Caroline Flack found dead

feelthepower

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

I never made any jibes.

Although there has been plenty directed at me, just because people cannot handle anyone who doesn't view life and death exactly like they do!

I never disrespected anyone either. I simply gave my opinion, evidently a very unpopular opinion... and I have basically been attacked for this! I have been the one trying to stay on topic, while everyone else showed their lack of maturity by trying to make everything personal. Childish stuff really tbh!

Nobody has the right to tell anyone else how they should view death or suicide... if someone thinks suicide is good legitimate life choice, they are entitled to hold that opinion. It's a valid opinion!

You don't have to agree with it... but it should be respected, like any other opinion. But it certainly has not been respected within this thread. Quite the opposite, in fact.

And rightly so so its should be disrepected. Have you lost anyone close to you to suicide? if not your opinion is pointless.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

I never made any jibes.

Although there has been plenty directed at me, just because people cannot handle anyone who doesn't view life and death exactly like they do!

I never disrespected anyone either. I simply gave my opinion, evidently a very unpopular opinion... and I have basically been attacked for this! I have been the one trying to stay on topic, while everyone else showed their lack of maturity by trying to make everything personal. Childish stuff really tbh!

Nobody has the right to tell anyone else how they should view death or suicide... if someone thinks suicide is good legitimate life choice, they are entitled to hold that opinion. It's a valid opinion!

You don't have to agree with it... but it should be respected, like any other opinion. But it certainly has not been respected within this thread. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Actually, no opinion has the automatic right to be respected. Nobody is under any obligation to do so.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

feelthepower wrote: »

And rightly so so its should be disrepected. Have you lost anyone close to you to suicide? if not your opinion is pointless.

Again, another poster who is not capable of discussing this topic without making it personal?

My private life is not open for discussion in this forum. But as I have already said, I have lots of experience around the issues of suicide and death. I don't really see why I should need to go into any more depth about my personal experiences... if others wish to do so, that's their prerogative.

The personal attacks on my character, and the wild assumptions being made about me, are neither necessary appropriate or particularly fair. (But don't worry, I won't be playing a sad song on my little violin and looking for sympathy:P - if people want to take that approach to debate, crack on. However, it is very immature!)

Why should anyone's right to choose whether they live or die, be something you think can be disrespected?

Who owns our life? Do we all have full ownership over our own lives?

Because if we all do truly fully own our own lives... then I would argue very strongly, that part of those ownership rights should also naturally include the right to choose if and when we die!

Why should anyone else have the right, to tell another person they cannot end their life?

I did put these points to another poster... but they were not capable of answering them. Perhaps you or someone else on here, might make a better attempt at doing so!

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Actually, no opinion has the automatic right to be respected. Nobody is under any obligation to do so.

That's nice. Very sound foundation, on which to build any constructive discussion! :rolleyes:

feelthepower

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Again, another poster who is not capable of discussing this topic without making it personal?

My private life is not open for discussion in this forum. But as I have already said, I have lots of experience around the issues of suicide and death. I don't really see why I should need to go into any more depth about my personal experiences... if others wish to do so, that's their prerogative.

The personal attacks on my character, and the wild assumptions being made about me, are neither necessary appropriate or particularly fair. (But don't worry, I won't be playing a sad song on my little violin and looking for sympathy:P - if people want to take that approach to debate, crack on. However, it is very immature!)

Why should anyone's right to choose whether they live or die, be something you think can be disrespected?

Who owns our life? Do we all have full ownership over our own lives?

Because if we all do truly fully own our own lives... then I would argue very strongly, that part of those ownership rights should also naturally include the right to choose if and when we die!

Why should anyone else have the right, to tell another person they cannot end their life?

I did put these points to another poster... but they were not capable of answering them. Perhaps you or someone else on here, might make a better attempt at doing so!



That's nice. Very sound foundation, on which to build any constructive discussion! :rolleyes:

You were saying that it was fine for Caroline Flack to take her own life because she was in her 40's and led a good life even though she was mentally ill.

Yea no one is going to criticize you over that:rolleyes::rolleyes:

If a person wants to take their own life without been terminally ill then they are mentally ill.

They need help to stop them doing it, not encouragement from cretins like you.

Is this you in disguise? Mods seriously can you get this nonsense out of the thread because its nothing to with Caroline Flack.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

feelthepower wrote: »

You were saying that it was fine for Caroline Flack to take her own life because she was in her 40's and led a good life even though she was mentally ill.

Yea no one is going to criticize you over that:rolleyes::rolleyes:

If a person wants to take their own life without been terminally ill then they are mentally ill.

They need help to stop them doing it, not encouragement from cretins like you.

Is this you in disguise? Mods seriously can you get this nonsense out of the thread because its nothing to with Caroline Flack.

If someone wishes to end their life slightly early at age 40, that should be their right to make that decision. It's their life, they should have that right and privilege!

Who are you to pass judgement on whether someone else can end their life?

And yes, I qualified my opinion on this, by saying that you can squeeze a huge amount of life into the first 40 years of your life. Which you absolutely can, and many people do! (And Caroline Flack certainly appeared to have) And if someone decides they've had enough, and would rather leave the party early... that is a perfectly legitimate choice for them to make with their life....

You are welcome to disagree with me... and offer up your counter argument. But I do not agree, that I should be personally open for criticism just for holding a different opinion to you or anyone else!

And I do not agree with your opinion, that anyone who wishes to take their own life - without being terminally ill - must be mentally ill... this is just an opinion you hold. It's not a fact!

Are you going to attempt to answer my questions, about who has ownership over our lives?

And why the personal insult? Is that really necessary? You should try to have more self control, when discussing these emotive topics... :rolleyes:

Ellie2008

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

If someone wishes to end their life slightly early at age 40, that should be their right to make that decision. It's their life, they should have that right and privilege!

Who are you to pass judgement on whether someone else can end their life?

And yes, I qualified my opinion on this, by saying that you can squeeze a huge amount of life into the first 40 years of your life. Which you absolutely can, and many people do! (And Caroline Flack certainly appeared to have) And if someone decides they've had enough, and would rather leave the party early... that is a perfectly legitimate choice for them to make with their life....

You are welcome to disagree with me... and offer up your counter argument. But I do not agree, that I should be personally open for criticism just for holding a different opinion to you or anyone else!

And I do not agree with your opinion, that anyone who wishes to take their own life - without being terminally ill - must be mentally ill... this is just an opinion you hold. It's not a fact!

Are you going to attempt to answer my questions, about who has ownership over our lives?

And why the personal insult? Is that really necessary? You should try to have more self control, when discussing these emotive topics... :rolleyes:

Caroline Flack has drafted an Instagram post which makes it clear that she was suffering hugely. She didn’t check out because her star was fading at the “slightly early age” of 40. In my opinion that is a tragedy, a personal tragedy for her & her family, & a chance for wider society to consider how we persecute people.

