• sudneo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I see and agree with both points. I definitely keep such choices to a very tight circle (like I gave instructions to my partner and family in what to do should I end up in certain situations - also called biological testament in Italian).

    I also mentioned that indeed I would consider certain disabilities a deal breaker for me not to keep living, definitely not all disabilities. I would actually say that there are things that I want to do in life, and if I can’t - for whatever reason - that would be a reason not to live for me. Whether it’s a disability, a material condition, etc. It’s not really relevant - a disability can simply be a proxy not to be able to do something.

    For example, I fought tooth and nail to ensure that my grandma would receive the proper care when she had dementia (which is a disabling condition I would say?). I also took care of her directly, and I would do that again a thousand times. However, should I get a similar condition, I let my family know that I would like to be euthanized, I don’t want to live like that.

    Finally, this perspective is really really personal, it is bound to my experiences and my idea to the point that it can’t simply apply to anybody else. I would definitely never go to anybody and say “if I were in your shoes I would rather die”, but even if I thought that, this is a meaningless statement for another person. It’s of course extremely rude to say this, so once again, I am saying it for the sake of a theoretical discussion.

    Overall for me this is a matter of free will and agency over your own body, it’s in anthithesis with the religious view that considers your body not yours and suffering a noble thing in itself.