Comment by lordnacho

I had an old teacher who died almost a year ago.

Great guy, very sociable, knew everyone in the little town he lived in. Kept in touch with a lot of students. Good neighbour, friendly guy who'd talk to everyone.

He got Alzheimers. He started forgetting stuff, and it frustrated him. He got caught driving dangerously, and cursed the doctor who took away his license.

He argued with me about the state of some chicken he wanted to cook. I told him "this is pink all over, you have to cook it more". He got angry. I understood he'd become like this to everyone.

He pissed off everyone on his street, and all police, medical and social workers sent to help him. The disease made him blow up every relationship he had with anyone that he didn't know well, like me and a couple of colleagues.

He got found in his house, having left the gas on, endangering the whole street. He ended up in a care home, not knowing who he was, or who I was.

If he'd been run over by a car, or died of a heart attack at the age of 80, people he knew would remember him as that nice old guy who had a dog and made a lot of art, and was friendly to everyone. Instead he was that 83 year old guy who pissed off everyone, nearly blew up the neighbourhood, and drove like a maniac.

You really don't want to end up with dementia and related illnesses, it totally sours everyone's view of you.

basisword 3 days ago

>> You really don't want to end up with dementia and related illnesses, it totally sours everyone's view of you.

I don't think this is fair. I know several people who died with Alzheimer's and although their final years were very difficult for them nobody has a bad opinion of them. It's certainly a strain on the family but intimating that if you have dementia you better kill yourself or your legacy will be ruined is not ok.

  • 0xEF 3 days ago

    I think the suggestion needs more thought, but I don't necessarily disagree with the idea of making my exit before the dementia really sets in. I've directly cared for two family members who suffered from it (collective 5 years of my life, which I'd like to think gives me a pretty good view of what the disease can actually do to people) and I decided for myself that I'd rather be quietly killed than put my loved ones through what I went through as a caretaker. While also trying to work a full-time job and maintain my own sanity while I watched people I'd known all my life be destroyed, becoming tortured versions of themselves like something out of a body-snatchers horror film.

    We, the loved ones, made the decisions to keep them going and I wonder how fair that was to them. We tend to not want to let people go, choosing to sacrifice quality of life for the sufferer and those around them for, what, a few fleeting moments of possible clarity? The opportunity to say goodbye to someone who may or may not even understand what is happening?

    The events I went through with my family hurt us in ways that will not likely ever heal, despite effort on at least a few of our part, and it did leave me wondering if I would put my son or wife through that should something similar ever happen to me. I decided against it, seeing as I am at the age where these are very real possibilities. In the US, we have DNRs ("do not resuscitate") and living wills that offer prior directives, but something like assisted suicide is not allowed here unless some very extreme circumstances are met, because insurance companies and hospitals make more money from suffering people than dead ones. I'm a strong advocate of the right to die, but it is a decision that needs to be made some extensive consideration and documentation before one actually needs it.

    • thunky 3 days ago

      Sorry if I'm missing something but how do you plan to exit on your own terms if it's not allowed, and your only legal tools are DNRs and living wills?

      It seems like DIY methods could be risky to your family if you're already impacted by the disease, and your own competency is called into question.

      • 0xEF 3 days ago

        You're not missing anything. I did not want to get too deep into it here, because let's be honest; thinking about having to take our own life is a really, really dark place to go, even if it with the best of intentions. I'm not really sure that HN is the place for that type of discussion, at least not on any detailed level.

        At the moment, I have standing orders in place that no heroic measures or treatments should be enacted in the event that I am in a terminal or vegitative state. I've communicated clearly to family members that would be responsible for my decision making that things are not to be prolonged or dragged out for the sake of emotional contrivance.

        Without knowing how we will die, it's really quite impossible to plan around it, of course. My comment, more or less, expresses my desire to have more control over my exit in the event that I am put in a position to become a massive burden on those I love; this is something I consider a reasonable and rational request, where the folks that make our laws do not. None of that changes without discussing and sharing our viewpoints on the matter, though, which I suppose was all that I was doing.

        • thunky 3 days ago

          Thanks for sharing. I asked because I've had similar thoughts, and I'm not sure what can be done about it. I believe that there is usually a time window where it's possible to know what's coming your way and have the capacity to do something about it. Easier said than done.

          Good luck to you.

  • jotaen 3 days ago

    > intimating that if you have dementia you better kill yourself [...] is not ok.

    Parent comment doesn’t say this, does it?

    • basisword 3 days ago

      Neither does mine unless you leave out a key phrase and replace it with [...]. The point is that having dementia does not necessarily "sour everyone's view of you" as the parent said.