So your theory doesn’t apply in this case. Your why are you boring me with your personal stuff in response to my amazing “alternative view”, lacks empathy to put it mildly. Quite possibly because you are directing it at people who have read suicide notes or haven’t & wondered why they would say. In my personal experience (i know, I know it’s m boring you) I don’t know anyone who has taken their own life who wasn’t hugely struggling. It was never some rational clinical decisions. And while they were relieved of that struggle which could be seen as a positive thing they robbed themselves of the rest of their lives. That’s not mentioned the children, parents & others they left behind.

I’m glad I live in a society where people like Joan Freeman are willing to set up Pieta House & people give generously to organisations like the Samitarians.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

If someone wishes to end their life slightly early at age 40, that should be their right to make that decision. It's their life, they should have that right and privilege!

Who are you to pass judgement on whether someone else can end their life?

And yes, I qualified my opinion on this, by saying that you can squeeze a huge amount of life into the first 40 years of your life. Which you absolutely can, and many people do! (And Caroline Flack certainly appeared to have) And if someone decides they've had enough, and would rather leave the party early... that is a perfectly legitimate choice for them to make with their life....

You are welcome to disagree with me... and offer up your counter argument. But I do not agree, that I should be personally open for criticism just for holding a different opinion to you or anyone else!

And I do not agree with your opinion, that anyone who wishes to take their own life - without being terminally ill - must be mentally ill... this is just an opinion you hold. It's not a fact!

Are you going to attempt to answer my questions, about who has ownership over our lives?

And why the personal insult? Is that really necessary? You should try to have more self control, when discussing these emotive topics... :rolleyes:

The strongest instinct we have is survival. To be so upset, stressed and down that you take your own life when you have the possibility of years of potential in front of you seems to me to qualify as being anything other than healthy, mentally. Caroline Flack’s death is a tragedy; for her, for her family, for those who truly loved and cared for her. I suspect she “chose” suicide was because life seemed so bleak to her.

To dress it up as some sort of rational, considered decision is, quite frankly, nonsense.

The world that she lived in appears to me to be so manufactured and surreal that simple common sense is entirely missing. Gauging who you are as a person by social media and the media in general isn’t real. Living life through the “like button” is a complete fantasy. At 40, with a bit of luck and a following wind, you might be only half way through your life. In your teenage years, you have only just begun. It’s very glib to say that people who resort to taking their own lives are “exercising their rights” or “making a choice”. And I certainly wouldn’t propose that explanation to anyone who’s lost someone close and dear to them.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

http://martin-manley.eprci.com/

Here is a link to a webpage, that a man named Martin Manley created in order to better explain his decision to end his life at age 60.

I read it a few years ago... I was trying to remember how to find it again. It's a very interesting read, for anyone who thinks there can be no such thing as a rational suicide in someone who is not terminally ill etc

He did have a few problems that were making his life less enjoyable. But we all encounter problems... and most people will probably encounter some of these problems, if they make it to this man's age!

But he certainly does come across very rational and of sound mind, when weighing up the decision to end his life at 60. Some people will automatically assume, that he must have been depressed to make this decision... maybe he was, maybe he wasn't... it is of course debatable.

I personally don't think he was... I think he was simply not enjoying his life as much anymore, and also was not looking forward to old age! So he made a rational decision to leave this life at 60.

Whether you are 40 or 60 or 90... or terminally ill... I think every human being, should have the right to end their life at the time of their choosing. Without being stigmatized or having to feel ashamed about it.

I think that should be a fundamental human right... not just a right that we afford to terminally ill people, but ALL people. Every human being should have full ownership over their own life. And you do not have that, if you are forbidden to end your life. Or stigmatized/shamed etc...

Ellie2008

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

http://martin-manley.eprci.com/

Here is a link to a webpage, that a man named Martin Manley created in order to better explain his decision to end his life at age 60.

I read it a few years ago... I was trying to remember how to find it again. It's a very interesting read, for anyone who thinks there can be no such thing as a rational suicide in someone who is not terminally ill etc

He did have a few problems that were making his life less enjoyable. But we all encounter problems... and most people will probably encounter some of these problems, if they make it to this man's age!

But he certainly does come across very rational and of sound mind, when weighing up the decision to end his life at 60. Some people will automatically assume, that he must have been depressed to make this decision... maybe he was, maybe he wasn't... it is of course debatable.

I personally don't think he was... I think he was simply not enjoying his life as much anymore, and also was not looking forward to old age! So he made a rational decision to leave this life at 60.

Whether you are 40 or 60 or 90... or terminally ill... I think every human being, should have the right to end their life at the time of their choosing. Without being stigmatized or having to feel ashamed about it.

I think that should be a fundamental human right... not just a right that we afford to terminally ill people, but ALL people. Every human being should have full ownership over their own life. And you do not have that, if you are forbidden to end your life. Or stigmatized/shamed etc...

I thought that this thread was about Caroline Flack?! A young woman who has made clear by her own writings that this thought process didn’t apply to her.
Her friends & family have also made this clear.

ThewhiteJesus

This thread should now be closed, she hung herself it’s over.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

http://martin-manley.eprci.com/

Here is a link to a webpage, that a man named Martin Manley created in order to better explain his decision to end his life at age 60.

I read it a few years ago... I was trying to remember how to find it again. It's a very interesting read, for anyone who thinks there can be no such thing as a rational suicide in someone who is not terminally ill etc

He did have a few problems that were making his life less enjoyable. But we all encounter problems... and most people will probably encounter some of these problems, if they make it to this man's age!

But he certainly does come across very rational and of sound mind, when weighing up the decision to end his life at 60. Some people will automatically assume, that he must have been depressed to make this decision... maybe he was, maybe he wasn't... it is of course debatable.

I personally don't think he was... I think he was simply not enjoying his life as much anymore, and also was not looking forward to old age! So he made a rational decision to leave this life at 60.

Whether you are 40 or 60 or 90... or terminally ill... I think every human being, should have the right to end their life at the time of their choosing. Without being stigmatized or having to feel ashamed about it.

I think that should be a fundamental human right... not just a right that we afford to terminally ill people, but ALL people. Every human being should have full ownership over their own life. And you do not have that, if you are forbidden to end your life. Or stigmatized/shamed etc...

Whatever else I might think, he’s certainly given it a good bit of thought. I’m not qualified or competent to judge his mental state.

The key point for me is (in this thread on Caroline Flack’s death) that she appears to have come to the decision not in any rationale state of mind. And other teenage or young people’s decision to end their lives also seems to me to be out of desperation, bleakness, hopelessness.

For me, it’s not about rights, ownership of your life, choice. I’m not forbidding anyone in this regard. I am saying that I believe that Caroline, and others (especially the young with so much potential ahead of them) don’t reach their decision by any rational and considered route.

