The Inmendham Archive

VloggerDome #04 The Right To Die

Dublin Core


VloggerDome #04 The Right To Die


The subject is The Right To Die





First published on Youtube on Nov 12, 2014
Vloggerdome #4 The Right To Die: Can TV Channel 19 Tue Dec 2, 2014 10PM
Vloggerdome #4 The Right To Die: Can TV Channel 19 Fri, Dec 5th, 2014 10:30PM
Vloggerdome #4 The Right To Die: Can TV Channel 19 Fri, Dec 26th, 2014 12:30AM
Vloggerdome #4 The Right To Die: Can TV Channel 19 Mon, Dec 29th, 2014 10:30PM


Dr. Kavanaugh : of The Final Exit Network:
Full Un-Edited Conversation
voice work:


Web video/Public Access TV




Digital Video



To be, or not to be. Or you can…
Vloggerdome, the TV show!
featuring Glynos, and with contributions from Voxneruda and DerivedEnergy. And our special guest, Dr. F of the final exit network.

Welcome to episode 4 of VloggerDome on the subject of the right to die. Should not really be a subject. I mean the right to self termination should be kind of a modern right. One that is completely embraced by most people. The idea that we have a self. A body an identity and “ahh”. Really the only consequences when you are going to doing something back to others and if you re going to do something impacting yourself there is, generally speaking, a social understanding that “uhh” yea, is your business. “uhhm” but these subjects that touch on morality issues and religion are difficult to get with the program. To move them into some sort of rational perspective. So is taking hundreds of years for people to get rational on the subject of sexual preference. And the subject of Dying with dignity and by choice. Does seem likewise to have to go through a process of disengaging people who claim ownership of the property of your philosophy and body, they presume to tell you what is in your best interest and what the right way to be is. Or the right way to do is. So “amm” as a political issue, this should be understood that yea this is your own property, your body, that you should have the right to self termination. That you should be able to use the advantages of the medical technology for your purposes. Not necessarily their purposes. That it really should not be that much a conversation. Beyond some effort to persuade people who. “ahh” may make reckless or sloppy decisions. There are ways to make this fail safe. and I will go into those. But it seems, there… it’s more of an ideological argument than a pragmatical or a practical argument. Like abortion and many other subjects. I think it is mostly bailed in traditional religious notions of offence to the creator. You are not allowed to offend a god or nature. By deciding, “umm” deciding for yourself, “uhh” what the right destiny for your life is. And what val.. what you value, clearly it is “uhh” killing yourself, meaning suicide. Is a statement, it does say something. “Umm” about the design, is not perfect quite obviously. Seems at minimum a statement, saying this is not a perfect design, because I will have to exercise some volition to do this right. To die right. Nature will not kill you… efficiently. and for those who believe in god, apparently god does not have much of an appreciation for efficiency either. And it is really just about whether we as individuals have a right to offend somebody else’s god. “Umm” fundamentally. Or some kind of pantheism/theist/gaia nature god. Where somehow the nature knows best, when you should die and how you should die. And I dont believe thats true. There is a simple political solution to any arguments that are being made about protecting the … those who aren't exercising full competence. Ironically we do not need any such protections for people who sign up for the military. A bunch of young people sign up for the military to get a job killing people for money. And nobody feels any obligation to test their veracity or the integrity of their will to kill somebody else. But if they choose to kill themselves, we would have to psychiatrically test them, because that is insane. Is not insane to kill somebody else for money, but “umm” yea it is questionable whether you should die when you are suffering. Or I think that maybe is time to get out when you circumstance, becomes less than pleasant in its prospects. So if we have a living will we can establish people’s intent. So, you know, at 16 years old lets say. People would sign a living will, basically that they have philosophically no problem with death by volition under the right circumstances. And then they would also assign a guardian for their life, who would basically testify that the person is insane at the time they may request help. And this way we can protect people from suspect judgement. Therefore worried about somebody saying they are going to kill themselves because they are a burden on other people or for some other reason. That guardian, can be their defence against some kind of extortion like that. And that they can testify for the person essentially. That the person does not really want to die, but they also don't wanna be a burden. And it is that intractable circumstance that is driving them to it. Rather than any real desire to no longer live. So it can be made fail safe, is the point. You can just create a couple of mechanisms, social mechanisms where people… like I said, if you choose … if you are a religious person and you ever, will never want have to take control of your death. Then You can basically sign away your right. And never have it again, unless you are willing to go to court and explain to a judge why you changed your mind. So there are going to be protections against misfunctions in judgment. I can't think of any time in my life where I would have signed away my right for me to decide rather than you to decide, for me. So there was no point in my life, where I would thought it a good idea to trust you with my life, ever.
So I would certainly sign for keeping my rights and not giving them to you. If you wish to give your rights away you may do so, but you do not have the right to take other people’s. The right to self termination is just so fundamentally obvious as a fundamental right. Unless you have a reason to trespass on my judgement, you do not have a right to do it. And the fact that I am, have rationally drawn a conclusion about dismal circumstances, and doing something efficient about them. It does not give you any right to jump fences and take control of somebody else’s life. It is obnoxiously arrogant and fundamentally unconstitutional behaviour. By an unrestrained and an uncontrolled majority. So anyway, that is enough for now, I think, so enjoy the show. Is kind of a rough subject, but is fundamentally one of the greatest healthcare issues there is. You can not do better than preventing unnecessary harm and suffering on the world. And that we waste preposterous amounts of money forcing people who have no desire to live, to somehow acquire the desire. and yet we will watch all around the world people who have intense passionate desire to live. And you know, lots of want and they lack 50 cents to do it with. And that hypocrisy in itself, that non sequitur, that insane circumstance kind of illustrates that there is no sincerity of your desire to oblige people to live. And that it is just about defence o you god, whether your be a god or your god be nature, and that's all you are really interfering for. Is to defend the insecurity you have regarding your philosophical perspective. Anyway, enough commentary , till the next time.


