Daniel Kahneman Opted for Assisted Suicide in Switzerland
Key topics
The news of Daniel Kahneman's assisted suicide in Switzerland sparked a heated discussion on HN about the ethics and implications of assisted suicide, with some supporting his decision and others expressing concerns about the potential risks and consequences.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
2h
Peak period
140
Day 1
Avg / period
20
Based on 160 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Oct 11, 2025 at 4:09 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Oct 11, 2025 at 6:32 AM EDT
2h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
140 comments in Day 1
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Oct 21, 2025 at 2:58 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
I probably won’t ever meet my grandchildren if there are any, because I am over fifty and single; I probably will never be a parent. So I will have to go a lot sooner if I am not to be a burden on society. But if you think you are going to be a grandparent, you can work on being an irreplaceable and useful one.
Very few people are independent after age 80, and a miniscule amount after 90.
And I don’t want that for my kids, or even from the rest of society.
It's less likely to be "a certain age" and more surrounding factors: if most of your friends have passed and you don't have much chance to do things that interest you because you could pass at any moment yourself there comes a point where life has limited worth.
Essentially, hope runs out, and when it's run out entirely you either wait for death, or ... don't wait.
> It's fascinating that even for very ill or injured people the will to survive is so strong
Sometimes. Chronic illnesses are a massive contributing factor to suicide rates for instance: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7...
For physical illnesses.
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.
“It shouldn't be that way” is not an excuse to torture people through your moralizing indifference to the fact that it is that way.
Currently? I'd say that I wouldn't want to live with dementia, but what if my "demented self" (kinda hate the phrasing, sorry) in the future wants to live, or doesn't remember they don't want to live?
Do I have a say over the life of someone who doesn't remember they were me?
It sounds like Daniel Kahneman was suffering from depression after his wife's death and all he saw in the rest of his life was sadness. He had no hope. What day was the best day to die? What if the next day his hope came back?
What if he tried that, but every day just got worse than the last day?
And people don't get any younger.
My grandmother is 98. She hates her life since she could not go out anymore. But she is catholic and suicide would be a mortal sin. So she waits till gods take her. And suffers till then.
I would make a different choice for sure. If life is hell and no one depends on me, why should I continue the suffering? (At the cost of others, if I would need help?)
But my plan is of course to reach 120+ in good health. But if I decide I had enough, it will be my decision.
Anyone can say that about their life right now, can't they? How many people struggling today think that their life will get no better? Look at all those who made it through slavery, what hope did they have? Their hope came from their faith.
Suffering has a purpose, this is something your grandmother understands through her faith. Buddhists understand this as well. Maybe the problem is not our suffering, but our lack of faith in others and in in something bigger than ourselves.
So sure, suffering and pain are part of life. And accepting that helps a lot to not get stuck in that condition by avoiding painful things, you cannot avoid.
"Anyone can say that about their life right now, can't they?"
So no, not anyone is saying that. Only those with a death wish.
And I don't consider having a death wish as a mental condition. It can of course result of a illness, but it can also be a consciouss wish and then finally a decision.
And if other people decide they may not do this, but have to remain in their state of living hell, then this is just torture to me.
At the very least, suffering (through childbirth) is a prerequisite to bringing life into this world.
edit: strange that this is flagged. my parent asked for proof that suffering is inherent in life, and I don't know anyone who has said that the physical act of giving birth is anything but painful.
(Vouched for it to be able to reply)
The truth of dukkha: Recognizing that suffering is a fundamental part of existence
They even call Joy “hidden suffering”. Because whenever the thing is that gives us joy, if we become attached to it and it is taken away then we have suffering.
And the Christians believe that the suffering of Christ was needed to forgive everyone of their sins.
So they both view suffering as an important aspect of life. Something to be used for learning and understanding the human condition.
But the buddhist and the Christians believe that you can escape what you would think of a state of constant suffering through religious practices. It’s the faith the American slaves had in Christ that got them through their state of living hell. And we’ve even seen a Buddhist light themselves on fire to protest the war in Vietnam. So I’m sorry, but I can’t look upon suffering as something that’s negative and I accept it as part of life and just as I can learn things from joy and I can learn things from suffering, and they are both the same size of the coin and equally as valuable.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45548996
And please don’t bring some mythical being in the argument.
But those two characters taught us a lot about suffering. Where it comes from and how to face suffering with courage and not just throw your morals out the window once you have the glimpse of even future suffering.
Maybe it’s just me, but I see every moment as the best it can possibly be. Whether I’m seeing this gorgeous sunny blue sky today or I’m 95 years old with terminal cancer. It’s a miracle to be born and to exist in this world, it’s extremely rare. And I want to live every last second of it. Maybe that’s what’s upsetting me about reading what he wrote. If you just try to grab the good times in this life and use that as a goal you’re going to be severely disappointed.
