Do you think that it's hypocritical that people can be forcefully hospitalized for being suicidal?

[Anonymous]

But people with otherwise fatal diseases can refuse treatment?

Yes

No

[Anonymous]

You bring up a good point I haven't thought about.

I guess the grey area is one person is already dieing & the other is of good health? Then again what if the sick person wants to off themselves to spare everyone pain & suffering.

The humane thing is to put an animal down but not a person. Let's see how long we can keep them alive & suffering.

[popsickle]

No. Because people with fatal diseases don't particularly have a chance of survival or turning things around and often involve relentless suffering that healthcare workers can only attempt to reduce. In suicidal folks, there's a real chance to help the individual come out of suicidal thoughts.

[Asker]

Actually some diseases have <5% mortality rates when treated yet near 100% mortality rates untreated, yet people can still refuse treatment. Plus with coerced treatment there's the risk of locking up people who aren't actually suicidal or a danger (of which I am a victim).

[popsickle]

Your original post is talking about fatal illnesses... terminal illness means the person is going to die at an extremely extremely high likelihood. Diseases like pulmonary fibrosis, DIPG cancer, prion disease, ALS, etc. That's very different from diseases with <5% mortality rate. Suicide attempt is treated along the lines of mental illness or like a person deemed unable to make decisions for themselves due to the medical state they are in. Medical professionals always assess a person to confirm whether the person is deemed competent to make decisions regarding their own health, and when it is too questionable... they have to make decisions without the patient's input. If you attempted suicide or made it known you had a plan, you are considered unwell for now until they assess you as being well again. It is force out of concern for you and your life. Your life is the most precious thing you own. Refusal of treatment isn't a straightforward thing. It isn't always granted. Depends.

[Asker]

My original post was about OTHERWISE fatal diseases for which people can refuse treatment.

[Asker]

Furthermore I was committed based on a misdiagnosis but I never had issues with suicidal thoughts or self harm before then but ever since I've been plagued by them.

[popsickle]

Oh wow, well I'm really sorry about how you're feeling. I won't act like I know what's really on your mind. Sometimes healthcare professionals and families do make mistakes in judgment. Sometimes it's hard to tell and no one knows what's in your mind but you. It's better to be safe than sorry though, because once a person is gone, he is gone forever and that's how they operate. Since you currently feel overwhelmed by suicidal thoughts, that may be why you are still under care. When you start to feel better and they see it too, so will their care over you. I don't know what you have been going through, but I urge please consider accepting the help and see where it leads you.

[Asker]

I'm not under care and as for this whole "It's better to be safe than sorry though, because once a person is gone, he is gone forever and that's how they operate." medicine doesn't work that way and cures can be worse than the illness. There is no single course of action that eliminated all liability claims. If someone has a potentially lethal infection you don't automatically reach for the most powerful antibiotic because the more powerful the drug, the more potent the side effects and if the doctor did this and the patient died, they can still get sued if the side effects killed the patient. Even if the patient survives and the disease could have been treated without such potent drugs the doctor can still get sued.

[popsickle]

It's better to be safe than sorry DOES factor in if the risks outweigh the benefits and any insight on how the outcome might be. How is this relevant to suicide ideation without evidence of fatal illness? And by the way, I am a medical student.

[Asker]

"It's better to be safe than sorry DOES factor in if the risks outweigh the benefits and any insight on how the outcome might be." Ummmm, if the risks of a treatment outweigh the benefits then you shouldn't go ahead with it. And because someone is at risk of suicide isn't a reason to lock them up because the trauma of that happening (in their compromised state) can be what pushes them over the edge and makes them kill themselves when they get out.

[Asker]

And if you are a medical student you should be acutely aware that a course of treatment that saves the life of one patient can end up killing another. Furthermore, if someone was wrongfully committed they may be unwilling to seek counseling until it's too late and they kill themselves.

[performerwannabe]

Exactly!! People here keep blocking my answer and reporting me on gag because I have stated that I'm suicidal. And then gag sends me the golden message about me needing help. I don't want y'all fucking help, let me be.

[thewanderingme]

people who don't want help don't continually seek attention for their issues.

[performerwannabe]

@thewanderingme funny, right? I have mentioned it twice and both times I got blocked. Not that I need to explain myself to you but it's one of the reasons I don't need a s/o, I didn't say it because I'm some attention whore. I only said the reasons I don't need a man at this point and it's one of them.