Humans share their instinct to survive with most other animals we share this world with. As I said in an earlier post, I’m not aware of any other species that becomes so desperate that they commit suicide. The fact that some of us do is to be recognised for what it is. A dreadful tragedy.

RabbleRouser2k

I personally think that an important lesson could have been made about Flack's suicide-not turning it into a blame game, but moreso no matter how 'good' you seem to have it, if you're not loving yourself internally, nothing will make you happy.

Sadly, instead of that-we got everyone rushing to play the blame game, using the mildest slight to play the victim (while they're up and walking about) and ignoring how everything played a part in her death. I mean, to put it simply, when she called up people to help her-they didn't answer their phones.
That to me was a sad, sad indictment of how lonely her life truly must have been.

Eoghan McDermott was on the Late Late Show-to talk about Flack. Instead, he spun it into his own Narrative. (His attacking the Sun was proper turncoat, imo. He worked as a columnist there-had no issues with what they said while he was there).
He then proceeded to blame social media... yet as soon as his LLS show interview was over (not even 30 minutes later) he was on twitter. :rolleyes:

Laura Whitmore tried to blame Social Media, or the print media too. She used to work for MTV news, which pretty much reported nothing BUT gossip.
She ignored her own part in the issues she seemed determined to gripe about.

Katie Hind wrote an interesting dissection (For the daily mail, so I won't post it here) of the whole furore of Flack's death (while still also using a scapegoat with Love Island).
But she finishes it with 'Caroline was a victim of the narcissistic culture that she was the much love poster girl'.
I found that sadly true-Flack had instagram followers, twitter followers, and whole slew of other 'peeks' into her life.
But the picture she painted was sadly far more depressing.

Ironicname

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote:

That's nice. Very sound foundation, on which to build any constructive discussion!

I think your opinion on the matter is very dangerous if I am being honest.

If, when I was at my lowest ebb, saw your comments, it may have been the justification I needed to end my life instead of seeking help. I'm so glad I never saw what you said or read something like it on here.

If anyone is reading this thread and feeling suicidal, please believe me that it can get better. I'm living proof of that.

Hannibal_Smith

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I personally think that an important lesson could have been made about Flack's suicide-not turning it into a blame game, but moreso no matter how 'good' you seem to have it, if you're not loving yourself internally, nothing will make you happy.

I think it's important that a side be heard. Like, I didnt know Caroline Flack personally, but even me sitting at home seeing how relentless the tabloids were. ' The truth has been taken out of my hands and used as entertainment'. It certainly comes across as though It had an impact on her.

So rather than it being labelled a blame game, maybe look at it as being a change in the game. Maybe people will be encouraged not to click or buy the rags anymore?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

That's nice. Very sound foundation, on which to build any constructive discussion! :rolleyes:

*shrug* Life isn’t always nice. Nobody has the automatic right to have their opinions respected. You can’t control people’s reactions to things you say.

Raconteuse

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I personally think that an important lesson could have been made about Flack's suicide-not turning it into a blame game, but moreso no matter how 'good' you seem to have it, if you're not loving yourself internally, nothing will make you happy.

Sadly, instead of that-we got everyone rushing to play the blame game, using the mildest slight to play the victim (while they're up and walking about) and ignoring how everything played a part in her death. I mean, to put it simply, when she called up people to help her-they didn't answer their phones.
That to me was a sad, sad indictment of how lonely her life truly must have been.

Eoghan McDermott was on the Late Late Show-to talk about Flack. Instead, he spun it into his own Narrative. (His attacking the Sun was proper turncoat, imo. He worked as a columnist there-had no issues with what they said while he was there).
He then proceeded to blame social media... yet as soon as his LLS show interview was over (not even 30 minutes later) he was on twitter. :rolleyes:

Laura Whitmore tried to blame Social Media, or the print media too. She used to work for MTV news, which pretty much reported nothing BUT gossip.
She ignored her own part in the issues she seemed determined to gripe about.

Katie Hind wrote an interesting dissection (For the daily mail, so I won't post it here) of the whole furore of Flack's death (while still also using a scapegoat with Love Island).
But she finishes it with 'Caroline was a victim of the narcissistic culture that she was the much love poster girl'.
I found that sadly true-Flack had instagram followers, twitter followers, and whole slew of other 'peeks' into her life.
But the picture she painted was sadly far more depressing.

Very well said.

I mean, harassment is never ok but I see a tweet from Laura Whitmore with a video of her telling a paparazzo to get lost. She shared this to show people how she got rid of him because he was encroaching on her privacy while grieving the loss of her friend.



Does she not SEE the irony?!

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Raconteuse wrote: »

Very well said.

I mean, harassment is never ok but I see a tweet from Laura Whitmore with a video of her telling a paparazzo to get lost. She shared this to show people how she got rid of him because he was encroaching on her privacy while grieving the loss of her friend.



Does she not SEE the irony?!

I dunno, I liked her turning it back on the paparazzo and seeing how perturbed he got when he was the one being filmed. She was giving him a taste of his own medicine. That was the point.

PressRun

Absolutely mental to frame a suicide brought on by psychological issues as something to shrug one's shoulders at and say "that's grand". Everyone is free to make their own decisions about their lives (and indeed their deaths), and suicidal thoughts are not something people should be ashamed of, but it's so much more empowering for suicidal people and the families and friends who support them to try and find solutions to such problems. Just waving it away does nothing to help those troubled by depression, the loved ones left behind, or the communities and wider society who have to deal with the fall out from suicide.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

PressRun wrote: »

Absolutely mental to frame a suicide brought on by psychological issues as something to shrug one's shoulders at and say "that's grand". Everyone is free to make their own decisions about their lives (and indeed their deaths), and suicidal thoughts are not something people should be ashamed of, but it's so much more empowering for suicidal people and the families and friends who support them to try and find solutions to such problems. Just waving it away does nothing to help those troubled by depression, the loved ones left behind, or the communities and wider society who have to deal with the fall out from suicide.

Especially as, and I can’t highlight this enough, researchers into suicide have independent of each other found that if a suicidal person is helped through the crisis, most of them will never attempt suicide again. And of the dozen or so survivors of the Golden Gate Bridge jump, pretty much all of them regretted their decision the moment they stepped off the bridge. So it is very much worth it to try and help a suicidal person through the maelstrom. That’s why volunteers go out to monitor suicide black spots.

Ellie2008

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Especially as, and I can’t highlight this enough, researchers into suicide have independent of each other found that if a suicidal person is helped through the crisis, most of them will never attempt suicide again. And of the dozen or so survivors of the Golden Gate Bridge jump, pretty much all of them regretted their decision the moment they stepped off the bridge. So it is very much worth it to try and help a suicidal person through the maelstrom. That’s why volunteers go out to monitor suicide black spots.

