Thank you for your article Sells.

I have been a psychiatric nurse since 1978. I have nursed numerous suicidal people and many people who have committed suicide. Generally these people were suffering from extreme clinical depression.

The notion of ambivalence is the key to understanding the suicidal person. In many post suicidal assessments that I have conducted, it has always been clear that the person did not want to die - but rather, wanted to escape from what they believed was an unsolvable and painful situation. People need to learn the differences between suicidal ideas, suicidal intent, suicidal gestures, acts of self harm and suicidal conviction.

There is no doubt in my mind that completed suicide is self murder. The person kills him or her self in a calculated and planned way - a clear egocentric act with little or no thought for those left behind.

Euthanasia is not the synonymous with completed suicide - even though it also has an egocentric element. People who choose to euthanase generally do so in close consultation with family and/or friends. Generally family and friends are relieved after the person dies.

People who are left behind after a person's completed suicide often never recover from the pain of their loss. My brother is a good case example. His wife committed suicide leaving him with a five months old daughter and an 18 months old daughter. My brother is grieving as much today as he was some 15 years ago. My nieces have often been victimised at school when people found out that their mother had suicided. They still ask - why? What did we do wrong? We were only babies.

I have no doubt that my post will upset a lot of people. Even so, at a professional and personal level I think that I am more than qualified to assert in an educated way. Further, I specialised in curricula writing on suicidology for my Master of Education.

kalweb

Thanks for the information Oliver - there are so many interesting things I don't know.

kalweb

Thank you!
Sells confused and oversimplified article seems to have generated a heated rather than considered debate.
You have introduced a note of wisdom and common sense.
Abortion, Suicide and Euthanasia really are three very different issues and need to be treated differently.

Sells is right, however, in one point. If consequences are all that we use to determine the 'rightness' of our actions then we are doomed forever to argue the issues with little hope of finding any sort of agreement or resolution. Every action has consequences, good and bad. Aborting a foetus may have awful consequences for those involved but bringing unwanted children into the world also can have awful consequences. Weighing consequences doesnt really work.

I think it is fair to say that Christ affirmed life in His teaching and in the way He accepted His fate. The Church, on the other hand, has not always managed to interpret Jesus faithfully and has allowed some pretty silly ideas to enter into its dogma.

The Church should encourage people to choose life if it is to be faithful to Jesus teaching. This can in no way be achieved by the severely judgemental attitude inherent in Sells article. He appears to have forgotten why Jesus died?

Yes, Boaz, I probably would, up to a point.

>>Pericles.. where are you? I'd say this was a WHACK-A-CHRISTIAN thread par excellence thus far..wouldnt you?<<

But I haven't yet noticed anyone sneaking in the opinion that Sells' views herald the end of civilization as we know it, or that they indicate imminent mortal danger for non-adherents, which are the principal ingredients of a good whack-a-mozzie rant.

So I'd set it at around a two, or perhaps you could persuade me to a three, on the whack-a scale.

waterboy,
^The Church, on the other hand, has not always managed to interpret Jesus faithfully and has allowed some pretty silly ideas to enter into its dogma.^

Would three of these silly ideas be the infallibility of the pope,
no sex for priests and no condoms for anyone?.

No wonder the church is in decline.

Fair point Pericles.. '3' (out_of_5_of_course:)

but again you actually illustrate the important difference between Islam and Christianity (in the strict doctrinal sense)

If Islam took hold..it would indeed be the end of civilization as we know it and that many of us love. We Christians just want to change your hearts and minds and wills.. we won't fine you for not attending worship.

We won't hang you from a crane for being gay (though Pastor Fred Phelps is the notable exception here.. possibly)

Our 'program', based on the teaching and example of Christ is as simple as being renewed in your heart mind and will. No amount of legislation (religious or otherwise) can ever ever achieve that. It can only produce outward compliance. We won't tax you at some horrific rate for the blessing of our 'protection' if you choose not to believe...

FYI this morning we had a very well delivered talk on Homosexuality.
For the speaker it was the only one he has heard in 50 yrs of his faith. I think it was very well and sensitively handled..and I doubt that any gay person in the congregation would have been offended. But then.. the speaker avoided highlighting the 2nd part of verse 27 he also avoided any colorful adjectives of an unkind nature.

I think this subject came up because of the CYC controversy.

FYI 2 Last weekend we had a very focused weekend camp on the subject of PURITY.. (of mind and act) and some members confessed to a struggle with 'just one click'... by contrast my cousin (who attends a gym with me) declared his only problem with where that one click takes you is running out of bandwidth!
As a distraction, on Saturday evening (at camp) we had 'The Last Samurai' running after official meetings. It came to a point where I was sure there would be a sex scene..me being the one who fired up the DVD did not help my level of comfort over this :) fortunately, it turned out to be very romantic and beautiful.

TOPIC.. on euthenasia..I'm with Runner.