I've never accomplished anything and at this point there are symptoms that prevent me from functioning normally. I have no right to be a burden on society or my family. The only solution that I see is death.
Just because it's the only solution I can see, doesn't mean it's the only solution.
Just because it's what I want, it doesn't mean that it's what would be best for me, make me the most happy, or even be what I would want in 5 / 10 / 26 & a half years.
No one has the right -in theory- but everyone has the right to choose to take up that burden, and many people devote their entire lives to taking care of others. That's their passion, their joy, & their chosen path in life. Good thing, because some people need to be taken care of (or they'd die), and other people want to be taken care of (for many reasons).
One of my rules about suicide is that if I'm willing to kill myself? Before doing that I have to be willing to change EVERYTHING, (or I'm not really willing to kill myself). Meaning I'm not allowed to just eat my gun wherever I am. First I have to leave my family, leave all -or most- of my stuff, & leave the country. Near literally change
everything. Whether it's Thailand or Sweden, tropical paradise or war torn hell... I have to go somewhere completely different from where I'm at... And do something completely different from what I've been doing.
I'm not usually willing to do that. I'm still trying to fight / hang onto what I have. Which makes suicide not make sense, logically, because if I kill myself? I lose all that, anyway. But it's still the main argument against; But then I'd risk losing ABC!! I can't just walk off and leave XYZ!! When that bit of contra-logic runs face first into my other "logic".... I know it's earned the damn quotation marks. If I'm not willing to walk away from everything, but I am willing to kill myself? I'm not thinking clearly. My logic is f*cked up.
How 'bout it, Eve? Are you willing to change everything, before losing everything?