Prof. Joiner gets it wrong

[Taki]

Here's an interview with Joiner in Medium: "Because," as he says, "no one should have to die alone in a mess in a hotel bathroom, in the back of a van, or on a park bench, thinking incorrectly that the world will be better off without them."

Wrong, my conviction is that I am better off without the world.

 

[motel rooms]

The guy who interviewed him is a total moron.
"We now know that suicidal intention is transient. If we can get support to get through those times when we feel disconnected, a burden to others, and having the means and mindset to actually kill ourselves, we can begin to develop the social supports to turn things around."

Suicidal intention is transient/lasts only for a short time? People can't feel disconnected, a burden to others & have the means & mindset to ctb for an extended period of time?!

 

[LastLoveLetter]

Articles like this perpetuate the perspective that suicide is "a permanent solution to a temporary problem." Treating suicidal ideation as "transient" is another variation of this view. The media constantly clings to the conclusion that suicidality is an ephemeral absurdity regardless of the circumstances. Those who desire death are deemed ill, illogical, impulsive or incapable, rather than autonomous adults with the capacity to make their own choices. We must all feel like burdens - we could not possibly feel burdened by life.

We allow animals more dignity in death than humans. Euthanizing pets to prevent or shorten suffering is widely accepted and considered compassionate, while we must persevere no matter what we want and no matter what our quality of life is like for us.

The article's emphasis on connection, development of social support and "letting in love" is ludicrous when you consider that robust relationships are not universally attainable. Support networks - such as a loving family, friends you can comfortably confide in and a spouse that sincerely supports you - are privileges. Telling someone without any of these things to simply cultivate them is the equivalent of telling a poor person to just start being wealthy. Even then, there are those surrounded by loved ones they adore that still kill themselves, demonstrating that connection is not a cure-all for every difficulty and every malady.

Instead of recognising that dignity in dying ought to be a human right, we are advised to "reach out", "seek support", "get therapy/take medication." It is rarely acknowledged that none of these approaches are a panacea, and that death is not a disaster to be avoided at all costs, but an inevitability that we will all face someday. It is not wrong, irrational or unreasonable to want choice and control over our bodies, our lives and ultimately our deaths.

 

[motel rooms]

The article's emphasis on connection, development of social support and "letting in love" is ludicrous when you consider that robust relationships are not universally attainable.

Yeah, I love the part about "letting in love" & the implication that we're ALL surrounded by immense quantities of love, so the only problem is that certain stubbornly negative individuals insist on refusing to let it in

You know what I find really infuriating? I'm sure that most, if not all, of these experts know that the BS they keep spewing is completely ineffective; they aren't naively optimistic, they're actually cynically protecting their livelihood...

 

[Celerity]

The article's emphasis on connection, development of social support and "letting in love" is ludicrous when you consider that robust relationships are not universally attainable. Support networks - such as a loving family, friends you can comfortably confide in and a spouse that sincerely supports you - are privileges. Telling someone without any of these things to simply cultivate them is the equivalent of telling a poor person to just start being wealthy.

This is exactly how I feel when people tell me to get new friends and to date. They don't seem to get that no one likes me. Friendship and love is out of my reach.

Yeah, I love the part about "letting in love" & the implication that we're ALL surrounded by immense quantities of love, so the only problem is that certain stubbornly negative individuals insist on refusing to let it in

You know what I find really infuriating? I'm sure that most, if not all, of these experts know that the BS they keep spewing is completely ineffective; they aren't naively optimistic, they're actually cynically protecting their livelihood...

This too. It's always our problem. We are always the defective ones. If that's the case, why don't they just let undesirables like me die in peace?