Suicide, Agency and the Semicolon Project

Photo by Timothy L Brock on Unsplash

The argument that suicide is selfish is a selfish argument.

This is a piece I've been working on for a while, and it was prompted by the passing away of Amy Bleuel, suicide prevention activist. Bleuel had a history of suicide attempts, had already lost a family member to suicide, and was the founder of the Semicolon Project - a suicide awareness and support movement wherein one incorporates a semicolon tattoo into one's designs. And yes, she succumbed to suicide. Other members of the suicide prevention community have pointed out repeatedly that a very common cause of death for someone with a history of suicide attempts is, in fact, suicide. And that that doesn't mean hope is lost.

The semicolon tattoo is usually used by people who fight mental illness or other issues or a regular basis, who grapple with the idea of suicide constantly. It draws a parallel to the function of the semicolon in punctuation - wherein one uses it in place of a full stop, choosing not to end the sentence there, but to continue it. 

It's a great idea, and no doubt there are so many out there who owe Amy their lives. I personally intend to incorporate the semicolon into the tattoo I will eventually be getting. 

So what is this apparent sanctity that life is given, that one must not take such a step? What is this push against such autonomy exercised - for if your life is the only thing you can truly call your own, how can anyone else have a say in what you do with it?

But the words used by Amy's colleagues and friends in the suicide prevention and activism community made me stop and wonder. One said that perhaps Amy wasn't able to "see her lighthouse", that perhaps she wasn't able to remember, in that moment, that she had people who would support her. 

I honestly think this line of thought takes a measure of agency away from an individual. Because is it not possible to know full well that one has a willing support system, and still take this step anyway? Is it not possible to know that the lighthouse is right there, and then decide not to swim to it? 

Any support system is, by definition, always overwhelmed and under-stocked when it comes to available resources. There are always far too many people who need help (including the ones offering it) and not enough people offering help. So when you're grappling with something, that's definitely a factor you'd take into account - especially when you've been an active member of that support system, helping others in whatever way you can. You'd remind yourself that everyone has problems of their own, that there are others in need as well. And when your pain or suffering is so chronic and overwhelming that it keeps on coming back, time after damn time, you'd end up asking yourself whether it's right to burden that system even further with your problems. Because your problems, you realize, are going to continue to exist in perpetuity, forever. You're always going to have to deal with it. And by extension, the people who want to help you are always going to have to deal with it.

Is that fair to them?

Then there is the matter of dealing with it all. In the beginning, there is always hope. There is an understanding that you can actually engage with this problem and resolve it. But when you've gone 12 rounds with the same goddamn thing, and then you've gone 24 rounds, and then it's 36, and...

You begin to realize that it's always going to be there. And ultimately, you're the one that has to deal with it. So you think that perhaps it's time to leave. Because maybe you don't want to be dealing with it at every turn. Maybe you're just fucking tired. Maybe you realize that you'll never be able to get where you want to go because this goddamn thing is always in your way.

Under those circumstances, why shouldn't you just...leave?

The argument that suicide is selfish is a selfish argument. Because you know what, no near or dear loved one has the right to insist that anyone else continue to live for them. That's not okay. If they choose to, sure. That's great. But hey, don't make it all about you. Respect their choice.

So what is this apparent sanctity that life is given, that one must not take such a step? What is this push against such autonomy exercised - for if your life is the only thing you can truly call your own, how can anyone else have a say in what you do with it? And what makes life your most treasured possession? What is life without freedom? It's hell. So why do we consistently and constantly make people choose life over freedom? Why do we demonize the reverse choice when made?

Let me be clear. I'm not saying suicide is a good thing. As an atheist who doesn't believe in anything existing post-death, I'd say that making the best of the life we get would be a great thing. But that choice must ultimately be left up to individuals, and whatever choice they make should be respected. Someone who needs and wants your help should definitely be given it in as whole-hearted and complete a fashion you can manage. But pray do not attempt to make their life worse in the name of extending it. And do not insult individual agency by assuming that someone who takes this extreme step is weak or foolish.