      • jotaen 3 days ago

        Disagreeing with the “sour everyone's view of you” aspect is one thing, but you called out parent comment for a potential conclusion that they neither made nor intimated.

  • h33t-l4x0r 3 days ago

    Not to mention that you won't really care what people think of you because you'll be dead.

pessimizer 3 days ago

> If he'd been run over by a car, or died of a heart attack at the age of 80, people he knew would remember him as that nice old guy who had a dog and made a lot of art, and was friendly to everyone. Instead he was that 83 year old guy who pissed off everyone, nearly blew up the neighbourhood, and drove like a maniac.

I've really thought about this a lot after seeing a number of family members and friend's family members go through dementia, and it seems like it can go two ways: like this, which is how it went with my grandmother (whose hoarding behavior increased aggressively, and she started slapping people), or how it went with my grandfather on the other side (he became quieter and quieter, watched tv every day while understanding less and less of it, and when you caught his eye would repeat how much he loved you and how much seeing you "made an old man feel good.")

It has something to do with how you feel about the nature of people in general, and whether you feel they are all suspicious and possibly conspiring against you, or that you think they are basically good and want the best for you. When you have all of your mind, you can beat the demons or the angels back with your reasoning enough to have the personality that you want. My grandmother was very loving, and my grandfather was very shrewd and practical. But when that higher function can't regulate you, what shows is if you were someone who taught yourself how to see the good in people, or someone who taught yourself how to see the bad in people.

I suspect I'll end up like my grandfather, as much as I think of myself as like my grandmother. Deep down, I've always been crippled by the feeling that everyone is a wonderful person. My aggression and judgemental nature on a lot of things can really, embarrassingly, be interpreted as me looking for excuses for everyone's behavior.

err4nt 3 days ago

This leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I see that the man was Israeli in the original story and I don't want to presume a religious perspective, but I can share some thoughts from my own based on his story and yours. I've read the New Testament within a Jewish framework and one of the things it says, Rabbi Shaul says in 1 Corinthians 12:23 that those people in the community who are most embarrassing or cause us to blush, like the parts of our own body who are honoured or dignified by being clothed with underwear, likewise in the community are owed a special covering and to be afforded dignity by the other parts of the same body/community. Just something to think about in light of this story!

Jolter 3 days ago

Not all Alzheimers patients get aggressive/angry. I know it happens, I’ve known one person who did almost exactly what you describe above. He lived with his partner of many years, and seemed superficially very cogent and together. It was just that he started to see insults and conspiracies against his person everywhere around him. Not until later did the cognitive and memory decline become apparent, giving him a diagnosis that explained his bad behavior.

But my personal anecdata puts that man in a minority. None of my older relatives with Alzheimer’s have become aggressive or troublesome. Worry, anxiety and confusion seem to be much more common states of mind, which admittedly also doesn’t seem like such a fun way to spend your days.

singleshot_ 3 days ago

> You really don't want to end up with dementia and related illnesses, it totally sours everyone's view of you.

Yes, the sixty-fifth worst thing about degenerative brain disease. Good observation.

fsloth 3 days ago

I agree alzheimers turns everything to shit in every meaning of the word.

I disagree it’s up to you to conclude it would have been better if he had been killed 3 years earlier (which you imply).

In general you don’t have the right to such a statement.

Now, if you were discussing _your own_ condition this would be a totally valid consideration IMHO. But you (almost) _never_ have the right to conclude from someone elses part when it’s their time to go.

Assisted suicide is a humane option but ”I hope he had died with some dignity years ago instead of pissing everyone off” tarnishes the entire concept and is exactly the type of argument which stops assisted suecide becoming a more widely accepted option.

  • kayodelycaon 3 days ago

    It’s basically getting rid of somebody when they become an inconvenience to others. Outside the bubble of HN, I suspect most people that talk about it as humane for the person actually mean humane for them.

    Many countries hesitate to execute criminals despite very clear criteria that could be used to justify it. (Many countries banned entirely.)

    Why would we have a lower bar for someone who hasn’t committed any crimes?

raw_anon_1111 3 days ago

My issue is, anyone with half a clue should know that a formerly nice respected man doesn’t automatically turn into a mean guy that “pisses them off” because he wants to be. They should have known that he had dementia and it wasn’t his fault.

I’ve never been close to anyone who had dementia. My grandparents on both sides died with their mental facilities in tact and my parents who are 83 and 81 are independent and just as of 6 months ago passed a cognitive test. I can imagine if they started acting out of character and being mean to me or forgot who I was that I would be hurt, overwhelmed etc. But not pissed.

zakki 3 days ago

I guess modern people need more empathy to their elderly. In Asian Village I believe they have more empathy if the elderly is having dementia.