Approximately 1 million people kill themselves every year. Hanging shooting, drowning stabbing. Many must resort to extremes and often painful acts to end their suffering. in this country we cherish liberty, the right to die to determine our own faiths is the ultimate freedom. What the suicidal wants the most is to feel in control over their own deaths. Life is an arduous journey , even the most optimistic of us. People's lives are destroyed every day in this world, there are no guarantees. Accidents, mental illness , physical illness, poverty. we are all at some degree of risk some people see this journey as being worth all of the risk and hardship.They see a light at the tunnel. For others however this light is merely a non coming train. Neither of these perspectives can be proven correct. So it should be up to each individual to decide how much they are willing to endure . What pain is worth what gain. The answer to that question will be different for each of us. If someone who wants to die even dares to bring up these issues they are ridiculed, humiliated, deemed crazy. Sent to the psych wards, stuffed with pillows and ultimately, and probably worst of all they, are ignored. Death is an unstoppable force and it comes for every sentient creature. We can't actually choose to die, we can only choose when and how. None of us chose to be born or to die. Life and death are both imposed on us, and no one signs a contract and says yes, I am willing to be exposed to all the dangers associated with this existence. To force miserable people to live life they did not consent to is akin to slavery . we all have attachments to others, but that does not mean that we have the right to dictate how they live their lives. Or even if they should live at all. Some feel unceasingly tormented by this existence. Every waking moment is a moment that never should have been. It is wrong to demand for a loved one who is in pain to live for the sake of your attachment to them. That is not loving them, that is taking from them . Giving people the right to die on their own terms could actually help those same people live longer . If people felt they had a safety net, a tool in defence of the uncertainties of being . Many would be more willing to face challenges. Everyone wants to feel they are masters of their own feit, and giving them this fundamental right will give the suicidal the strength and sense of control, they so desperately longed for . It will give them a sense of peace on a world full of chaos. Still some may choose death and that is okay. The harsh reality is that there are millions of people trying to survive every day. We need to stop wating resources obligating those who do not want to be here. And instead, focusing these resources to help those who desperately want to live. Don't weep for those loved ones who choose to die, they did what all of us desire . to live on our own terms. instead think of them as safe from their suffering.


On the subject of the right to die, individual has the fundamental right to invest their own welfare in their own judgement. And maintaining the ability to say I want to live is not placing too high a standard on survival. Life is imposed without consent and once an individual reaches the age of consent ,they should be free to contract a different choice. Along with rewards, living carries great risks and no individual should be coerced or forced to accept those risks. Suffering is the most valuable commodity in the universe. And it never should be endured or imposed unessesarily. Opposition to a liberal right to die is primarily driven by poorly motivated religious zealots. Who wish to force law to reflect the dogma of their gods. A right to die that fairly protects all legitimate life supporting motivations of society, can be constructed. It is proposed that upon reaching their 17th birthday all individuals be allowed to name a person to be their legal guardian and establish a living will stating whether or not they wish to maintain a legal right to die. that any time in the future the person will be free to revoke any interest in having the right to die. But to regain the right an individual will be required to go to court and defend the competency of their change of mind. To exercise as the right to die , an individual would present to an appropriate medical authority the living will confirming their right. And a notarized statement from a guardian verifying they believe the decision to die is competent and appropriate. Such a system would substantially protect any vulnerable individuals from any momentary bad judgement or pressures. And society would be able to fairly protect rather than destroy the vital liberty interest.

[transition to glynos]

Hello youtube, I have finally arrived to my brother’s place and I am only dreading this. He has this tendency not to understand anything I say and then misrepresent it. This could get ugly.
Glynos: Knocks*
B: [who the fak are you talking to ovethere.]
Glynos: time to go inside.
B: How come you dont wanna have kids then.
Glynos: Well I spend a few years reading and listening to different arguments and the only 2 arguments for having children are “I can” or “I want.”
B: where do you find these arguments then?
Glynos: well there are a few books on the subject , but mostly online
B: laughs*, so you say you believe everything on the internet then, you are a fucking idiot, people on the internet believe a load of bulshit
Glynos: Ohh no
B: Show me one of these online arguments then.
Glynos: I am not sure that is the best idea
B: Oh come on.
Glynos: I just don't think that is going to be your cup of tea.
B: No, is cuz you know.
Glynos: What do I know?
B: You know I would be able to fucking prove them all wrong laughs*
Glynos: Okay, let me see what I can find.