I’m really glad that the vast vast majority of posts on this thread are along these lines. When I read ah sure at 40 you might weigh up your options & decide your best years are behind you & it’s not sad, I wasn’t sure how you counter that mentality. Any suicide I’ve experienced has been an absolute tragedy both for the person themselves & those left behind. Some people had been struggling for years, there was never a sense of ah sure it’s not that sad, the world is overpopulated etc.
Children left behind to cope, parents totally bereft. I think of them from time to time even people I didn’t know that well as I go through various life stages & all they missed out on.

Tork

I'm still not sure if that poster is a dangerous troll or someone who might need some help themselves. I accept that in some cases, people can't be helped and that they will commit suicide. Or that there's a reason for it. If someone got diagnosed with something incurable and awful like Motor Neurone Disease, I can understand why they'd want to go on their own terms. I still have that nagging feeling that Caroline Flack could have been "saved" and that she lost all sense of perspective.

Keyzer

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

This thread should now be closed, she hung herself it’s over.

100%

This thread is a disgrace...

Ash.J.Williams

Keyzer wrote: »

100%

This thread is a disgrace...

A friend did the exact same... sneaky, well executed and quick. Celebs and us unwashed are the exact same at the end.

RabbleRouser2k

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

I think it's important that a side be heard. Like, I didnt know Caroline Flack personally, but even me sitting at home seeing how relentless the tabloids were. ' The truth has been taken out of my hands and used as entertainment'. It certainly comes across as though It had an impact on her.

So rather than it being labelled a blame game, maybe look at it as being a change in the game. Maybe people will be encouraged not to click or buy the rags anymore?

As JM Barrie once wrote, 'All of this has happened before, and it will all happen again.'

Media got blamed for Prince Diana's death-as she was chased by Paparazzi. Nothing changed. (If anything, it got worse-there's an immediacy to wanting to know 'the latest' news. We have access to the news and latest gossip on our phones. Before you had to be glued to a TV or buying magazines or the newspaper the next day to get the info)
Social Media literally drove a porn star, August Ames, to commit suicide-nothing changed.

Philip Schofield 'playing tribute' to Flack on the first Dancing On Ice after her suicide was blatantly two faced.
The show happily used Caprice Bourret (who as competing on the show) as a boost for ratings. She left the show as she found all the attention was affecting her mental health. Where was the support then?

Piers Morgan has shared a behind the scenes conversation he had with Flack-regarding the targeted harassment she got from Jameela Jamil.
Jamil puts forth this 'I'm fighting for people's mental health'... then turns into a total bully when she gets on social media.

Raconteuse wrote: »

Very well said.

I mean, harassment is never ok but I see a tweet from Laura Whitmore with a video of her telling a paparazzo to get lost. She shared this to show people how she got rid of him because he was encroaching on her privacy while grieving the loss of her friend.



Does she not SEE the irony?!

Tbh, it shows her own narcissism. She WANTS to control the narrative. So did Flack. The moment the narrative collapses, is the moment their world falls apart. (Whitmore couldn't apply any filters or photoshop to alter her images).
The photographer is getting paid for his photos - we may not 'like' his job, but there are lots of jobs I don't like.
Still has to pay the bills-and he's involved in the biz that she herself has chosen to play the game in. (She's wanted to be famous for a while-even tried to be a model-where cameras are everywhere).
Turning the camera on the paps is nothing new-Cate Blanchett does it quite often.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

Ellie2008 wrote: »

Caroline Flack has drafted an Instagram post which makes it clear that she was suffering hugely. She didn’t check out because her star was fading at the “slightly early age” of 40. In my opinion that is a tragedy, a personal tragedy for her & her family, & a chance for wider society to consider how we persecute people.

So your theory doesn’t apply in this case. Your why are you boring me with your personal stuff in response to my amazing “alternative view”, lacks empathy to put it mildly. Quite possibly because you are directing it at people who have read suicide notes or haven’t & wondered why they would say. In my personal experience (i know, I know it’s m boring you) I don’t know anyone who has taken their own life who wasn’t hugely struggling. It was never some rational clinical decisions. And while they were relieved of that struggle which could be seen as a positive thing they robbed themselves of the rest of their lives. That’s not mentioned the children, parents & others they left behind.

I’m glad I live in a society where people like Joan Freeman are willing to set up Pieta House & people give generously to organisations like the Samitarians.

An instagram post is only ever a snapshot into someone's life and feelings.

You or I will never know every single factor that might have made this person unhappy... as others have already said, and I agree, the root of anyone's unhappiness is rarely straightforward and simplistic. It's usually multi-faceted.

It's no secret that most people worry about life after a certain age. This would be particularly true for those who make their living in the world that Caroline Flack inhabited... where you are under constant scrutiny for your appearance, and it's all about youth and beauty! To deny that this would have been a weight on this woman's shoulders, is naive at best...

I'm not sure why people are suggesting that I lack empathy, just because I have a different way of viewing death and suicide. It is true that I do not engage in these pointless competitions, to see who can outdo each other with faux empathy and hollow rhetoric that is so common these days on social media etc... but this doesn't mean that I am unfeeling or uncaring.

Just because someone was struggling at the end, and perhaps in a distressed state in the days before they ended their life... this does not mean that they were completely incapable of rational thoughts or logical reasoning.

But more importantly, it is very likely that they may have weighed up the idea of ending their life during calmer and less stressful times. I've talked with many people, who have suicidal feelings... many of these people don't only think about suicide during the worst moments of their life. It's something that crosses their mind very often, even in less dark moments.

There is this notion, that suicidal thoughts only pop into someone's head when they are at their lowest point... when they have hit rock bottom. I think this is a foolish notion. Again, it is a very naive way of viewing suicide and the complex way in which our minds work.

But there is a very obvious reason, why people like to paint suicide in this manner. Because it makes it much easier to label this act, as being purely impulsive. When in fact the desire to end one's life is quite often not impulsive at all. If someone has thought about suicide for years and years throughout their life... which many people do... then to label their suicide as 100% impulsive, is a foolish way to analyse it. Yes there quite likely was an element of impulsivity at play in the moment when they did the deed... but the final moment when someone ends their life, often does not fully encapsulate their overall desire to die!

Deleted User wrote: »

For me, it’s not about rights, ownership of your life, choice. I’m not forbidding anyone in this regard. I am saying that I believe that Caroline, and others (especially the young with so much potential ahead of them) don’t reach their decision by any rational and considered route.

Humans share their instinct to survive with most other animals we share this world with. As I said in an earlier post, I’m not aware of any other species that becomes so desperate that they commit suicide. The fact that some of us do is to be recognised for what it is. A dreadful tragedy.

I disagree. I think it is about ownership over one's life...

People go to great lengths in society, to stigmatize suicide and paint it as a very shameful act. The main motivation behind this attitude, is the desire to make it an unfashionable and undesirable option!

You only need to look at the angry posts directed at me in this thread to see this attitude at play... look at the wild accusations, assumptions and attempted character assassinations directed at me, simply because I have the nerve to hold a different view to most people.

