The RIGHT TO LIVE is one of the most fundamental human rights, enshrined in international conventions and upheld in national constitutions worldwide. Yet, the corollary to this right—the right to die—remains highly contentious. Suicide, in most parts of the world, is either criminalised, heavily stigmatised, or both. Moral, religious, and social norms primarily shape this attitude.
However, it is worth probing why the right to die, including the right to suicide, is not granted the same respect as the right to live. There is a segment of people who seriously endorse the individual right to choose death and that suicide, in specific circumstances, should be decriminalised and recognised as a legitimate personal choice.
The rising student suicides, farmer suicides, my thoughts on Living Will, the news of the first-time use of the controversial Suicide capsule at Last Resort, the belief that I, as a rational should have complete control over my life and the recent suicide by a PGP-II student at IIM Ahmedabad, triggered my thinking on the subject.
Meanwhile, if the subject interests you, the Ministry of Health has released a draft proposal titled ‘Guidelines for withdrawal of life support in terminally ill patients’. It has the scope of pre-defined Advanced Medical Directive or Living will, which will help the process. One can send in their comments by October 20th, 2024.
The Concept of Autonomy
The principle of autonomy is at the heart of the argument for the right to die. Autonomy entails the capacity of an individual to make decisions about their own life, free from external coercion or undue interference.
The right to die is deeply rooted in this concept because it acknowledges that individuals are the best judges of their well-being. If a person is experiencing unbearable suffering, whether physical, psychological, or existential, it seems only logical that if they finally choose death as a means of ending that suffering, to be free from it- it should be respected.
On the other side, people not subscribing to the above thought believe that life has an inherent value and suicide undermines it. Such reasoning imposes an external standard on what is an intensely personal decision.
The idea that life is inherently valuable is subjective—what might hold value for one individual may not for another. For someone in constant, unrelenting pain with no hope of improvement, life may no longer seem worth living. It is neither humane nor ethical to force someone to endure a life they deem intolerable simply because society has an abstract notion of life’s sanctity.
Suicide Is Not A Selfish Act.
People argue that suicide is inherently a selfish act, leaving behind emotional wreckage for family and friends who must bear the social and emotional outcomes. Yes, the impact of suicide on loved ones can be devastating. Families are left vulnerable, grappling with grief, shame, confusion, and sometimes even societal judgment. The emotional fallout can fracture family structures, creating long-lasting scars.
However, it oversimplifies the reality of the situation, placing the blame on the individual who chose to die rather than addressing the deeper truth: if the emotional support and involvement from the family, friends, or community were present, the individual might not have reached the point of contemplating suicide.
Society often overlooks the fact that by the time someone decides to end their life, they have already endured immense emotional turmoil, and the pain or effect on others becomes immaterial to them. They are thinking about ending their suffering, which has likely been building for a long time, unnoticed or unaddressed by those around them.
The act of suicide is not selfish, but the collective failure to recognise and support individuals through their mental or emotional crises before they reach that breaking point reflects the broad spectrum of selfish people.
Addressing Moral and Religious Arguments
A common objection to suicide is that it is morally or religiously wrong. Many religions view life as a gift from the divine and argue that only it has the right to take it away. They view suicide as not only a rejection of life but also a transgression against divine will. However, secular societies, especially those built on liberal principles, cannot and should not legislate based on religious doctrine.
While individuals have the right to follow their own religious beliefs, the state must remain neutral on matters of personal faith. To deny the right to suicide on religious grounds is to impose specific religious beliefs on those who may not share them, violating the principle of religious freedom.
Moreover, morality is not absolute. Many moral principles that were once deemed inviolable have been reconsidered over time, particularly when it comes to issues of personal autonomy. For instance, blasphemy and same-sex marriage, once punishable offences in many parts of the world, are no longer criminalised in most liberal societies. The same reconsideration should happen with the right to die. A shift in moral thinking is not only possible but necessary regarding matters of personal liberty and self-determination.
Mental Health and Rationality
One of the strongest arguments against legalising suicide is that people contemplating suicide suffer from mental illness, particularly depression, and are, therefore, not in a position to make rational decisions. Hence, suicide is not a legitimate choice but rather the outcome of impaired judgment, and society has a duty to intervene to prevent it.
While it is true that mental illness often plays a role in suicidal ideation, this does not mean that all individuals who contemplate or attempt suicide are incapable of making rational decisions. There are cases, particularly in terminal illness or chronic, untreatable conditions, where the desire to die is not the result of mental illness but rather a considered, rational response to suffering.
To dismiss all suicides as irrational is to oversimplify a complex issue. It also undermines the autonomy of individuals who have carefully weighed their options and decided that death is preferable to continued suffering.