Glynos: Okay this is a guy called DerivedEnergy.
DE: Approximately 3.7 billion years ago the moment matter began to configure itself in such a way, as to begin a process which results in sentient organisms, walking falling , slippering and flying all over the surface of this planet. This process...

B: Hold on Hold on, I don't understand a fucking word he is saying.
Glynos: Well his accent seems actually pretty clear to me.
B: He is using those fucking big words man, show me someone else.
Glynos: Okay: this is Beardy Man.
BM: people, can not bring themselves to say anything against mom. They just cant do it. It is a psychological block. You can hear it in Anton, he is moving towards agreeing with gary but kind of bumps into mom.
B: So what he is saying there is people hate their mothers.
Glynos: uhh no. I don't understand any of it brother!

Adventures of the Anti Natalist will be right back.


This month, vloggerdome proudly welcomes Dr.F of the final exit network. To have a chat with Inmendham about the right to die. Dr.F serves in the advisory board on the final exit network. He has been a health educator for 40 years, retiring as professor of medical and public affairs at the George Washington University Medical Center, and professor of communications at george with an endowed chair at washington university. He is chair emeritus of the international academy for preventative medicine and a former vice president of the cooper institute for advanced studies in medicine and the humanities. His years in the medical community have helped to understand the tremendous advances we have made in intervening in patients health issues and improving lives. but also too often how the medical community walks away from patients at the most critical point in their lives. When nothing more can be done to relieve their suffering. Dr. F and Inmendham are both passionate advocates for the right to die let's hear what they have to say.


Inmendham: Alright so on the subject of the right to die. We have a special guest Dr.Frank . Who is connected with the Final Exit Network and advocates for the liberty for people to gracefully exit and has probably spent some years doing that, would you like to tell us something about yourself frank? your history?
Frank: Sure, our organisation is an organisation of about 3000 all volunteers around the united states . We do not have any paid staff any offices they tend to be senior citizens and elderly people like myself. In a prior life I was a faculty member of the George Washington University Medical Center in Washington DC. I was not a medical doctor, I was a phd. My areas where health policy, health law, health communications, health management systems those sorts of things. But with my 23 years in the medical center I saw the wonderful the things that we did. Intervening in people’s lives and making them better and unfortunately also saw, when we could not make them any better we too often walked away from them at the most critical time in their life and I retired and came to Florida and thought. Well what kind of things I want to do, what am I really interested in. And hat stayed with me for quite a while. And I was familiar with the hemlock society which started way back in 1980. Under the name of Derrick Comfort, he still alive today in oregon and Derick wrote the book called “Final Exit”. it Is published in 12 different languages it was at the New York Times best seller for 19 years and he gave rise to this movement. If you will. And it actually.. the final exit network itself got created in 2007. I decided it would be a good thing to volunteer my time so I have. Many people come to the organisation because of a terrible situation in the prolonged death and suffering of a family member and volunteer that way. I just came because I saw the medical profession I didn't think was responding in the proper way . Lots of emphasis on keeping people alive procedures, not enough what we would call end of life care . Or really, aid in dying and such . Thats what brought me too.

Inmendham: ya ya, over the years I have been interested even as a youth I kind of had a perspective that this should be a natural right. You know that this is a, you know. Life is complicated , is not a free lunch okay. You can get harmed living, and I always kind of thought this is not something you impose on people. Is up to them to decide, and part of it I guess too is as a youth reading a book on the mind and had images on the mental hospitals on the past. You saw the horror that these people lived in. And you are just saying this is so unnecessary, is crazy. I mean you have these incurable circumstances and what do you do, you have them in cages? You know, just horrible. You know I would not pay that price. I mean there is nothing I would going to do in my life that would ever justify me volunteering you know, to be the victim. So I always had this perception that this was a valuable thing . I remember Derrick Confries?
And He started first with his wife, you know he had to assist her and that was just First Janes, I think that was the title of that book. And Kevorkian and I had to bring him up just as a reference to see your opinion. But I love Kevorkian. I mean he tried.. he pushed a little too hard. You know you find fault with anybody’s strategy, but as a man. As a character as a human being, you could not get any more generous and he spent 7 years in prison. Because he advocated for people taking their own volition , acting on their own judgement and really needing a little assistance with one of the most difficult processes in life, dying.

Frank:MY take on him is, I have a very high regard for him. He was a character, he was outrageous. You know all of the years, where he provided the means for people to die. And they actually initiated the first death machine. Jeffry Fiber? Is the attorney and defended him in court in Michigan and acquitted each time, over and over. Then he decided that he wanted to get the issue to the united states supreme court. And he said the way to do that is by: Why don't I inject somebody myself. I will take their life. I will video tape it. I will go give it to 60 minutes and of course that is when he became charged of murder. Then he made the second mistake of defending himself in court, you know. Everybody has a fool for a lawyer when you do that and of course he lost that case and then went to prison and after he came out he lived for about a year and then he past away. But he did a great deal promoting the dialog about the right to die and he did a great deal in advancing hospice in this country with better end of ailing took care??. He really focused on the end of life and people who are in that situation. I think most of the people involved in the movement. are there recognising is a little crazy thanking for the contribution that he made and the way that he advanced the movement if you will.

