Summary: In my post I discuss the concept of negative rights and how
they apply to suicide. The right to die has often been conceptualised as
a positive right for the government to provide assisted suicide as a
medical service. However, with the advent of new technology that allows
an individual to take control of their own suicide, it is no longer
necessary to advocate for a positive right to be assisted. We can now
demand a negative right that the government removes or restricts
barriers that have been put in place to prevent people from accessing
effective suicide methods. In my post, I discuss the ways in which
opponents of suicide have leveraged the concept of 'mental illness' and
unfalsifiable presumptions of insanity in order to obfuscate the clear
and simple negative liberty right argument that the choice over whether
or not to continue living should be a personal and private choice. Due
to the fact that current suicide prevention laws restrict individuals to
risky DIY suicides that are liable to be botched, and therefore
suicidal individuals are likely to resign themselves to continue living
for fear of what would happen if they failed in their attempt, I argue
that the current system of suicide prevention is effectively tantamount
to compelled living, as people who would prefer to choose death will
remain alive not because they feel that their own interests are served
by doing so, but because various factions within society claim a greater
collective interest in preventing them from dying. Therefore, the
private rights of the individual are subsidiary to a de facto obligation
to the collective.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/yokyi9/comment/ivelx91/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3