrong -- we now have awful proof. I do not think this is a great opportunity to pinpoint and record those situations that would be so horrible as to make suicide understandable. The next marginal "less wrong suicide" is not likely to be a person facing such a horrible problem. They are quite likely to be someone of a depressed temperament hit by a period of intense but temporary emotional distress.

It frankly strikes me as absurd (and grotesquely unempathetic) to suppose that someone for whom life is so painful that they would rather die somehow has an obligation to continue enduring it just in order to spare other people the emotion of grief.

I don't grieve for strangers but I often empathize with them. To those writing veiled and bald allusions to their own suicidal ideas: I wish I could communicate the empathy behind my contrary wishes. Don't do it brothers, sisters.

I regret not killing myself a few years ago, after losing the things that made me happy and getting further away from other things that could make me happy. This actual future self wouldn't mind being murdered. At the time I was rendered psychologically incapable of even trying to help myself, and was also incapable of applying my knowledge that it probably wasn't going to get better with my then-strong motivation to die.

I'd felt suicidal before I was happy, but wasn't certain it was a good idea. So I picked someone who would listen and understand, and tried to get a second opinion. She couldn't take the pressure and I preferred not to torture her, so that stopped. Apparently people don't want to deal with suicide as an issue, and that may also lead to ineffective attempts at prevention.

And I have this other friend who, like me, isn't in any particular pain most of the time, but would choose to opt-out of life if it were convenient to do so. Thanks but no thanks, reality, we'll have no more of this. For us, inflicting pain on others from our suicides is relevant. That may be the only reason she's still alive. At least I have someone to text "opting out kthxbye" to, just in case.

I managed to stay out of mental hospitals after the first time by telling anyone who asked that I would kill myself if I were detained, because it would adversely affect the improvements I would have been making to my life. I wasn't sure that would work, but it did and that amuses me. There are ways to work around the constraints Chris complained about.

This is depressing. Maybe that's why people don't want to think about suicide, and moral issues aren't their true rejection.

Yikes. This post strikes me as harmful and irresponsible. Less Wrong is less of a community than I'd like -- less there for its members, less mindful of what effects each person has on the others and on the rest of the community.

I agree, actually, that all subjects are fitting subjects for rationality. But if you’re going to talk with someone who is suicidal and unstable about the detailed pros and cons of killing themselves, you risk having seriously bad consequences. Saying “but free speech is good, and thinking through all subjects is good” just isn’t enough of an answer to that. Talking about some subjects brings responsibilities -- responsibilities for thinking carefully through who you might harm, and how you can support them during the discussion. Offering help.

LW has a number of seriously depressed people.

Since this thread is already up -- let's make an effort now to reach out to anyone who needs reaching out to, to increase the odds that depressed LW readers have social support. That is: if you know a LW-er online or in person who is depressed, make contact with them. If you're a good listener with a couple of free hours in your life, echo Alicorn's offer of help. If you have a bit of spare money and a good CBT book to recommend, offer to mail it to someone who'd read it. If you have useful well-being tips and can write, consider making a front-level post (on happiness tips or CBT or the like, not on topics that might prime suicide).

I passionately hate that all of the mental health people are obligated by law to commit me to an asylum if they think I’m about to kill myself. They can’t be objective. You know, if they could talk to me without such stupid constraints, they might have prevented this very suicide.

This is a serious problem, but I should inform people that it's not as much of a catch-22 as it sounds. A sane therapist can tell the difference between "I'm going to shoot myself tonight" and "I wish I were dead a lot of the time, but I know it would wreck my family if I went through with it," and he won't hospitalize the second person. It may take a little gentle probing to see if your therapist is sane, but such people do exist; it is possible to talk to someone even about very dark thoughts without being committed. If you're very, very risk-averse about such things, there are suicide hotlines.

Western society has long suffered from what we might now call Schiavism, a desperate clinging to the idea that "only God gives and takes life". I suspect Schiavism plays a large role in holding back changes in attitude and legislation regarding cryonics, assisted suicide, euthanasia, but also medically assisted procreation, contraception and a host of other issues.

On the other hand, just because there exists a pervasive and ill-considered belief that people's lives aren't in their own hands, doesn't mean every such decision is automatically correct. In particular, depression tends to skew your judgements of self-worth systematically in the wrong direction.

In Chris' case there is evidence that he had amply considered what many here would consider the most rational option, cryonics, and reluctantly rejected it because society's Schiavism, and US laws in particular, make it inapplicable. He seems to have been aware of all the relevant facts: the biases introduced by his condition, the prospects for recovery, the probabilities of a change in attitudes or legislation. He and only he was able to weigh the scales of joy and suffering in his life, subjectively.