Inmendham: Yea, it is kind of a tricky… there is a lot of subjects like abortion that … there are different subjects that exist on this dialog for decades. You know you are a little older than me so you have a longer experience. But just .. it seems that it gets talked about. You know somebody brings them up. A governor , the governor Lam brought up the right to die, you know, it gets a little bit of momentum. The people start talking about it and then it just goes away. Kevorkian spending the 7 years in prison and there was no dialog in the subject. The doors just closed and the silence remained and you know, you have these other cases in other countries. You know of other policies in other countries, just seems like the core issue is never gotten to and that is why policy never seems to evolve. I mean there is a fundamental political question about what are our rights as individuals . You know and then there is this philosophical question where even if you are saying that you have a right to trespass against our rights. To say, I don't have a right, you know: Is too dangerous to give me freedom. You now, regarding my own life, that is too dangerous. Even if they are gonna make that argument they will have to make a philosophical argument to make that rational. That you are not just basically imposing some sort of theology on me and saying that I have to live up to your definition of what my life is. And my life is something that nature is supposed to control, or god is supposed to control. Why am I! not supposed to control it? You have to explain why you are right and I am wrong. And these people don't seem to.. nobody has forced … the law is never forced to say why it is right.

Frank: Well there is a momentum certainly in the world and the country as you say in the terms of rights as we went through women's right. We went trough voters rights. We went trough gay rights. We went through disability rights. And I would suggest that the right to die with dignity is the ultimate human right of the 21 century. And we are surely coming , it was on the trial way back in california to pass legislation. Had a very difficult time there , they went to oregon because it was a smaller state . And Oregon was the first state by voter initiative to pass the right to die with dignity and physician assisted dying. And that has been in place now for 17 years and with a very good track record. When it happened it's a … people said : oh my folk are gonna be killing themselves life flies. Dropping over, that never happened. There are maybe 100 people each year who get the medication from their physician when they are in a terminal situation, and about half of those take the medication. What that says to me is that, once you have the means in your hands to easily end your own life that you have control of your life. That is very important you and you can then go on for another day, another week another month , some such thing as that and then in 2008 the state of washington duplicated that law in Vermont 2012 or 13. there was legislative action of the governor of the state of Vermont signed in it. So those 3 states and you have the interesting situation where in 2 states montana and new mexico , the supreme court said. that the physician could not be persecuted for easing the ending of a person’s life. So now we have 5 states in the country where dying with dignity is possible. In that sense and .. I am not very sure that it is going to come very fast . Probably in the next 10 years of my life or something we might see another 5 or 6 states . But there is a steamroller going on ,and there is strong public opinion in its favor. One of the good polls by Harrison bbc america found that when people were asked the question of : Do you feel that a mentally competent person with a terminal or irreversible condition has the right to end their own life? 70% said yes. Only 17% said no, and the remainder said, um I am not sure. The 17 % that said no where principally of the catholic faith and the strongest opposition of this movement, is not necessarily catholic individuals but the catholic church. It says you do not have the right to take a life, only god has that right. And we get people who come to us for information and support and very ofthen they are catholics and we will ask them about their faith and what they say is: I think my god would be comfortable with my desicion to end my life. Therefore is okay with me. If you will.

Inmendham: Yea, I …
Frank: I should say just a bit about our organization, because we do have some limitations and we do operate within the law. If you will, and we try to, altho we find ourselves invariably in court in some parts of the united states. But what we hold is that mentally competent adults that suffer from a physical or irreversible illness or intractable pain have a basic human right to chose to end their lives when they judge the quality of their lives is unacceptable. That right by its nature implies that the ending of one’s life by one’s choice, including the timing, the persons present and they should be free of any restriction by family, friends, government, medical profession, clergy no matter how well intentioned those people may be. I should say also that there are some things that we do not do. We do not do encourage anyone to end their life.We do not provide the means to them to do so and we do not physically assist them in any way. They have to perform all of the tasks. So what we are doing and where we won in the supreme court in two different states now. Is our first amendment right to free speech because is all we do. Is all we provide, information and support. If you were in that situation and you had an irreversible or a terminal illness and you came to us we would ask you to put your situation in writing. We would ask you for a copy of your medical records . We would have 3 physicians evaluate that medical record and see if it appeared that you warranted our support. If they did not disagree a fourth physician would be brought in. But if they agreed, then someone comes to visit with you at no expense anywhere in the united states. To talk with you and really to determine whether you are mentally competent. And if you are not temporarily depressed where you may be helped by medication or therapy or some such thing as that. And if you are determined to be competent, then we sayto you alright, we will provide you with the information to help you end your life. If you want us to be there with you when you do it. We will also be there because we dont think that anybody should die alone. Now in many situations, this is kind of a living ???? with family as it was with Britanny Mainor, everybody around. Kind of a celebration of the end of suffering. But very often there are family members who do not agree with us so the person is left alone. Somebody who would try to stop them if they knew. Thats when we say, if you want us to be there with you, we will be there with you. So that is kind of the work of the final exit network. We are not unique at all, there are some 57 different organizations in 26 countries arround the world that have some form of aid in dying that are kind of working. Whether it be advanced directives whether it be voluntary euthanasia. All those things … so this is .. it is a world wide movement and it is coming but certainly gonna be no federal action to make it happen. Its gotta happen on a state by state basis.