I don't really care if people make personal attacks on me. I'm a big boy with a fairly thick skin tbh... but it is a very obvious sign, of just how immature most people are around topics such as this one. There is still a very old fashioned attitude that prevails in society, around these issues!

And of course, I get that this is a very emotive subject that brings out a lot of passion in people. But it is the year 2020... we really need to grow up as a society, and learn to discuss these issues in a calmer and more reasoned manner!

Human beings have always committed suicide... you only have to read through history to see this. So I would say, we are not exactly the same as wild animals in this regard. And people will continue to take their own lives, regardless of whether you continue to stigmatize the act or not... painting it as a shameful or foolish act, has not worked throughout history... and it will not work in the future!

It's time we moved passed these outdated views on suicide. Society needs to evolve a lot more around these topics.

Ironicname wrote: »

I think your opinion on the matter is very dangerous if I am being honest.

If, when I was at my lowest ebb, saw your comments, it may have been the justification I needed to end my life instead of seeking help. I'm so glad I never saw what you said or read something like it on here.

If anyone is reading this thread and feeling suicidal, please believe me that it can get better. I'm living proof of that.

I respect your opinion, but I do think you're wrong...

I think it is more dangerous NOT to talk about these issues.

The fact that society has such an immature and old fashioned attitude to death and suicide, is far more detrimental in the long run.

To suggest that we should not openly discuss something like suicide, just because someone might be influenced by those discussions one way or the other... that is wrong!

You cannot take an important issue like this off the discussion table, just because it's potentially dangerous or tricky to discuss it. That is a very poor justification for shutting down any discussion.

At the end of the day, people are going to take their life... whether you shut down discussion on suicide or not.

The ability to talk about something like this openly and freely, and respecting many different viewpoints and perspectives on it... that is the best way going forward.

Reacting angrily or in a hostile manner, to anyone who might hold a slightly different view to your own on this topic... that is an attitude very much rooted in the past. It will not help to bring better understanding of suicide. And it certainly will not do anything to prevent people from considering suicide as an option in their life!

Hannibal_Smith

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

As JM Barrie once wrote, 'All of this has happened before, and it will all happen again.'

Media got blamed for Prince Diana's death-as she was chased by Paparazzi. Nothing changed. (If anything, it got worse-there's an immediacy to wanting to know 'the latest' news. We have access to the news and latest gossip on our phones. Before you had to be glued to a TV or buying magazines or the newspaper the next day to get the info)
Social Media literally drove a porn star, August Ames, to commit suicide-nothing changed.

Philip Schofield 'playing tribute' to Flack on the first Dancing On Ice after her suicide was blatantly two faced.
The show happily used Caprice Bourret (who as competing on the show) as a boost for ratings. She left the show as she found all the attention was affecting her mental health. Where was the support then?

Piers Morgan has shared a behind the scenes conversation he had with Flack-regarding the targeted harassment she got from Jameela Jamil.
Jamil puts forth this 'I'm fighting for people's mental health'... then turns into a total bully when she gets on social media.

Piers Morgan is struggling to keep himself relevant. I was up early with the dog one morning and heard him launchinto an attack on Megan Markle. This is after the woman said she was struggling with negative media. Hes just as hypocritical.

Things did change after Diana. A code of practice was set up and it set or public v private places for snaps and also the sneaky long shots without consent.

Tbh, it shows her own narcissism. She WANTS to control the narrative. So did Flack. The moment the narrative collapses, is the moment their world falls apart. (Whitmore couldn't apply any filters or photoshop to alter her images).
The photographer is getting paid for his photos - we may not 'like' his job, but there are lots of jobs I don't like.
Still has to pay the bills-and he's involved in the biz that she herself has chosen to play the game in. (She's wanted to be famous for a while-even tried to be a model-where cameras are everywhere).
Turning the camera on the paps is nothing new-Cate Blanchett does it quite often.

Both ladies said they accepted the paparazzi were part of the deal. Whitmore said she let him take pictures and then they moved away and he followed them. Thats when she snapped. I dont think not wanting pictures is narcissism. Vanity maybe. But there are lots of non famous people like that.

RabbleRouser2k

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

An instagram post is only ever a snapshot into someone's life and feelings.

You or I will never know every single factor that might have made this person unhappy... as others have already said, and I agree, the root of anyone's unhappiness is rarely straightforward and simplistic. It's usually multi-faceted.

*edited for brevity, not because I disagree*

It's no secret that most people worry about life after a certain age. This would be particularly true for those who make their living in the world that Caroline Flack inhabited... where you are under constant scrutiny for your appearance, and it's all about youth and beauty! To deny that this would have been a weight on this woman's shoulders, is naive at best...

Well, Whitmore and Flack know that the shelf life for women presenters is even shorter-once they're in their 20's, they better start making plans. Because their bosses sure as hell are.

From my teens, I knew how brief life could be, and pretty much worry (and still worry) all the time about the future.
But I also get the benefit of being male (not 'privileged', just more that some things I get more time to decide.)

For Flack, she was probably looking around and seeing how her friends and family were going the 'normal' route- getting married, having kids. Finding love. For a 40 year old woman-she knew the possibilities of having children were running out.
That can be rough. But sadly, one of the things you learn, very early, with mental illness is that you won't get to live the 'normal' life.Sadly. (Speaking from experience).
For someone who wants the 'normal' life... that can be a hard lesson to take.

There's also the feeling of being a burden, a 'drain' on someone else. Without something to occupy your time... those thoughts can encroach upon you.
The show, the media attention, the romances, the parties... they all seem like a distraction in retrospect.

Once the cameras were off her-she was on her own.

RabbleRouser2k

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Piers Morgan is struggling to keep himself relevant. I was up early with the dog one morning and heard him launchinto an attack on Megan Markle. This is after the woman said she was struggling with negative media. Hes just as hypocritical.

Things did change after Diana. A code of practice was set up and it set or public v private places for snaps and also the sneaky long shots without consent.

Except fast forward, and there was this whole scandal about Kate and William's photos, where Kate was topless.

The media got sneaky. Up until not long ago, they would still show the celebs' kids faces.
Now they pixellate the kid's faces. But only if they're under 18.

Laws may have come in, but the media got sneakier.

Both ladies said they accepted the paparazzi were part of the deal. Whitmore said she let him take pictures and then they moved away and he followed them. Thats when she snapped. I dont think not wanting pictures is narcissism. Vanity maybe. But there are lots of non famous people like that.

Ellie2008

The tone of the conversation about women is interesting. Women may have a much lesser chance of having children or being an A list actress after 40 but there is life after 40! 40 FFS I actually despair! Neither Caroline Flack nor Laura Whitmore are A list, plenty of older women on ITV. I do think parts of Caroline Flack’s life seemed sad, the constant nightclubs & men prepared to sell her out. I’d have hoped her best years were in front of her.

dubstarr

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Except fast forward, and there was this whole scandal about Kate and William's photos, where Kate was topless.

