system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Why is our right to die for unsatisfying lives not mainstream?

Is there a movement that grants a person their right for a humane death? Such a procedure would need a long waiting time, like 14 months with multiple doctors appointments and antidepressant treatments such as vitamin D. 

I feel like a lot of suicides are impulsive decisions, sometimes out of rage, or helplessness, and are sometimes unsuccessful (or successful) with devastating consequences, and a right to die for any person would make suicides inpractical. Copycat suicides would be less likely due to the process being more clinical.

Secondly, what grants a parent, or the state, a right for their child lives if they are artificially kept alive after a *suicide* attempt? I am thinking of terrible cases such as Kyle Osadnick or Michael Morones.
gpt
Well outside of the terminally ill the thought that the right to die is inappropriate because bad lives are generally contingent, as in they can be transformed into good lives. The other motivating reason is that the terminally ill are often physically incapable of committing suicide, and so without the right to die have a very concrete inability to kill themselves, but this does not apply in the case of the dissatisfied. 

>Secondly, what grants a parent, or the state, a right for their child lives if they are artificially kept alive after a suicide attempt?

The reason we don't permit guardians  to let disabled children to die is that otherwise people would kill lots of disabled children who wanted to live/should be allowed to live on.