We will return with the conversation between Inmendham and Dr. F very soon.

And now to Adventures of an antinatalist.

B: So these are the people that convince you not to have kids?
Glynos: I suppose so yea. Oh and Gary.
B: Who the fack is Gary?
Glynos: You know; inmendham
B: who?
Glynos: Let me show you. Ah this is a good one.
Gary: Human beings are need machines. You do not create the need then you do not have a fucking problem. You do not have a need that needs satisfying. Is not that fucking complicated ashole. We come into the world we make the mess and then we clean up the mess and then we give ourselves a blue ribbon. Thats bullshit. Alright, that is like a fireman that starts fires to justify his existence. Do something with that analogy, okay deal with the fact that it does not make any sense to start fires just so that they can get paid to put the fires out .
B: So wait a second, he i saying that noone should have kids.
Glynos: Exactly.
B: You do not believe I do.
Glynos: I do yea.
B: So you do not think I should have kids either then.
Glynos: Look, this is not about you personally. Is just an ethical question.
B: Na fuck you brother. You said I should not have fucking kids right? That means you wanna fucking kill my kids huh?
Glynos: No that is not what I am saying at all.
B: Don't fucking lie brother, I know what you said. I am going to fucking knife you. Knives him*.

[transition] 34:47

Great care should be given to the way in which suicides are reported in the media. improper reporting techniques can lead to suicide contagion (copycat suicides.)

DE: In other words, if you have to choose between ‘telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth’ or present a story in a way that discourages suicide, always opt for the latter.

One of the best examples of suicide contagion was that of the Vienna train suicides of the 1980s.

DE: I already doubt your ability to prioritize the truth over dogma.

For about four years, from 1984 to 1987, several individuals died by suicide by runing or jumping in front of oncoming trains. The media coverage of each suicide was sensational and extensive, and caused numerous “copycat” suicides.

DE: Why are you being so vague? What does ‘several’ and ‘numerous’ mean in these sentences?

Finally, in 1987, a campaign was launched to alter the way media reported the suicides. The result f the campaign was dramatic - suicides and attempted suicides dropped by over 80
% after only six months.

DE: Oh, so now it’s time to be specific with your statistics. Never underestimate how much impact the media has on human behaviour. The media shapes human behaviour much more than the average person is willing to accept.

Thus, the way suicides are reported in the media can either cause suicides or PREVENT suicide. offers guidelines for reporting on suicide that will assist members of the media in weiting stories that will help prevent suicides.

DE: What about offering guidelines for reporting on suicide that will help people understand this phenomenon better?
These guidelines include:
Minimise coverage of suicides. Keep the stories relatively brief and do not run too many stories. But it is important to run stories!

DE: Yes, keep the stories brief. Dont give people the information they need in order to think deeply about a particular suicide case. Your primary function is to discourage suicide, not to help people to understand this phenomenon in any kind of dept.

ALWAYS provide suicide prevention information with suicide stories. This is CRITICAL.

DE: And the suicide hotlines will in turn also fail to be impartial. Their primary function is to prevent suicide.

Emphasize the number one cause for suicide: The number one cause for suicide is untreated depression.

DE: Why would suicidal people be untreated if they had already beem diagnosed with depression?

If they had *not* been diagnosed with depression before their death then how do they know the cause of their death was ‘untreated depression’? Who is retrospectively diagnosing these people after death and how qualified are they to do so?

Would it not be more intellectually honest to emphasize the reason/s for the person’s suicide that were stated intheir suicide note (if they left one behind)?

And then indicate that depression is treatable, and thus anyone suffering from depression needs to receive IMMEDIATE help.

DE: Depression is not always treatable. This is inaccurate information. Period. In fact, the use of drugs and counseling can in some cases make the peson feel even worse.

Do not hesistate to talk about suicide in stories. But ALWAYS do so in a way that provides help, hope, and resources for the suicidal and suicide survivors.

DE: Sometimes there simply is no hope. Why would you wish to pretend that people never find themselves in hopeless circumstances?

There is a strong stigma associated with suicide.

DE: Yes, and we are asking you to perpetuate this stigma. If you want to kill yourself it’s probably beause you are suffering from untreated depression. In fact, we will emphasise that.

Sensitive articles about suicide can help REDUCE this stigma; but please be EXTREMELY careful about how you talk about it and how you cover stories about suicide.

DE: First, you need to articulate what that stigma is before you can -plan on helping to reduce it . So what is the stigma attached to people who kill themselves? Cowardly, selfish, weak, illogical, mentally ill .Waht are you advocating that the media should do to change *those* stigmas. Answer: Absolutely nothing.