The media got sneaky. Up until not long ago, they would still show the celebs' kids faces.
Now they pixellate the kid's faces. But only if they're under 18.

Laws may have come in, but the media got sneakier.

The thing about the media is they go to countries where them laws dont exist.They get the pictures that way.

Shelga

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

For Flack, she was probably looking around and seeing how her friends and family were going the 'normal' route- getting married, having kids. Finding love. For a 40 year old woman-she knew the possibilities of having children were running out.
That can be rough. But sadly, one of the things you learn, very early, with mental illness is that you won't get to live the 'normal' life.Sadly. (Speaking from experience).
For someone who wants the 'normal' life... that can be a hard lesson to take.

There's also the feeling of being a burden, a 'drain' on someone else. Without something to occupy your time... those thoughts can encroach upon you.
The show, the media attention, the romances, the parties... they all seem like a distraction in retrospect.

Once the cameras were off her-she was on her own.

Caroline Flack said many times that she had no desire to have children. That she never had any maternal desire. You are totally projecting here.

Part of the problem is this assumption that all women are desperate to have children, and that you must be sad or lacking if you don’t. Even if you don’t want kids, it’s not nice when people like you are thinking that stuff about you.

Ironicname

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote:

You only need to look at the angry posts directed at me in this thread to see this attitude at play... look at the wild accusations, assumptions and attempted character assassinations directed at me, simply because I have the nerve to hold a different view to most people.

Your views are potentially giving justification to people, who are vulnerable, to make life ending choices.

I think that in a thread like this, which many emotionally troubled people will be reading, it is, at best, insensitive or, at worst, dangerous to be promoting your views the way you are.

AryaStark

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

An instagram post is only ever a snapshot into someone's life and feelings.

You or I will never know every single factor that might have made this person unhappy... as others have already said, and I agree, the root of anyone's unhappiness is rarely straightforward and simplistic. It's usually multi-faceted.

It's no secret that most people worry about life after a certain age. This would be particularly true for those who make their living in the world that Caroline Flack inhabited... where you are under constant scrutiny for your appearance, and it's all about youth and beauty! To deny that this would have been a weight on this woman's shoulders, is naive at best...

I'm not sure why people are suggesting that I lack empathy, just because I have a different way of viewing death and suicide. It is true that I do not engage in these pointless competitions, to see who can outdo each other with faux empathy and hollow rhetoric that is so common these days on social media etc... but this doesn't mean that I am unfeeling or uncaring.

Just because someone was struggling at the end, and perhaps in a distressed state in the days before they ended their life... this does not mean that they were completely incapable of rational thoughts or logical reasoning.

But more importantly, it is very likely that they may have weighed up the idea of ending their life during calmer and less stressful times. I've talked with many people, who have suicidal feelings... many of these people don't only think about suicide during the worst moments of their life. It's something that crosses their mind very often, even in less dark moments.

There is this notion, that suicidal thoughts only pop into someone's head when they are at their lowest point... when they have hit rock bottom. I think this is a foolish notion. Again, it is a very naive way of viewing suicide and the complex way in which our minds work.

But there is a very obvious reason, why people like to paint suicide in this manner. Because it makes it much easier to label this act, as being purely impulsive. When in fact the desire to end one's life is quite often not impulsive at all. If someone has thought about suicide for years and years throughout their life... which many people do... then to label their suicide as 100% impulsive, is a foolish way to analyse it. Yes there quite likely was an element of impulsivity at play in the moment when they did the deed... but the final moment when someone ends their life, often does not fully encapsulate their overall desire to die!



I disagree. I think it is about ownership over one's life...

People go to great lengths in society, to stigmatize suicide and paint it as a very shameful act. The main motivation behind this attitude, is the desire to make it an unfashionable and undesirable option!

You only need to look at the angry posts directed at me in this thread to see this attitude at play... look at the wild accusations, assumptions and attempted character assassinations directed at me, simply because I have the nerve to hold a different view to most people.

I don't really care if people make personal attacks on me. I'm a big boy with a fairly thick skin tbh... but it is a very obvious sign, of just how immature most people are around topics such as this one. There is still a very old fashioned attitude that prevails in society, around these issues!

And of course, I get that this is a very emotive subject that brings out a lot of passion in people. But it is the year 2020... we really need to grow up as a society, and learn to discuss these issues in a calmer and more reasoned manner!

Human beings have always committed suicide... you only have to read through history to see this. So I would say, we are not exactly the same as wild animals in this regard. And people will continue to take their own lives, regardless of whether you continue to stigmatize the act or not... painting it as a shameful or foolish act, has not worked throughout history... and it will not work in the future!

It's time we moved passed these outdated views on suicide. Society needs to evolve a lot more around these topics.



I respect your opinion, but I do think you're wrong...

I think it is more dangerous NOT to talk about these issues.

The fact that society has such an immature and old fashioned attitude to death and suicide, is far more detrimental in the long run.

To suggest that we should not openly discuss something like suicide, just because someone might be influenced by those discussions one way or the other... that is wrong!

You cannot take an important issue like this off the discussion table, just because it's potentially dangerous or tricky to discuss it. That is a very poor justification for shutting down any discussion.

At the end of the day, people are going to take their life... whether you shut down discussion on suicide or not.

The ability to talk about something like this openly and freely, and respecting many different viewpoints and perspectives on it... that is the best way going forward.

Reacting angrily or in a hostile manner, to anyone who might hold a slightly different view to your own on this topic... that is an attitude very much rooted in the past. It will not help to bring better understanding of suicide. And it certainly will not do anything to prevent people from considering suicide as an option in their life!

I really hope that the portion of your post that I have highlighted is not true. I am almost sure that you are just a troll and that you have no idea what you are talking about.
I do know that if you had personal experience with a family member or loved one committing suicide your feelings would change. That is if you are a normal person with empathy and capable of loving somebody.

Anyway I think your views (or what you are writing) are dangerous to vulnerable people and hope that anybody on the thread who is vulnerable sees you for the immature idiot you seem to be.

I have two hands. In one I hold an understanding of the absolute devastation that suicide brings and the pain that exists before a person takes their own life. In the other I hold an understanding of how people with their full rational faculties make that same decision.

In my opinion to believe that Greta is trolling is to dismiss the complexities of human nature. We do not know the inner workings of another. We try to, we think we have an idea, we can intuit and support but we never ever know.

RabbleRouser2k

Shelga wrote: »

Caroline Flack said many times that she had no desire to have children. That she never had any maternal desire. You are totally projecting here.

Part of the problem is this assumption that all women are desperate to have children, and that you must be sad or lacking if you don’t. Even if you don’t want kids, it’s not nice when people like you are thinking that stuff about you.

Claiming I'm projecting, while then projecting onto me... you might wanna look in the mirror there. Oh, and maybe learn to use google-before jumping to conclusions.

