Those left behind: Euthanasia, suicide and other regarding preferences

Abstract

This paper examines the rationality of other regarding preferences on end-of-life decisions such as euthanasia and suicide, by extending the discounted future utility model. The discussion shows that individuals with other regarding preferences may act upon choices contrary to their ex-ante preferences, such that they are choosing to remain alive rather than opting for euthanasia or suicide. The policy extension is that individuals with close friends and/or family are less likely to take their own life, but can also prolong their own suffering because of the same attachments.

Dying for the cause: The rationality of martyrs, suicide bombers and self-immolators

“…This model provides a way of understanding the rationality of the decision as we can reduce it to a simple utility maximisation decision (see Savage, 2016), where the value for each action is estimated and then one chooses the outcome with the highest value. However, what this fails to take into account are any potential inputs from outside the normally stated lifespan of humans, for example, the value of an afterlife.…”

“…However, under the neoclassical homo-economicus model, we would argue that rational people do not readily sacrifice their health, status, income, comfort, freedom and, much less, their life, but most people do endure substantial costs for reasons other than personal benefit. Behavioural evidence does show that rational individuals routinely risk wealth, health and even life for family and friends and sometimes even strangers (Frey et al, 2010;Savage andTorgler, 2013, 2015). A large number of people would be willing to claim some inclination to suffer and even die for their most cherished values, and a non-trivial number make good on their claims.…”

Does social capital matter? A study of hit-and-run in US counties

“…We contribute to the strand of research analysing whether pro-social attitudes matter in extreme and high-pressure situations (see, for instance, Frey et al, 2010;Frey et al, 2011;Elinder and Erixson, 2012;Sach and Whynes, 2012;Savage, 2013;Savage, 2016). Furthermore, we offer new insights about the impact of social capital on socio-economic outcomes and the heterogeneity of such effects.…”

Does Social Capital Matter? A Study of Hit-and-Run in Us Counties

“…We contribute to the strand of research analysing whether pro-social attitudes matter in extreme and high-pressure situations (see, for instance, Frey et al, 2010;Frey et al, 2011;Elinder and Erixson, 2012;Sach and Whynes, 2012;Savage, 2013;Savage, 2016). Furthermore, we offer new insights about the impact of social capital on socio-economic outcomes and the heterogeneity of such effects.…”