Do not begin a television newscast with a suicide story.
Do not place suicide stories on the cover of news papers or magazines.
Do not sensationalize suicides.
DE: But feel free to sensationalize life -affirming themse.
Do not romanticize suicides and never portray suicides as heroic.
DE: yes, leave that to Shakesperean plays. Those are an acceptable medium for us to sublime our horror of life and death.

Never say that suicide “ended pain” or “ended suffering.”

DE: Omit factual statements from your reporting.

Suicide CAUSES excruciating pain for suicide survivors.

DE: Not in all cases and the pain f living can often be greater for the suicidal person that the pain of the survivors having to deal with their loss.

“Also, people need to be alive to feel relief from pain”

DE: But people don’t need to feel relief from pain if they are dead.

Suicide CAUSES pain.

DE: Not to the person who is dead.

Be careful about describing the methods used do not go into great detail about the methods, and do not show detailed pictures of the locations where the suicides occurred.

DE: Your job is to prevent suicide. Not to provide relevant information that a person needs in order to understand exactly what happened.

Do not say that suicides occur because of one event. (suicides rarely occur because of one event)

DE: Do not let the story be dictated by what actually happened. Just follow formulaic principles.

[Transition] 38 :13
This is the voice of radio free Neruda.

Right to dye.
You wish to dye?
Why woad you do that, blue?
Does it matter?
That would take a Rit.
Don’t rubia the wrong way, It makes one mordant.
Why resist, wax wroth?
Anti natal Indigo?
The gall!
You deserve a tannin.
Brought to you by … the makers at GOLEMATIC
Bright Lies for Dark Truths.

[transition] 39:26

Inmendham: Yah, well I, I am not excluding the ability to have the proper law suit. Constructed the proper way to finally edify the fact that we do have this individual rights. So I am not … I think it is ultimately a constitutional right. I think is fundamentally a violation of my constitutional right for anyone to say they are going to tell me what life means. That is a philosophical concept and nobody has the right to tell me, what my pain is worth or what the joy of a sunset is worth. Those are… those are their property, that is my property and it's a clear violation , clear trespass of a jeffersonian notion of rights for they to say they have to jump the fence and have to save me from my own judgement. Prove I am incompetent or pretty much shut up. That is how I look at it, if you can't prove I am incompetent , we do not have all these tests. All these tests you have for all these people’s judgement, I am not saying is not what you have to do as a pragmatic matter . But we do not do that for the military. We let an 18 year old boy decide I am going to be a murderer, and I am going to be paid to do it. Right? We do not ask them any questions at all. We do not find … we don't get a bunch of doctors to figure out whether he is sane or competent or not a crazy maniac or sadistic lunatic. No we do not care, more sadistic the better . And so our hypocrisy in policy should be.. in my opinion, is just so glaring. You know the, hypocrisy of caring about even, people’s lives right. We watch people die all around the world for a lack of 50 cents a day. 50 cents will buy a human life. A human life desperate to live and yet we will pretend we care when we force anybody to die horribly. I mean to me it is sadistic , it is cruel. It is ignorant. It is bigoted. And that is… I am not saying that should be your argument. But that Is I am saying that Is my argument okay. These people do not have any justification because their hypocrisy is glaring. They are defending their own insecurity about their own philosophical position. You know their religion, and that is all they are doing. They are defending God and they are using my rights, they are throwing my rights at the altar to sacrifice to their god. Is a right they dont want, is a right they have no use for. Well then, sign a piece of paper saying you dont want the right to die. I should not have to sign a piece of paper saying I want authority. If you want to give away your rights. If you are afraid that one day you will do something crazy. Well sign away your own rights. But do not sign away your own rights,but do sign away mines, do not steal mines.

Frank: And those pieces of paper are so important because most of us hope that we die home in our own home peacefully . 80% of us die in a hospital, with all kinds of things pointed at orifices. Surrounded by people arguing about whether or not we should continue to live. And just a commercial for the advanced directive, you know. To say to people: have the conversation with your family about what you do and do not want. Would you wanna live on a feeding tube? Would you want to live in a respirator? Make sure that they understand that. Sometimes that conversation is very difficult to have. 
People say, oh I do not want to talk about death. You know , but If I love you and want to honor your wishes. Then I want to know what they are. And once we determine that, then put that in writing and assign, have somebody appointed as a healthcare surrogate to speak for you if you become a permanent vegetative state. Those things are all sort of key to the process. Very often when we are young we think that we are immortal and we think that people like Caronine Q, Nansy P., Cherry C. All women in their twenties who thought they were immortal until they went into a permanent vegetative state. And once they hit that and did not have the advance directive then they went on to live for 10 or 15 years. While husbands and mothers and fathers argued whether or not they are going to pull the plug. Because it was never discussed it was never put … never written. So it is for us folks taking the time to do those advanced directives, you are never too young to do them.