I am not assuming anything here-I'm quoting Flack's own words, from her book, 'Storm in a C Cup'.

https://www.irishmirror.ie/showbiz/celebrity-news/caroline-flack-reflected-different-life-21516330

Or this...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-7406475/Caroline-Flack-39-scared-shes-left-late-children.html

This isn't an 'assumption' that she wanted to have children-she stated she was worried she left it too late.
She WANTED kids... she just didn't ever find anyone to have them with.

I'm happily childless, have no desire to rear a child, and will continue to be childless.

But of course, people like 'you' assume everyone wants to have children... and it's not nice when people like you are thinking that stuff about you :rolleyes:

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Deleted User wrote: »

I have two hands. In one I hold an understanding of the absolute devastation that suicide brings and the pain that exists before a person takes their own life. In the other I hold an understanding of how people with their full rational faculties make that same decision.

In my opinion to believe that Greta is trolling is to dismiss the complexities of human nature. We do not know the inner workings of another. We try to, we think we have an idea, we can intuit and support but we never ever know.

I think that people are hoping that he/she is trolling because the alternative is unnerving. I wouldn’t want Greta around a suicidal person if these are deeply held beliefs.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I think that people are hoping that he/she is trolling because the alternative is unnerving. I wouldn’t want Greta around a suicidal person if these are deeply held beliefs.

When people do horrible things like murder a child it can be "easy" to reach for a mental illness label because it frightens us to think that it was rational or that the person was simply bad.

I think suicide can be thought of in a similar way. The idea that a person would reach a point when they decide they are done with life. They have lived x amount of decades, they aren't particularly sad or distressed but they have enough. That can be hard to get ones head around.

Greta's view doesn't mean they won't offer support and empathy if they encounter a person who is suicidal. There are those who quietly go about their lives without hurt, who don't seek the help of a professional, and who decide to take their own lives. The reality of the human condition is a myriad of colour and texture.

The texture of a 20 yr old who is full of self loathing and loneliness and a fear of death but also a fear of living is very different to that of a 50 yr old who is thankful for all they have done but is tired at the prospect of more living and content to put an end to their future.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Deleted User wrote: »

When people do horrible things like murder a child it can be "easy" to reach for a mental illness label because it frightens us to think that it was rational or that the person was simply bad.

I think suicide can be thought of in a similar way. The idea that a person would reach a point when they decide they are done with life. They have lived x amount of decades, they aren't particularly sad or distressed but they have enough. That can be hard to get ones head around.

Greta's view doesn't mean they won't offer support and empathy if they encounter a person who is suicidal. There are those who quietly go about their lives without hurt, who don't seek the help of a professional, and who decide to take their own lives. The reality of the human condition is a myriad of colour and texture.

The texture of a 20 yr old who is full of self loathing and loneliness and a fear of death but also a fear of living is very different to that of a 50 yr old who is thankful for all they have done but is tired at the prospect of more living and content to put an end to their future.

The ageism inherent in that sentence is honestly kind of disturbing. What is up with people on this thread implying or outright saying that 40 or 50 is ancient in a country where the life expectancy is over 80? Who is to say that the middle-aged person has “better” reasons for wanting to die by suicide? I don’t recall the age profiles of those who were helped through the crisis and survived in the studies I read. I doubt they were all young seeing as most people never attempted again and there is likely a spread of ages and demographics. Get that? Most never attempted again.

The valuing of the life of the 20 year old over that of the 50 year old is bizarre. I must tell all the people I know who are terminally ill in their 50 or 60s that it matters less than the terminally ill 20 year old. Hell, is my terminal illness less sad because I’m a few years from 40 than the 21 year old I know who is also dying of the same disease?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The ageism inherent in that sentence is honestly kind of disturbing. What is up with people on this thread implying or outright saying that 40 or 50 is ancient in a country where the life expectancy is over 80? Who is to say that the middle-aged person has “better” reasons for wanting to die by suicide? I don’t recall the age profiles of those who were helped through the crisis and survived in the studies I read. I doubt they were all young seeing as most people never attempted again and there is likely a spread of ages and demographics. Get that? Most never attempted again.

The valuing of the life of the 20 year old over that of the 50 year old is bizarre. I must tell all the people I know who are terminally ill in their 50 or 60s that it matters less than the terminally ill 20 year old. Hell, is my terminal illness less sad because I’m a few years from 40 than the 21 year old I know who is also dying of the same disease?

It wasn't my intention to come across as ageist. There is no value being placed on one person over another. I never said that 20 is more important than 50 or mentioned terminal illness.

There are an awful lot of people out there of all ages who are in turmoil and who have taken their own lives. The reason I picked 50 in my example is because it's my opinion that there are also people who reach a point after having lived many years and decide they are done with life.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Deleted User wrote: »

It wasn't my intention to come across as ageist. There is no value being placed on one person over another. I never said that 20 is more important than 50 or mentioned terminal illness.

There are an awful lot of people out there of all ages who are in turmoil and who have taken their own lives. The reason I picked 50 in my example is because it's my opinion that there are also people who reach a point after having lived many years and decide they are done with life.

And there is no reason to not try to dissuade them as much as the 20 year old. It’s a completely arbitrary age. It’s very odd. 50 isn’t many years. And if the 20 year old gives the same reason as the 50 year old, they should be taken less seriously if being they say they are “done with life”? I just can’t understand your reasoning at all. Done with life at 50? Ah well. Done with life at 20? NOOOO!!!

So bizarre.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

And there is no reason to not try to dissuade them as much as the 20 year old. It’s a completely arbitrary age. It’s very odd. 50 isn’t many years. And if the 20 year old gives the same reason as the 50 year old, they should be taken less seriously if being they say they are “done with life”? I just can’t understand your reasoning at all. Done with life at 50? Ah well. Done with life at 20? NOOOO!!!

So bizarre.

Maybe later I will attempt to articulate what it is I'm trying to get across.

RabbleRouser2k

Deleted User wrote: »

When people do horrible things like murder a child it can be "easy" to reach for a mental illness label because it frightens us to think that it was rational or that the person was simply bad.

I think suicide can be thought of in a similar way. The idea that a person would reach a point when they decide they are done with life. They have lived x amount of decades, they aren't particularly sad or distressed but they have enough. That can be hard to get ones head around.

Greta's view doesn't mean they won't offer support and empathy if they encounter a person who is suicidal. There are those who quietly go about their lives without hurt, who don't seek the help of a professional, and who decide to take their own lives. The reality of the human condition is a myriad of colour and texture.

People want to find excuses for bizarre, often horrible, incidents. To use an analogy, it's sort of similar to conspiracies surrounding JFK. People want to believer his own government did him in because the truth is far scarier.
If a guy with a gun can easily shoot and kill the 'Leader of the Free World' so easily, what hope do the rest of us have?