*no data though, just observing my village

AtNightWeCode 3 days ago

I think you are bit wrong. Once someone close to you dies you remember them by their legacy. Also, you just have to laugh at some of the chaos these elderly cause. They call you in the middle of the night being lost somewhere and you have to guide em home. Or help the cops guide em home.

I am pro assisted suicide. Not sure about Switzerland but some countries allows it for young people with mental health problems. That I can't accept that.

groby_b 3 days ago

> it totally sours everyone's view of you.

That's the part that doesn't matter at all. Your life isn't contingent on others having a specific view of you - the rest of the world can, for lack of better words, go fuck themselves.

What matters is if you want to live a life where you can't drive a car, you might poison yourself with your cooking, you lose your mental facilities, etc. That is the relevant choice here.

kcexn 3 days ago

I think the takeaway should be you really don't want Alzheimer's regardless of what people think of you.

Think about what is happening from his point of view. The condition has fundamentally changed his perception of reality. You are trying to tell him that this perfectly cooked chicken is pink all-over when it clearly isn't. Everyone else has gone mad and he doesn't know why.

danielscrubs 2 days ago

I hear quite a lot of these stories from my parents. Are these kind of personality shifting diseases, like Alzheimers becoming more common? And if so, is it because we take better care of our hearts and don’t die as early as?

  • randcraw 2 days ago

    Yes, I think that's right. The average age of death due to old age has climbed for over a century, probably due to greatly improved public health and personal medicine.

    https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy

    Because dementia and other neurodegenerative diseases take decades to manifest they've been especially hard to diagnose early and prevent or treat early, while cognition is still intact. Alas, I think that hasn't changed much in recent years, despite many scientists and businesses working toward that end.

    Partly that's because few academic researchers can pursue a theory long enough in time to fully assess its potential, especially in combo therapies. Nor can the big pharma corporations who not only suffer from the same difficulty in long-term funding, but prefer the ROI of continuing treatments for disease to that of quick cures (or lifestyle advice). These are nowhere near as profitable a pill the patient must take for decades.

swat535 3 days ago

This is a heartbreaking story to read. But I think that pushing for assisted suicide as a "fix" like you're suggesting misses the bigger picture. We have a responsibility as a society to support people through these diseases, not cut their lives short because it's tough on everyone else.

The real issue is our broken systems for handling dementia and underfunded homes, overworked staff, no real community nets. Fixing that honors the full life someone led, instead of saying their value drops when they need help. Assisted suicide opens doors to abuse, like pressuring people who feel like burdens.

We owe better to people like your teacher.

[removed] 3 days ago
[deleted]
hhthrowaway1230 3 days ago

Sounds like LinkedIn story to me. Written by claude trying to drive a point home.

  • lordnacho 3 days ago

    Not sure how to react. This is the second time in a month that someone thinks I used AI to write an HN post.

    All I can say is that I didn't, and thank you for implying that it was so well written that it could only have been authored by a machine that has all of humanity's cultural output to hand.

sebastianconcpt 3 days ago

This sounds like a big and somehow convincing but still rationalization.

If you apply at scale the same logic with more sensibility you will also be able to rationalize a genocide because someone felt bad about something.

What defines demonic inspiration?

And here I don't say "demonic" metaphysically but philosophically.

deafpolygon 3 days ago

I would say that this is a societal problem, not an individual one. Society needs to do better in taking care of people who do slip by the wayside, with mental illness and diseases like Alzheimer's.

imtringued 3 days ago

So you're telling me Alzheimers is a death sentence? Also, what is the minimum nuisance that should lead to someone's death? Because that is the problem with the euthanasia obsession.

At some point everything indirectly leads to euthanasia and society is not built for that at all. Everything you do might or might not lead to someone's euthanasia, which means you are liable for their death.

Let's say we can predict school shooters before they shoot and give them an euthanasia to save lives. If bullying or encouragement causes someone to start shooting up a school, then the latent shooter will die before they do their shooting, but it also means that the instigator is a murderer themselves, because in the absence of instigation, no crime would be committed and no euthanasia would be necessary.

Since it is probably not possible to assign liability of a euthanasia to a single individual, because multiple people contributed to the outcome, the liability will be shared. Ten people being involved means each has committed 10% of a murder, meaning that they should receive 10% of a life sentence. Are you ready to serve a cumulative year in prison spread throughout your life to account for indirectly causing euthanasia?

Note that this problem isn't necessarily unique to euthanasia. The problem applies to any cure all solution. (Think of series like "Common Side Effects")

If you punch someone's face in, but cure it with a blue mushroom, was it really a crime, since their face is intact? And yet, more punching happens as a result of the existence of the panacea, which is why there needs to be a punishment for making someone dependent on the panacea.