Inmendham: Yea, that is exactly. I am advocating a similar policy where people would be obligated to have a living will and they would have a guardian as I call it or whatever. For life , you know, somebody died , something happened they would have to get a new one. But that person would just sign off, the final judge of the circumstance. So for disabled people who worry that they are going to be coerced into killing themselves because of being a burden or something else. Obviously this advocate will always be there, to say no they do not wanna kill themselves they just feel like they are being pressured because they are expensive or a burden. And so this would protect them .. we can make it fail safe essentially we can protect the emotional and psychologically vulnerable without taking away everyone's rights. You do not have to sacrifice. Human dignity and human, liberty . You know ,to prevent real harm from happening. But again I would argue your examples of Caroline Q. and Crussan. are again examples of hypocrisy. Because you think of the millions of dollars, okay not a small amount of money. But actual, millions of dollars. Spent to prolong these vegetative states and for what. As a monument to god. There is no other, you are not doing anything else with. To think how much comfort could be given in the world, with that money. Just points out again. These people, their hypocrisy. You do not care about the living. If you will throw away resources on human vegetables ,and that's what they where as a token to show how much you love life. You do not love life if that is what you do with the resources that can provide comfort .

Frank: And we watch such extremes, you know Terry Shaibow 15 years you know, George W bush coming back from vacation to sign an order to keep her alive. And let it continue to go. For 15 years before her husband, he still lives in Florida here. Finally won that case and was allowed to take her out of life support. But 15 years of that is horrific. Certainly someway that she never wanted to or ever intended to live.

Inmendham: Another Issue you brought up is the, I call it, the medical industrial complex. You know everything sort of turned into a complex but the... You know, if medical doctors did not have a self interest. I mean they do have a self interest , they are making money off of the last years of life are the most expensive years right? The last 7 months of your life you are going to spend the half of all the medical expense of your life. Half of it is going to be in the last seven years of your life. So yea they wanna drag that out so thats half their income right? I mean I don't want to be too cynical but clearly if the medical profession would come out rationally and would say look yea this is part of life. I mean, dying is part of life and obviously, why should we do it anything other than gracefully. Why should we do it, There should not be a single misstep. It should be the most beautifully orchestrated. One of the most , it should be as good as a wedding. Okay, your dying should be as great as your wedding. It should be a vantage of life to celebrate your existence , celebrate what you have accomplished maybe lament some of the thing you mest up or you blow. But you know what I am saying, you sing the song, I did it my way and you gracefully exit stage left. I do not think any rational person, took to a polygraph test could say they are against that, without there being some reason. Like you brought up the catholics. I mean they are the ones that put kevorkian in jail, lets understand there was a catholic judge and a catholic jury and they put him in jail for years. So these religious people aren't harmless. And I think it is a big part of the subject , I think is part of the politics. I will bring up 1 more political issue, I do not want to swamp you but you know the real problem with the issue is that, these republicans. A Lot of conservatives are for the right to die. But they are part of a party, that has to placate the religious right. So they can not do what the party actualy wants to do. Lots of fanincial concervatives, who would be all for the right to die, but they are not going to vote for a liberal you know. And so they are stuck, bound tot his religious fundamentalism, they keeps standing in the way. And it happens. .. I can see in the politics in this state because they came very close to passing a right to die law, and is just this little bit of nasty republican politics that stood in the way.

Frank: Is an interesting thing in this movement too, people tend to think of it as a liberal movement. An individual human right, that liberal people was for those rights and so forth. But I find conservative side that you can make the case for: Hey get the government out of my life. Why should the government be telling me whether I could live or die. And that becomes a great conservative cause so there are a number of … apart of the political realities of I have to do something , there are both conservatives and liberals who support this idea for different reasons.

Inmendham: Right, I am saying I always want people to support it because it is a basic human dignity and because of compassion and because you don't want to waste suffering. But also too, if you are a financial conservative. I can not even tell you how much money you are going to save, when you are not shoving tubes, in people who do not want your tubes okay. I mean when you are spending a fortune to tie somebody down and do procedures on them and do tests. My grandma lived to be 107 years old. And the last day of her life, they did a diagnostic MRA. You know, can you make any, you know. They were diagnosing somebody who is 107 years old. Why are they doing that? And they tied her down to do it.

Frank: you hear that all the time, of somebody of a great age when all of the sudden we are gonna give this person a peacemaker and keep her heart going. While there is nothing left for the body for the hearth to keep going, and so... You mentioned an interesting thing before, I think is very important I was pleased that you said it . You kept saying the word , liberty. And we often talk about this as a human right. And you can make a distinction that a right is an activity that requires others to assist or cooperate in some way in allowing you to have that. However, liberty is something we may exercise without imposing obligations on somebody else, and in hastening the end of a person’s life may be thought of as a personal liberty for those who are irreversible ill, or are suffering more than they can bear. So I sometimes think that when we talk about it as a human right we ought to talk about it as a human liberty. And I am glad that you did that because there is a medical model that exists on those 5 states where a physician must provide you aid in dying. We have physicians review you, but we give you complete control over your life. In other words when the time comes, that you wish to end it. You can easily acquire in your own community, the means and do the simple physical tasks that are required for a quick painless and a foolproof death. That does not require a doctor to agree. Because even in oregon, washington, vermont, those places. A doctor may say, no I don't believe that, I am not giving you the medication. So it is till their individual choice and they are still dependent upon the doctor. And what we have is essentially a non medical model that does not make you dependent upon the doctor.