Glad for you. I really hope you never come into a situation that you wish for your life to end. But please take into account, that other people might experience life different at times.
No one has a death wish, because things are a bit rough sometimes. But if life is constant hell and when there is no hope anymore. Then you wish for death to release you.
(Also do you know what latestage cancer can mean? Constant pain that does not go away, ever.
And Jesus might have been a real person, but that he choose crucification out of his own choice is very much part of the mythological story that other people told after his death)
I see your last paragraph as naive, and cruelly dismissive of what true suffering is. It is possible to be in a place where the only life you have left is excruciating and intolerable. You are in a privileged position to have never seen a beloved family member die a slow and terrible death, or to have had a serious prolonged health event and have the moment of realization that for some people, your horrible weeks of insufferable illness are their entire experience of life, and wonder if you'd even want to live if that was all you had left.
How is my hypothetically deciding to end my own suffering “morally bad”? I don’t owe suffering from a terminal illness to anyone.
Your calculation for what you will suffer to enjoy another day of life may be different than mine and that’s fine.
Hanging in there with cancer? Sure, fight it and deal with the pain. Dementia? No, please end it. The two aren't even close in comparison, cancer feels easy and merciful.
No, it sounds like you would be disappointed in that scenario. Many would be elated to get through this hell-hole relatively joyous & unscathed.
Maybe some suffering has a purpose, and some suffering does not? It doesn't have to be always this or always that.
“His partner died in 2018 as a result of vascular dementia. The loss affected him deeply.”
I can see that loss affecting him even though he had a new partner. Depression does not always go away when you meet someone new.
But I think people with depression have lost hope in the future. And it sounds like he lost Hope in his future.
People in their 80's are watching their friends die one after the other. They aren't fooling themselves about their long-term prospects. No problems with enjoying life, I support that, but it's hard to believe the end isn't coming for you like it comes for everyone else.
I just think this idea that it is "hope" or "depression" is wrong-headed.
Having some older friends might give you a deeper perspective.
If you lived in your 80s and you have not figured out what life is about then that’s not a problem with life, that’s a problem with the person who did not figure out life.
This is the spiritual quest that I think is missing in the world right now. I’m not really being woo-woo here and I’m not talking about God or any other mythical being. I’m talking about the amazing thing that it is to be alive. Being alive is not just about happiness, but you can be joyous experiencing both happiness and suffering. Our suffering will end, and our happiness will end.
Acceptance of the things you can’t change is the key here. I am no stoic that’s for sure. If you’re too hot, move into the shade. But if I have no shade and I’m suffering the heat, how much more happy am I going to be when I finally reach shade!
It’s my friends who went through the deepest suffering that are the most happy and joyous. It’s these people who teach us about life, Not the people who kill themselves because they’re afraid of looking like an old man.
It was seeing my father's death that really solidified it for me that there are things worse than death. I am not in the slightest depressed about it, though.
That's a personal choice. Anyone not interested in that won't have to do anything and can just wait for the end.
You are shiftinf the topic. This is about self-euthanization, assisted suicide. Not others.
> Where do we draw the line?
As written elsewhere, having to draw a line does not mean that the only reasonable conclusion is to make it illegal in general. It's a hard topic without easy answers. "Don't allow it" is an easy answer that doesn't do justice to the topics complexity.
A good friend of mine passed away a year ago with an incurable disease, diagnosed 3 months before his death, and it was essentially guaranteed that he'd have to endure unbelievable suffering during the last weeks of those months. He didn't have the choice to end it early. It was heartbreaking.
I for my part hope that I can choose myself when the time has come.
The politicians, yes. Auschwitz may return but it won't be voluntary.
My parent comment has driven alot of valuable discussion (other than your comment)
When things get bad, it was usually not the drawing of lines that did it, but the intention and underlying stance on the rights and indeed humanity of others. The line is not what makes the slope slippery, but a pervasive lack of empathy seems to do it. We also know that bad actors do not care about lines much.
So I think that slippery slope is not a powerful argument on its own.
I tell you this now in good faith, any human being can choose when to end it. That is without question. I can go get in my car and drive into the nearest body of water, if desired, and no law could stop me. Even under supervision 24/7, it is still possible to do it. We are a determined species.
The only thing in debate is if they can be ethically assisted in the task, with compassion. You say no, someone might pressure Nana into dying to pass her inheritance. Well, the same people might very well put a pillow over her face when no one is looking. A bad actor is a bad actor and murder is illegal but people do it anyways and moral hand-wringing doesn't exactly stop it from happening.
From where I stand you're just unknowingly advocating for extra pain and suffering. Perhaps you'd change your mind if you were in the shoes of someone losing their marbles or worse, someone who has to care for them.
