Category Archives: Proposals

Transdermal patches for a rational voluntary death?

James Park is one of our favourite contemporary philosophers, and like us he is a proponent of the right of people to decide on their own death. However, Park is seriously concerned about what he calls irrational suicide, that is people making an end to their life for futile reasons such losing a job or being rejected by their love, but if they had not chosen to die they would be able to recover from these setbacks and be able to live a happy life.

The problem, according to Park, is that most methods for voluntary death only require one decision: yes or no. And once the decision to commit suicide, a point of no return has been passed. It would be better in his opinion if people who want to die should use a method which would require multiple decisions. This would force people to consider whether their original desire for a voluntary death is actually what they want.

Park therefore proposes voluntary death by dehydration as a method for a rational voluntary death, i.e. the refusal of drinking water by a person with the intent of ending one’s life. Because death in this fashion is not instantaneous and require a period of at least several days, during which the person has to consistently to refuse water, this method precludes its use in an impulse suicide.

He then puts forward several arguments in favour of this method. First this method does not depend on doctors, and that it could be used by everyone. Also he states that no change of law is required, but this depends on the jurisdiction where one lives and in many countries doctors will put you on intensive care if you has lost your consciousness (but not yet your life) in this way.

But most important is his claim that this method is relatively painless. But this claim is highly questionable, and evidence suggests that voluntary dehydration does cause great suffering. But given that most people will agree with Park’s concern about irrational suicide, could we design a humane but slow method of voluntary death?

I think the answer might be found in transdermal patches. Unlike pills or potions, transdermal patches are designed to administer low doses of a drug to the body over a longer period of time. A well-known example of such devices are nicotine patches, but another example are contraceptive patches and there are several other applications.

What properties should the drug used in this type of transdermal patch have? First, the drug should be able to permeate through the skin into the blood stream. Second, the drug should have a long biological half-life, i.e. the rate in which the body removes this drug should be lower than the rate in which it is administered and hence enables a build-up of the drug in the body. Third, the drug should have a high lethal dose. This means that a large amount of drug should be present in the body before death will occur, this will prolong the time between the attachment of the patch and ultimate death.

A fourth but very important property would be that until the lethal threshold level is reached, the drug should have no or only minimal side effects. And as fifth and final property, is that if the patch is removed before the point of no return, total recovery is possible.

These properties together will ensure that the use of transdermal patches as a method for voluntary death, will not lead to irrational suicides.

In order to guarantee a responsible distribution of these patches, we propose that these devices will only be available through a thanatologist (a medical profession proposed by A. C. Grayling, specialized in euthanasia in order to free other medical personal from this practice). People should be certain that patches provided by licensed thanatologists are save and reliable. An additional benefit is that when a person requests a patch, the thanatologist can have a conversation with this person on why one wants put an end to his or her life, and whether this is the only solution.

Exit visas and international child abduction

In the modern world only a few countries, mostly with dictatorial governments, require their citizens or residents to buy a visa for leaving the country. Most countries only require foreigners to buy a visa for entering the country.

Since the freedom of movement, including the right of leaving one’s own country at will, is considered a fundamental human right, most civilized nations consider a general restriction on departing one’s country as an abomination. Only in a few serious cases (e.g. of convicted criminals or people awaiting trial), it’s nowadays acceptable for a state to put restrictions on their citizens’ freedom to leave the country.

This is all fine for adults who are capable to decide for their own whether they will leave the country or not. There’s these days, however, a huge problem of international child abduction. It’s our opinion that an exit visa requirement for minors can be an effective measure to combat international child abductions.

In most cases of international child abduction, a non-custodial parent take his or her own child to another country against the will of the custodial parent. Usually the motive is the result of a failed marriage or another intimate relationship and a subsequent custody battle between the parents.

The system we propose will works as follows. All minors, defined as all persons below the age of sixteen years, who will travel to a foreign destination are required to be in the possession of an exit visa. Only the custodial parent is authorized to apply for this exit visa, which does not mean that a child cannot travel with his non-custodial parent, it only ensures the permission of the custodial parent.

On the application form the custodial parent will declare the minor’s destination (multiple destinations are possible), the duration of the stay abroad, whether the child will travel alone or in company of an adult, and in the latter case with whom.

In order to ensure the cooperation of foreign countries, the passport of minors should contain instead of “valid for all countries”, the phrase “valid only with appropriate exit visa”. The subsequent effect of this measure, is that expiration of the exit visa, the minor will automatically remain illegal in the foreign country, and hence the authorities are obliged to extradite the minor back to his or her home country. And the person, mostly the non-custodial parent, can be charged of harboring an illegal immigrant.

The Cheering of the Bulls

Bull fighting is barbaric and should be prohibited, and not only in space settlements. But for some reason people have a unsatisfiable need for “gruesome” entertainment, hence a proposal for a totally animal friendly alternative for bull fighting.

First like traditional bull fighting, this game is performed in an arena. Second we substitute real bulls with two humans in a realistic bull costume (including sharp horns), alternatively we could remote-controlled animatrons (but my preference is the first option). Third we need a human who fights the “bulls”, this person is referred to as the “coward”. Fourth within the arena there’s a field with a marked line, called the “ring”.

The rules are quite simple. First, the coward enters the arena and will stand at the midpoint, then (s)he will greet the audience. Meanwhile the coward is booed and insulted for coward by the audience. Subsequently two “bulls” enter the arena, and now the audience is cheering for the “bulls”.

The task for the “bulls” is plain and simple: pushing the coward outside the ring, for each time they manage to push him outside the ring they will receive a point. But also the coward can earn points by leaping over the “bulls”, each time he succeeds in leaping over a “bull”, the coward receives a point. The team which has the most points after fifteen minutes, wins the game.

To make this game even more exciting, each time the “bulls” earn a point the audience will cheer, but every time the coward earns one they will boo him.


Free Public Transport

We have discussed some ideas on public transportation in space habitats in an earlier post. In this post we will argue in defense of introducing free public transportation in Mordan.

Public transportation is in many developed countries already heavily subsidized, in some cases to such extent that travellers pay no more than 20% of the costs of public transportation. So we might wonder why bothering with charging fares at all? If you believe that people should pay for their own transportation, than you should oppose any subsidies on public transportation. But if you believe that some public subsidies on public transportation are fine, you should explain why we should not subsidize it for 100%.

We believe that freedom of movement is a fundamental right. But freedom of movement is also of great social and economic importance. People have to be able to travel from their homes to their jobs, students to their schools, consumers to the shops and so on. A good and accessible public transportation system will increase economic activity and hence wealth.

Since anyone, workers, employees, businesses, and consumers will gain from public transportation, we believe it will be fair if the government would use public funds to provide free public transportation. In principle the funds needed to finance such free public transportation will be supplied by the revenues generated by the lease of land by the government.

Related topics

The case for universal, single-payer health care