I say it again and again, but the way mental health is discussed or dissected in this country, as well as the 'preventative' measures to tackle the problem, is an absolute farce.
Not too long ago, the simple 'don't kill yourself' Donal Walsh campaign was being boilstered as a major anti-suicide campaign.
It did absolutely jack s**t to lower suicide cases. (There were suicides around the time of the 'campaign' that the media barely covered-notably a prominent hurler). And I felt genuinely disturbed by how it 'simplified' the issue-not looking at the complexities as to why someone takes their own life.

The Headbombz campaign created more problems-kids are visual, they genuinely thought their heads would blow up. (I had a personal problem with the 'ha ha ha ha' chorus in that freaking ad-made it sound like mental illness was a joke).

Hannibal_Smith

I like the head bombz ads. I think its a great thing. Its happened a few times where its caught my kids attention and a few minutes later you get 'you know what happened today mum..' and some story about them or some kid in their class will blurt out.

One eyed Jack

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I say it again and again, but the way mental health is discussed or dissected in this country, as well as the 'preventative' measures to tackle the problem, is an absolute farce.
Not too long ago, the simple 'don't kill yourself' Donal Walsh campaign was being boilstered as a major anti-suicide campaign.
It did absolutely jack s**t to lower suicide cases. (There were suicides around the time of the 'campaign' that the media barely covered-notably a prominent hurler). And I felt genuinely disturbed by how it 'simplified' the issue-not looking at the complexities as to why someone takes their own life.

The Headbombz campaign created more problems-kids are visual, they genuinely thought their heads would blow up. (I had a personal problem with the 'ha ha ha ha' chorus in that freaking ad-made it sound like mental illness was a joke).

It’s a farce because people are using an approach which you personally can’t relate to? I suppose if that were how we quantify suicide prevention in this country you’d have a valid argument. However your argument doesn’t amount to much when the research and the facts and figures speak for themselves. All these campaigns may not be relatable to you personally, but they aren’t intended to prevent every single incidence of suicide. There’s a target demographic in each one, which is intended to reach a different audience. I’m not going to argue over the point of each one with you, I don’t relate to a lot of them either, but that doesn’t mean they’re not reaching other people and are effective in that context.

As for the earlier points made about “ageism”, that’s just more of the same trying to find fault with something a person says which isn’t intended in the way it’s being twisted at all. Dunno whether or not it was intentional but regarding people in their 50’s as having an attitude of being done with life as such, is hardly unusual given that they are the demographic which completes suicide at a higher rate than any other. Arguing with the idea that someone in their 20s has more potential to do things with their life and therefore has more to live for and more reasons to live, than someone in their 50s, seems somewhat precious, frankly, apart from the fact that it’s completely missing the point.

Point 1: In my opinion there are no easy answers as to why a person ends their life. As I wrote in my initial post I understand how a person can get tired of life and with a rational mind decide to die.

Point 2: Young adults generally are not completely emotionally developed. Early twenties can be a time filled with identity confusion and getting to grips with deep relationships. That was why I used the age 20. In essence it means nothing. I was merely trying to highlight how suicide can come about in different ways and even be a welcome rational decision.

Point 3: To further get in to the complexities of this I also believe that at the end of the day its not about age. Any one person can be tormented and tortured and any one person can not be and both may still reach the same place, ending their lives.

Point 4: I would never ever not do all I could to prevent a person from taking their life. I feel however that the ones who come to that place with rational thought and acceptance will not be seeking help.


It can be a challenge for some to hold opposing thoughts in their minds and to go to unsavoury places with topics such as suicide. In my mind it isn't a challenge. I'm faced with the reality of turmoil, trauma, self loathing, suicidal ideation, abuse, narcissism, schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, and even psychopathy, on a basis that is more regular than many.

In order to learn more about life we need to be able to fully open up and explore the issue in all its forms.

statto25

Deleted User wrote: »

It can be a challenge for some to hold opposing thoughts in their minds and to go to unsavoury places with topics such as suicide.

It can be a challenge for most, they don't want to hear about it. If someone was to sit down and spill exactly what goes through your head when youre in this mindset, it would shock and scare you. However I think that shock factor is needed to get across what exactly a person is going through. Its the most unimaginable pain and suffering you can go through. What has led you to this point is also just as important. I'm a firm believer that previous experiences contribute greatly to suicidal ideation and people need to try and understand rather than dismiss this. Why is as important as the actual feeling or despair.

statto25

statto25 wrote: »

It can be a challenge for most, they don't want to hear about it. If someone was to sit down and spill exactly what goes through your head when youre in this mindset, it would shock and scare you. However I think that shock factor is needed to get across what exactly a person is going through. Its the most unimaginable pain and suffering you can go through. What has led you to this point is also just as important. I'm a firm believer that previous experiences contribute greatly to suicidal ideation and people need to try and understand rather than dismiss this. Why is as important as the actual feeling or despair.

Yes absolutely. The why is most definitely important.

RabbleRouser2k

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s a farce because people are using an approach which you personally can’t relate to? I suppose if that were how we quantify suicide prevention in this country you’d have a valid argument. However your argument doesn’t amount to much when the research and the facts and figures speak for themselves. All these campaigns may not be relatable to you personally, but they aren’t intended to prevent every single incidence of suicide. There’s a target demographic in each one, which is intended to reach a different audience. I’m not going to argue over the point of each one with you, I don’t relate to a lot of them either, but that doesn’t mean they’re not reaching other people and are effective in that context.

You and I are not gonna agree,so it's best to just agree to disagree, I think.

Raconteuse

A woman I was friendly with died of spinal cancer in 2017 after not much time following diagnosis (about a year). She was 35 - two small children and husband (widower at 39) left behind.

I remember her saying just before her 35th birthday that she would have been disgusted at the thought of turning 35 a year beforehand, but after her diagnosis she was downright thrilled to get to another birthday, and would give anything to see all the birthdays most people her age will experience, and that growing old is a privilege.

I give suicidal people or people seeking a "mercy killing" a free pass in relation to themselves because their minds aren't in a rational place due to psychological or physical pain (or both) but "well they had a good life so 40 isn't too bad" will never be anything other than hugely poor taste imo.

If you think it in relation to yourself, I don't agree with such thoughts, however you're entitled to feel that way about yourself. But don't project. It's not ok to say it's the case for others.

If someone kills themselves, I generally don't judge them (some suicides are cowardly, like those of war criminals) but I'll never think it's not sad for a good person to end their life.

Quantum Erasure

saw this yesterday, might be tangentially related

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51620021

The Canadian government has put forward a bill to make medically-assisted death available to people who are not terminally ill.
...
It would create a two-track system for determining a person's eligibility. One track for people who are terminally ill, and one track for people who are not.

Patients in both tracks must prove they are facing "intolerable" suffering.

The bill would explicitly exclude eligibility for individuals suffering solely from mental illness.