Save your loved ones some grief, create a living will with a trusted lawyer, update it about once a year. It's worth it. There are so many insane snafus one can get into with estranged family members, the state/gov't, medical institutions, etc that make the situation even more difficult and stressful to deal with. Don't expect anyone coming out of the woodwork to act according to honor. They are vultures and know no such kindness.
It includes a one hour zoom session with an actual attorney to explain things.
They make it so easy.
I get it’s easy with other diseases such as cancer, though.
You can't express in advance that you want to have assisted suicide.
Your former self might express wishes, but what if your later self doesn't feel like this anymore? In a way, we can all get the same feeling when doing another round of "lose weight this year" new year's resolutions just to realize a couple weeks later that the former self wasn't that trustworthy to begin with (or was it the other way around, the future self can't be trusted?)
Point is: you can wish for whatever you want, but dementia is probably a tough case and it shifts your priorities, making everything before obsolete and I'm not sure that people beginning to suffer from dementia ever find the right point in time to end life early.
Plenty of people here who reacted negatively to OP's suggestion seem to not have had to deal with a loved one who dealt with Alzheimer's or other forms of dementia. It's not hard like taking care of a toddler is hard. It's hard like, "this is not the same person I know for my whole life, they don't recognize me, they say and do mean things to me and their grand-kids and neighbors all the time, and require 24x7 supervision to not hurt themselves or break everything in the room."
Oh, and remember that in the US, all nursing homes for this kind of thing are for-profit companies backed by venture capital, meaning they are expensive as hell. Take your current middle-class apartment, shrink the size to just a bedroom (that you now have to share with someone else), and then quadruple the rent. Just a few years of that can decimate the life savings of the average retiree and/or their children's.
I speak with some authority here because all of this happened to my father. He was "alive" in the last few years of his life, but not what anyone would call "living." I absolutely do not want that to happen to me. If it were legal in the US, I would absolutely opt for an assisted suicide plan for myself.
There are ways to handle it that avoid all the "whatabouts" that you and others have already brought up. One rough draft of an example: 1) Have a lawyer write up a kind of will expressing my wishes. 2) Get three unbiased negative diagnoses to show I am of sound mind prior to signing the will. 3) Go in for regular testing (every year, maybe two). After each negative diagnosis, add another (witnessed and/or notarized) signature to the will. The will is not valid if testing or a signature is missed. 3) If there is ever a positive diagnosis, it must be confirmed by two other clinics. 4) If three years pass with doctors and clinical tests confirming increasing dementia symptoms along the way, the assisted suicide clause is invoked and I get to pass peacefully surrounded by loved ones instead of being a stressful burden on them for years or decades to come.
Yes, there are details and unintended consequences that neither me nor anyone else can see ahead of time. Like everything else, they are dealt with as they come up. No, you won't convince me that your favorite corner case means the entire idea is invalid.
This is exactly it. It's like dealing with a curmudgeonly toddler with extreme agency and no self-awareness. The rest of your comment is so spot on or at least matches my experience. I'm sorry you had to go through it but you genuinely seem to have become stronger from it and I'm grateful you could share your experience with us.
Arguably the best qualified person to decide what to do with Future You is Present You.
If you ended back in camp you’d be welcomed. If you didn’t, that was your end. I found that remarkably comforting and peaceful.
What you call "comforting" is leaving a helpless prison in the wilderness to succumb to thirst, hunger or predators
Go to a dementia facility and hang out with your those people. You will see suffering.
If you think that "cannot feed themselves" is when a person is already completely gone and it's okay to "leave them under a tree to die of hunger and thirst", I've got news for you.
I wish to remain so lucid when the time comes, that I can go sit under a tree and let myself go like that old dog. Perhaps I should leave a note.
That’s kind of what I want when I die too - I don’t think I want to be around other people when it happens. I want to have my final moments to face death on my own, without feeling like I have to perform for other people.
… that said, give me another 60 years to chew on it and maybe I’ll feel different.
[0] https://youtu.be/8j1IMBM-QyE?si=jfCe9YUvKW_t5m5e
A lot of motivation to be risk averse with my physical body in this life comes from a desire to make it to old age. Furthermore, I instantly understood why having children was good when I realized that they are your insurance that you’ll (usually) have someone to help comfort you on your deathbed who is themselves still lucid.
You should have kids because you want to create new life, and support them as they become the best humans that they can be - not because you’re scared of dying alone.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Never_to_Have_Been
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benatar%27s_asymmetry_argument
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_Human_Extinction_Mov...
> a decrease in the human population would prevent a significant amount of human-caused suffering
Ridiculous. Without coming into existence there is nothing anyway - by that logic, coming into existence is always a pleasure too, it’s always a joy, it’s always a triumph and a fulfillment. Existence is always existence, nothing is always nothing. It’s a useless tautology.
If you’d rather be nothing then give up on living. I’m perfectly happy existing.
