Coroner calls on Google and Amazon to act after British woman’s suicide::Chloe Macdermott researched suicide methods on a forum and bought lethal substance online from US

  • jetA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Helping people, yes

    Giving people options, yes

    Showing people a better way, yes

    Removing options, gatekeeping

    Restricting information, gatekeeping

    • Otter@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Removing options, gatekeeping

      There’s some nuance here too

      Say barriers on bridges and high areas that the public can access. It’s removing an option yes, but it might be enough friction to stop the person till they can receive the help they need

      • jetA
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        I concede the benefit of barriers to prevent accidents, or to discourage people from jumping from this point right here. Delaying the impulse. We don’t deny people the knowledge of gravity, and we don’t legistate the removal of high places. If someone really wants to jump they have options, hiking to a cliff etc.

        Let’s say there is a magic pill, that is painless, no side effects, etc. let’s say we made this available for people’s pets in pain, but not for humans in pain. In this fictional universe the gatekeeping of “enough pain” to justify a dignified and self selected exit is a net evil. As long as a human has agency they should have a choice without officials gatekeeping their knowledge. (I.e. we shouldn’t nanny adults)

      • unrelatedkeg@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think the main point of the barriers is preventing suicide specifically, but safety in general. Preventing suicide is more of a bonus.