Instead of criminalising suicide or labelling it as irrational, societies should adopt a more nuanced approach. Mental health interventions can play an important role in preventing impulsive suicides and helping those with treatable mental illnesses. But for those whose suffering is unrelenting and whose desire to die is consistent and considered, the option of a dignified death should be available.
The Ethical Dilemma of Forced Life
Forcing individuals to remain alive against their will is ethically dubious. In the context of terminal illness, for instance, there is widespread support for assisted dying or euthanasia in many parts of the world. Forcing someone to endure unbearable physical pain is inhumane. Yet, when it comes to suicide for non-terminal conditions, the same logic is rarely applied.
The assumption seems to be that if someone is not dying from a physical illness, their life is worth preserving at all costs. This is a dangerous and paternalistic approach, as it disregards the subjective experience of suffering.
People endure various forms of suffering that are not necessarily terminal but are nonetheless unbearable. Whether it is chronic depression, a debilitating physical condition, or existential anguish, forcing individuals to live in states they find intolerable is a form of cruelty.
Suicide is Not a “Momentary” Act—It is a Build-Up
One of the most pervasive myths about suicide is that it is the result of an impulsive moment, a sudden act triggered by a fleeting emotional breakdown. This oversimplified understanding is not only inaccurate but also harmful, as it minimises the deep and sustained emotional or physical suffering that leads individuals to this decision.
Suicide is rarely an isolated, rash act; it is often the culmination of a long process—a build-up of feelings of hopelessness, despair, isolation, or chronic pain. People may plan their deaths for days, weeks, or even months, weighing their options and coming to a decision only after much deliberation.
An attempted suicide reflects on the society’s failure to recognise the build-up. We often fail to notice signs like gradual withdrawal from social life, increased isolation, drastic changes in behaviour, or expressions of despair. Even when we sense them, we dismiss them as trivial or are unsure how to respond. We fail to realise many individuals’ ongoing internal struggles, leaving them to battle their demons in silence.
As much as individuals are responsible for their own decisions, society must bear some blame for not creating an environment where individuals feel safe, understood, and supported enough to seek help before it’s too late.
Suicide May Be The Ultimate Brave Step.
We are always taught that human life is precious, that you get it after so many rebirths, and that you must fight to succeed and live no matter how difficult life becomes. That there are always solutions and ways out. While the sanctity of life is a noble ideal, this perspective fails to grasp the profound suffering of those contemplating suicide. It dismisses the complex internal struggles and emotional turmoil that lead individuals to view death as the only remaining option.
Those who decide to end their lives are not cowardly, but rather, they have endured an exhausting battle with their inner demons, often over extended periods.
Suicide is not an easy or impulsive decision (though it may be so in some rash cases), but one made after careful thought, a sign of someone who has finally surrendered to a deep sense of defeat after exhausting all other avenues of survival. To call such a person a coward trivialises their experience and ignores the courage it takes to face the unknown that death represents.
Society must recognise that the decision to commit suicide is neither rash nor weak but an ultimate conclusion reached by those who feel that their fight has been fought and that life no longer offers anything but suffering. Instead of vilifying them, we should shift our focus towards understanding the depth of their pain and working to create an environment where the weight of their suffering can be shared, acknowledged, and addressed.
Student Suicides – no different.
When a student dies by suicide, the emotional shockwaves are immense. But beyond the immediate tragedy, there is often a complex web of factors contributing to the student’s decision. And it may not be just the academic stress, an uncertain future or failure to perform in examinations. A student, too, is a social person. Beyond the usually assigned reasons, there could be bullying, family expectations, financial stress, emotional breakups and social alienation that can weigh heavily on young minds. The build-up leading to a student’s suicide is often exacerbated by a societal obsession with success and achievement without adequate attention to mental well-being.
Student suicides may appear impulsive, in most cases, they are the result of prolonged periods of distress that go unaddressed. We must not view such deaths as isolated incidents. We must examine the structural and cultural factors that contribute to the mental health crisis among young people. Academic institutions, families, and communities must create safe, supportive spaces for prioritising mental health over academic or social performance.
Conclusion: Neither Encouraging Suicide nor Repulsed by it.
Please don’t misunderstand the argument. The right to die or the decriminalisation of suicide is not the same as promoting suicide. We should never encourage or trivialise death by suicide. However, we should not react to it with repulsion or moral condemnation.
Each individual’s pain is unique, and while we may never fully understand what triggers someone’s decision to end their life. We must approach the issue with compassion and respect for individual autonomy. Rather than shaming or punishing those who choose death, we should focus on creating a society that is more attuned to the build-up of suffering and more capable of offering meaningful support before it is too late.
Addon.
Under Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code 1860, an attempt to commit suicide shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with a fine or with both. Whoever abets the commission of suicide shall be punished with imprisonment, which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to a fine.
BLOG/086/2024 To connect, send an email, join on Twitter S_kotnala or subscribe to the weekly update.