Chris' decision strikes me as a clear-cut case of "insanity as a sane response to an insane situation" (cf. Bateson/Laing) - the outcome certainly isn't rational, but that's a consequence of a reasonable decision process unfolding in a pathological situation.

The NYC LessWrong group has a standing offer of something called "rationalist therapy" that any member can request.

Here's how it works. You don't have to have a problem that most people would seek "therapy" for, though it's okay if you do; in the past people have asked for rationalist therapy related to bad relationships, problems with family, worries about career/education, social isolation, and other common problems. You explain what's wrong; your friends and fellow rationalists try to troubleshoot it. If you're miserable, chances are you're miserable about something, and there may be a way to fix it that you haven't thought of. It's not focused on "aw, feel better" so much as on "hey, we can come up with a plan to address your problems."

I think it's a good idea. It's best done with a group, but I'd give it a shot with anybody who needs it.

I always feel sad when I hear about suicide. Wasted potential. But then I think about all wasted potential and suicide just becomes one of many very depressingly true things that I can't pretend away.

Goodybe Chris. At least your not hurting anymore. I'm not sure what to feel or even think about the rest of it.

It makes me want to go to sleep, and not mind so much if I wake up or not. Not in a depressed way. Just in a 'This-is-all-there-is' way. Guess I'll just try my best and enjoy it. Wouldn't be much else to do around here anyway :)

Ironically, society's demonization of suicide and suicidal people has negative consequences even from the standpoint of preventing suicide itself, as Chris points out:

I passionately hate that all of the mental health people are obligated by law to commit me to an asylum if they think I’m about to kill myself. They can’t be objective. You know, if they could talk to me without such stupid constraints, they might have prevented this very suicide

Does it overall cause more suicides than it prevents? I don't know. However, speaking as someone who has a history of clinical depression, if I'm ever in circumstances where I am contemplating suicide, I want people to commit me. Because when I'm functional I'd consider suicide to be completely and utterly awful. So where is the line here? When do we decide that someone is rational enough to decide on their own to end their existence and when not? These are certainly difficult questions, but it does seem that the majority of people who attempt suicide and do not have terminal illnesses are being essentially irrational. On the other hand, preferences are hard to break down here, and if the technology doesn't exist to cure someone then should they have a right to end it now rather than waiting years? Another thing to consider is that from a utilitarian perspective, committing suicide generally makes everyone around you absolutely miserable, and will then always cause pain for them. In that regard, committing suicide is either misguided or selfish.

if you think of future versions of yourself as separate agents, then suicide is a form of homicide.

It seems like that argument also implies that failing to bring into existence as many people as possible is comprable to homicide, since doing so would be depriving potential people of their lives. So, if you don't believe it's a moral responsibility to create more people, you shouldn't accept the argument that suicide is a crime against your future self either.

If you think suicide is irrational, consider this hypothetical. Let's assume you could aquire 10^5 additional average (not superhappy, just average) human life-years for yourself, but as a cost, you have to agree to be personally tortured severely (all with probability 1).

Would you take the offer?

This is relevant for anyone who claims suicide is irrational, while the decision of staying alive is not. I'd argue that, for any one person on the planet, the probability increase per year of continued survival for severe torture-like suffering, is higher than 10^-5.

So if you wouldn't accept the above offer, you shouldn't accept the conclusion that suicide is irrational, either.

(If you disagree with the probabilities, just adjust them in your mind. I assumed the statistical murder rate as a very crude proxy, which is actually higher than 10^-5 per person per year in the US and Europe.)

Are you still convinced suicide is always irrational? What would you say to a person who insists on rejecting the above offer and wants to aquire a good suicide method based on this argument? "You are objectively wrong about your preference not to be tortured"?

Given that we are Beyond the reach of God it's perfectly possible that a human being is born (or tortured) into a situation where life is not worth it. Suicide would be completely ethical all other things being equal.

At the same time person can be so messed up that they just cannot see a way out, even if it's right in front of them, or (even worse, if that is possible) their fears are illusionary. They can also be very convinced of this, and even convincing to others. This is why we tend to err on the side of discouraging suicide, since it's an irreversible option.

This is a disaster.

just in order to spare other people the emotion of grief (which they are inevitably going to have to confront at some point anyway, at least until we conquer all death

It is the emotion of shame that others are spared. (As you note, the grief is going to come anyway.)

People may for instance be severely mistaken about their prospects for improvement, especially while in the midst of acute crisis.(Conceivably, that could even have been his own situation.)

At the risk of sounding callous, because I did not know Chris or understand the suffering he was going through, I believe that Chris was wrong about this. I'm not sure that one can have enough certainty over (the lack of) future happiness that one can reasonably decide to cut one's losses.