[transition 52:52]

That is all the time we have for this conversation this month. But if you would like to hear the rest of this interview. Please visit us at our official webite and or our official youtube channel. Where you can see the rest of this conversation as well as other conversations. Other episodes, vlogs extras. Live events and more. We also have a facebook, and a twitter account. We welcome you to follow us on those as well.

Do you have a counter argument to anything in this episode or regarding one of our other topics or our other episodes? Well then please get in contact with us and make your argument. We can be contacted in any of the social media networks mentioned previously. But we can also be emailed at And we are also proud to announce that you can leave us a text argument on the new VideoSoapForums. If we like your response. You may just end up being part of the show. We have actually our first text argument by Rignolo. It is an argument for the right to die and it reads.

An argument regarding natural death:

Some people seem to think that an intelligently self-directed death is intrinsically worse than an undirected natural death. This leads to obligating people to suffer to the ends of their lives by natural afflictions, which is an unjustified imposition on those with disregarded preferences.

The tendencies toward specific kinds of results in evolution are by natural processes that do not have intrinsic purposes. There was no cause in evolution to safeguard against considerable end-of-life suffering. People need not have uncommonly high intelligence to be better qualified that an unthinking natural default in making decisions about the ends of their own lives.

That was Great Rignolo, that was a great contribution, thank you very much for your contribution, and hope to hear from you guys soon. See you then.


Inmendham: Is like a gas pump with 4000 holes in the hose, that is what life is. ohh yea, fill her up. Yea, accurate analogies or metaphors would have to include something preposterously wasteful. grotesquely rude and obnoxious to anything rational , sensible. To any kind of notion of love and beauty. Those concepts are completely disgraced by this debauchery that we call life. The stupid grotesque nonsense that goes on. The deformities and the brutality. grotesque, obscene brutality. The whole fucking audience ought to get the fuck out of their chairs and walk the fuck out. I mean it just does not deserve any participation in any kind of. Ohh is just a journey, you are going to die anyway. you know. I mean “ “ this is so much better, I am going to die anyway “ “ Ohh yes, what a great reason to live. 
So that I can die anyway, another day. So that I can spill some more guts, before I cash in my guts for good. It is just littered with all this slop and imperfection, and everybody just keeps talking like. Lets keep marching, through the slop as if we are actually going somewhere. Is going to be shakespeare plays forever. All this is pointless drama, it is. Pointless want chase, wheel deal, stab in the back. It is all crass crap. I mean it is just stupid in every fucking level, and the people that finally understand that, that actually become aware … ohh I get it, it is stupid. And you fucking god damn almost mock them. This whole fucking thing is so obnoxious that I have to actually explain to these assholes why there be some reason I would not be too enthusiastic to play this preposterously idiotic fucking game. It just feels undone to leave it this way. It feels undone to sit there and just say I am going to get the fuck out. But you know the game is going on. You know that everything that made you sick, everything that is got you totally “I gotta get out of here ” Is still there, and so you, is like. is like, jumping off the titanic when you know the nursery school has not been evacuated. The job is not done somehow, there is something you gotta do before you jump out the boat. I mean really it is just obnoxiously insulting that I have to sit there and even explain to you people how this play sucks. Fuck the optimist. Is not even optimism. Is delusionary rainbow sickness, yea whatever. Yea I said all I need to say, so yea I wish I could offer some comfort but I cant . I wish I could offer some advice but I cant. So yea instead I just ranted. Yea thats what i did. Till the next time. You people are insane. Fuck you guys, I am going home. Bla bla bls,, preposterous. Preposterous.

[transition] 57:26

So in conclusion, none of us asked to be here in the first place, and really all. Because of a few cowards, zealots and tyrants. Human beings are being denied what should be one of the most fundamental rights of being alive. To take control of one’s own death to invest in one’s own welfare and to be assured of a graceful exit. An ending befitting the dignity that every living feeling thing deserves. If this is a cause you believe in. Please do whatever you can to insist that all human beings have a right to a clean break from this suffering. At the time that they choose. Fight for it to be fail safe. Fight for it to be made available. Work hard to get people thinking about why this is so important. But chances are you will not. And your inaction is just another reason why we are doomed. But try to not doom anyone else, as much as possible. Try not to impose as much as possible. Just being alive makes you a taker. Your every happiness paid for the suffering of other sentient creature. You are in fact by your very design an ashole. It is extremely important for all of us to understand the myriad ways in which we are in fact dangerous to other feeling things in this world. try not to impose as much of this dangerousness as possible. No matter how small you are or how powerless. You infact have an impact. Use whatever power you have to minimise the suffering. Please.


Items in the VloggerDome #04 The Right To Die Collection

There are currently no items within this collection.

Social Bookmarking


Allowed tags: <p>, <a>, <em>, <strong>, <ul>, <ol>, <li>

Collection Tree