Seattle Crime Reports : Seattle Crime Blog : Seattle, Washington

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (6)
• Trackbacks

The issue of suicide has been popping up a lot lately, most recently with the city's plans to build a suicide barrier on the Aurora Bridge (detailed at SLOG on March 25). After paying attention to local news and getting a feel for the general attitude towards this taboo in our area, I've come to the realization that despite all it's libertarian leanings, Washington state has still got a ways to go before we're mature enough to deal with suicide-related matters appropriately.

The problem stems from the fact that we aren't looking at the issue from a reasonable perspective. A want to end ones life is two things:

1. A personal choice
2. A sign of weakness

Our culture fears suicide because we fear depression; and we fear depression because we think everyone should (and can) be happy. This couldn't be further from the truth. If society starts looking at depression and suicide as what they are - a weakness and the ultimate cop-out, respectively - we'll be much better suited to handle issues surrounding it when they inevitably arise in the future. If we start teaching kids that there's nothing glamorous about suicide and that it's a low-class way to go out, we'll be making a huge step in the right direction. After all, who wants to be remembered as a pussy and a chump?

The suicide barrier for the Aurora Bridge is a prime example of how stupidity can reign free when emotion (and the fallacy that "all human life is valuable and must be protected") gets a political foothold. So far, according to Jonah Spangenthal-Lee's report on SLOG, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has given $1.3 million to study a suicide barrier for the bridge, with another $6.2 million on the way. Though half of the funds will go towards a new lighting system on the bridge, the remaining money - approximately $3.75 million, by our count - will be exclusively for the barrier. That's $3.75 million we're putting towards saving the lives of those who don't want to be saved.

Sound like a foolish plan? That's because, like much of the nanny state decision-making that occurs in the Evergreen State, it is.

Of course, the hippies commenting on Jonah's piece seem to think otherwise. Commenter poppy says:

I'm pretty sure $3.1 million (not including the new lighting) for a barrier that would have saved about 40 lives the past ten years, including a 15 year old girl, isn't a waste of money.

Ah yes...invoking the suicide of a teenager to tug at the heartstrings and make your case even stronger. But look past the rhetoric, dear readers: even lowballing the cost as poppy has, $3.1 million to save 40 lives over 10 years is still a waste. These people do not want to live, and cannot cope with the stresses of everyday life that 6.6 billion of us face on a daily basis. Even spending $1 to save their lives seems like a waste.

There are some who share reasonable sentiments. Commenter Fierinferno offered a poignant response that captures my mood well:

If people want to die, let them. If suicide wasn't illegal then maybe they wouldn't be searching for a place that ensured their demise, rather than trying in the comfort of their own home where a chance of failure by discovery is so high.

Are the costs of body disposal so high that we have to save the taxpayers money? This is a legitimate question, because it's the only motivating factor I understand here.

[...]

Before everyone with a nephew or a grandmother who's committed suicide starts going on a tirade, please know that I've also loved people who have committed suicide. I didn't like it, I mourned them pitifully, but I believe it was their right to make that choice.

Well put. Despite experiencing the suicide of a family member firsthand, Fierinferno is a rare breed: one who doesn't let petty human emotion cloud their sense of logic.