I'm the same but I'm trying to accept that while we are born among family, dying is a solitary journey.
(There is a saying along these lines, but search engines are utterly useless at surfacing it)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalaikoothal
However, social acceptance may lead to more egregious abuses: the issue gained a higher profile in early 2010, when an 80-year-old man escaped after discovering his intended fate and heard his family members discussing how they were going to "share" his lands, and took refuge in a relative's home.
I want to be free to die on my own terms. Conversely, I do not want the healthcare system to be allowed to even suggest it.
The state tends to suppress methods which would be peaceful and effective, Such as Nembutal
People obsess over this risk. It—and religious opposition—are the reason it’s only an option for those who can travel to and hospice in Switzerland.
> social acceptance may lead to more egregious abuses
Do we have any evidence societies that have tolerated suicide had higher rates of murder? Switzerland doesn’t strike me as a hotbed of senior murder, for example.
You don’t. You try to take care of yourself before you’re gone. If you miss that opportunity, you and your loved ones suffer. Same as it is for everyone now.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Good luck to you.
Parent comment doesn’t say this, does it?
Maybe in a different city, or with different friends.
If he did “learn something new”, could he have incrementally improved upon it, using his brilliant mind? Could he have made one more wise observation?
It seems he likely left something on the table.
No cure for getting old and no cure for dementia on the useful horizon. Having made it to 90 intact, he had knocked living out of the park already. I completely understand his thinking here and support it. He likely could have gone a little longer, but he also might have had a stroke or some other nonfatal cataclysmic event that took away his options.
You should read the piece by Jason Zweig, if you haven't. The decision was deeply personal and was most certainly not an endorsement of euthanasia.
As we're currently seeing happen: whatever is left unsaid in the body of the law can and will be abused by evil people to concentrate more power (even if the spirit of the law advocates for something kind).
So, we have to normalize some sort of stress tests for laws... because you sure don't want to be dragged against your will because you're poor.
Like a more subtle form of Shakespeare's "Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?".
> But opponents argue it's being used as a cheaper alternative to providing adequate social or medical support.
I personally think that all attempts should be made to provide homeless and sick people with treatments, and they shouldn't be pushed in that direction if they do not want it.
If we do not have the capacity to do so, then my view is that we are failing as a society to provide adequate care for all in their time of need.
If a country is able to build dozens of city-sized data centers, then it is clearly choosing not to treat and house a certain part of their population.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_no_one_rid_me_of_this_tur...
Isn't the point of eugenics to influence population genetic trends? Not a very effective strategy to kill people when they already have probably 2 generations of descendents.
By targeting their support networks, the "baddies" effectively end up making the new generations risk for impoverishment greater (can't let the kids at grandma's, have to pay for daycare, lose access to nutritious inexpensive meals, etc).
This seems like such an absurd conclusion to this, as though the opinions of other people of you are what matter when you functionally lose your personhood and then die.
Maybe a better focus would be that there often isn't a good way for a community to manage a person who suddenly becomes irrational because of an illness.
There may be others reading in the thread who also can relate to the personality of the teacher and may care about their affect on others when they are "not themselves".
For myself: I hope for assisted suicide before Alzheimer’s. I value me for me. Not-me I don’t value, and Alzheimer’s does not improve not-me over me. But people who cannot separate me from not-me (with whom not-me loses status for me)… I don’t care about them! (Philosophical mood.)
IMHO it is important to see which context people are coming from. Different culture, social acceptance, historic treatment options, etc. influence the response.
Also, dementia is not the only disease with a strong degenerative impact on character and behaviour e.g there is schizophrenia et al. What is common with many of these conditions that there is a strong individual component of progression and morbidity.
It is great that you have the option to make a choice for yourself. Others might decide to make other choices.
I don’t want to go that way either. If I start losing my mind to Alzheimer’s or dementia I don’t want to slowly turn unrecognizable to those who love me, fuck that shit. Give me something suitable and I’ll do it my damn self if needs be.
I know there are medical directives that can be put in place but they don't cover everything and they can't compel anyone to end my hypothetical misery, the most they can do is withdraw care.
Sure, it is nice to be remembered well, if you deserve it, but I do not live for the opinions of others. This is slave mentality and pathetic. I care about being good, and if I am hated for that, then so be it. Sad, but better to be hated for being a good person than loved for being a mediocrity or a knave.
And to off yourself out of concern with how people remember you is a condemnation of our society, our lack of charity, our lack of magnanimity, and our selfish prioritization of convenience. Full throttle consumerism.
Jesus, Socrates, anyone who stands up against an immoral hierarchy. Rethink your thought
Or there are others trying to do good things and being hated for taking a courage to challenge things.
Care to name even a single objective good, and explain how exactly it is objectively good?
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.
456 more comments available on Hacker News