There is a great deal of uncertainty and randomness in life. Good things (and bad things) do happen, and they can happen suddenly and without warning. There were many such instances in my own life, when I thought that things were probably not going to get any better even despite my best efforts, and then, they did so serendipitously. The girlfriend I never thought would be interested in me. The job I never dreamed I would have the chance to have. Life is unfair, but sometimes we get lucky too. Given this uncertainty, isn't it better to err on the side of caution and choose to live?

I wish Chris had chosen life, and if there are any others out there feeling as he did, please reconsider, and if you really truly must, do it in a way that is cryonics-recoverable and have the proper arrangements in place.

What upsets me the most is that, as far as I can tell, he didn't take out a life insurance policy before killing himself.

I've been diagnosed with chronic major depression as well, and I find that I agree with most of what was said in the linked argument. In the last several years I've gotten to be less bad, and I do have hope of a sort that things will eventually be bearable or even good. However... if easy euthanasia was available, I would have used it as soon as I hit majority or earlier if possible.

I don't know how many other people are like me in this regard. I don't know what the future will bring. I have hope, and sometimes I hate that fact.

Edit - please disregard this post

I 100% want a right to suicide if I need it. But I'm extremely wary of the consequences of such a right. I suspect the best course of action is to keep the "official" rules saying "automatically commit people who attempt to kill themselves", but give some behind-the-scenes leeway to doctors who help patients who really need it.

I don't have a lot of intimate experience with suicide, beyond a few aquaintances and a few phases when I was younger.

The various links are dead for me, and I would be interested if anyone could provide them.

Also, Wikipedia said that a many people that commit suicide have metal health issues. I also don't know much about mental health, but I think it might be fair to say that many people who commit suicide may have been much better off staying alive due to the possibility of future treatment or cures that might result in a situation of not wanting to commit suicide, in these cases.

My main problem with suicide is that more often than not, rationality is not employed in the decision to commit the action. Most people who attempt suicide and fail regret the attempt almost immediately after jumping off the bridge, or taking the pills, or cutting their wrists. A depressed person is not necessarily the best, unbiased judge as to whether his life is futile.

As for the role of suicide in society, it may be an issue, but there seems to be little we can do about it. If a friend of mine comes to me saying he feels suicidal, my first call will be to a licensed professional. Obviously not all feelings of committing suicide are instincts we will act upon, but most individuals follow the "better safe than sorry mantra." Otherwise, we risk our friends becoming mere stats chalked up to the bystander effect.

I was saddened to learn of the recent death by suicide of Chris Capel, known here as pdf23ds.

That is sad. I was hoping to find out if he had any success using modafinil to manage his sleep disorder.

Deleted because of accidental double-post.

Like Chris I think I have a pretty strong rational case for killing myself. Of course, this kind of thing can't be brought up in polite conversation - people are shocked and instinctively go into Emergency Survival Hero mode, in which they try to apply the verbal equivalent of CPR

This is strange, firstly because to me, the idea of my death is no longer 'a big deal' (the name "alt.suicide.holiday" neatly encapsulates the banality of it). It takes some effort for me to keep in mind that others don't share this view. [It's all too easy for me to attribute my "cryonics is (mostly) pointless" stance to my own circumstances. Yet I can't help but think I'm the rational one, having overcome the "my survival = good" bias.]

Secondly it's strange because I too can remember not sharing this view. When I was a child, death was something unfathomably frightening and horrendous. I used to believe that thinking harder - more realistically - about one's death would always produce ever-increasing terror, and that the only way people make it through life is by deliberately turning a blind eye to the awfulness of death.

Nonetheless, I think many of the usual arguments that people use to show that suicide is "wrong" are bad arguments.

I can see two kinds of potentially strong argument against suicide.

1. If the person doesn't kill themselves, one can reasonably expect that they will lead a meaningful life (meaningful = having a career of some kind and/or creative outlets and/or friends etc.)

2. The person has already established meaningful connections with the world, and severing them would cause harm. (Family members lose for someone who provided for and/or helped them somehow, valuable talents at work go sorely missed, personal projects go unfinished, etc.)

If both of these fail, considered rationally in the cold light of day, then I think the person may as well kill themselves. Grief of family members shouldn't be ignored, especially as some of them may be depressed or irrational themselves, and may suffer 'disproportionately' to the objective size of the loss.

When is suicide without cryonics ever rational, aside from rare situations where altruism demands it? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't think of any personal situation with zero possibility of improvement. Chris's suicide, like the vast majority of suicides, was irrational and sad.

The demonization of suicide by society and the effect that that may have on the suicide rate is a separate issue, and is less clear. It would be interesting to see a study on this effect.

If you, reader, are thinking of committing suicide yourself, please don't. Things will improve. There's no way things won't improve.