Facebook Stops French Man From Streaming His Dying Days (cnn.com) 140
"Facebook has prevented a French man with an incurable illness from streaming his own death on the social media site, according to a company statement..." reports CNN:
Alain Cocq, 57, estimates he will only have days to live after stopping all medication, food and drink, which he planned to do on Friday evening. He had intended to broadcast his dying days on the platform, to raise awareness about France's laws on assisted dying.
In a statement Saturday Facebook said the live stream was prevented to avoid promoting self-harm. "Our hearts go out to Alain Cocq for what he's going through in this sad situation and everyone who is personally affected by it," the company said in the statement. "While we respect Alain's decision to draw attention to this important issue, we are preventing live broadcasts on his account based on the advice of experts that the depiction of suicide attempts could be triggering and promote more self-harm...."
Euthanasia is illegal in France. French law also dictates that deep and continuous sedation, which can hasten a person's death and render them unconscious until they die, is not legal unless under specific circumstances set out by the 2016 Claeys-Leonetti Law, which also requires a person's death to be imminent. But French citizens do have the right to stop medical care, and under French law there is no prosecution for suicide.
In a statement Saturday Facebook said the live stream was prevented to avoid promoting self-harm. "Our hearts go out to Alain Cocq for what he's going through in this sad situation and everyone who is personally affected by it," the company said in the statement. "While we respect Alain's decision to draw attention to this important issue, we are preventing live broadcasts on his account based on the advice of experts that the depiction of suicide attempts could be triggering and promote more self-harm...."
Euthanasia is illegal in France. French law also dictates that deep and continuous sedation, which can hasten a person's death and render them unconscious until they die, is not legal unless under specific circumstances set out by the 2016 Claeys-Leonetti Law, which also requires a person's death to be imminent. But French citizens do have the right to stop medical care, and under French law there is no prosecution for suicide.
...French law there is no prosecution for suicide (Score:3, Insightful)
"But French citizens do have the right to stop medical care, and under French law there is no prosecution for suicide."
Seriously now.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I am sure the lack of prosecution is of great relief to the victim.
Re: (Score:1)
I am sure the lack of prosecution is of great relief to the victim.
Sure, in some countries his entire family will be fined for the suicide and the victims property confiscated by the state as punishment.
Re: ...French law there is no prosecution for suic (Score:2)
Seriously?? Thats pretty fucked up. Obviously the suicidal person is not mentally well. Lets just go take houses and cars from families that had the nerve to produce a child with autism while we are at it.
Re: ...French law there is no prosecution for sui (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And in some countries, they'll even defend rapists that fight with police and draw a weapon if politically convenient.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, freedom is meaningless if you don't defend it when it happens to be someone you hate.
Re: (Score:3)
(But only when my comrades control the platform. Otherwise it's evil nazis, and state must punish them extremely harshly.)
Re: (Score:2)
It's ironic that you keep arguing for forced speech and forced publishing, but only when it suits you and your right wing buddies. Definitely won't use someone's preferred pronouns, but their business must be destroyed if they take down your tweet. Can't force someone to bake you a cake but you definitely can force someone to broadcast your video.
And of course if you have mod points get to work censoring any opinion you don't like. What do you think this is, a debate???
Re: (Score:2)
We know this isn't a debate. Your side won and it will strangle anyone who dares to pretend that there's any free speech left.
The only thing left is to try to change this through popular vote, and then hope that whoever gets elected is sufficiently brutal on Communists who have a stranglehold on cultural issues in anglosphere, that they have to release their stranglehold on the throats of the people. Which is why people like you have entered the next stage, complaining about votes being hidden rather than o
Re: (Score:2)
We won? News to me, looks like the right is trying to force platforms to publish against their will. They are on the verge of destroying freedom of speech and freedom of association in the United States.
https://gizmodo.com/god-help-u... [gizmodo.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You and your comrades won. Communists ban free speech in the new public square of internet discussion platforms as a matter of routine. The fact that you can cite your comrades screeching about the fact that may have to let go of the throats of the people is a great citation of just how correct I am.
It's just as visible in your very loud silence on the topic of terrorising the voters, right after you try to pretend to be righteous in terrorising people, only to get called on it.
Re: (Score:2)
You really believe that, don't you? Trump and Johnson in power, the media dominated by right wing publications and TV news, but somehow Communists are running the show. And I'm a Communist, which is just so bizarre... I can only conclude you don't know what communism actually is.
Re: (Score:2)
I know, I know. It's not like there are open neo-Marxists teaching white people that they are not human but devils in large companies today, it's not like it has become a competition among "right wing dominated media" about who can produce the craziest conspiracy theory about Trump and pretend the hardest its real. Which is totally a right wing thing. Totally. Listen and believe!
And Real Communism is obviously only in your head, and has never been tried. Fuck its victims. Fuck them. They may be hundreds of
Re: (Score:2)
That is a very poor strawman.
Re: ...French law there is no prosecution for sui (Score:2)
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; n
Re: (Score:2)
youre comparing religious nutjobs with punishing the family for a suicide of an adult that does not live with them. Thats not the same thing. Theyre both fucked up, but not exactly the same kind of fucked up. One is easily explained by a complete lack of education coupled with a religious leader(s) so drunk on their power they begin to see themselves as part of the deity class. Depression, on the other hand, everyone deals with at some point in their life. Basically there are two types of people in this wor
Re: ...French law there is no prosecution for su (Score:2)
Find the word clinical anywhere in my post. I dare you. Only you are the one inserting words into peoples comments. Clinical depression required a diagnosis. You dont need a doctor to tell you that your dealing with depression. Thats why they go through the 5 stages of grief in highschool, so that you can identify it as its happening hopefully. Ever lose a family member? Get divorced? Lose a job? Lose a child? Struggle with fertility? Miscarriage? As humans we empathize, and as I said... those that have dea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: ...French law there is no prosecution for (Score:2)
Then you felt enough pain you can certainly understand someone being in so much grief they cant see a way out. Thats called empathy. Which is why I cant imagine persecuting someone for attempting suicide. Its quite a bit different than the gay example you gave. Its much harder to empathize with something you have never experienced. The whole -that could be me- factor goes a long way.
Re: (Score:2)
Suicide invalidates your life assurance. Makes sense really. Suicide shouldn't be a way out of your financial problems.
Most life insurance policies do pay after suicide, but they typically have an exclusion period of something like the first two years.
However, they often won't pay if you lied about being under medical or psychiatric care when applying for the policy.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why you just go rock climbing or just hiking, and accidentally fall off the cliff while taking a selfie. Plenty of kids do that these days on the tops of skyscrapers and such. Most of the ones whose footage survives also survive, but others...
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, he knows is family will not be prosecuted, his assets won't be taken as a fine, and that if he somehow fails to die he won't be prosecuted.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:...French law there is no prosecution for suici (Score:4, Insightful)
A failed suicide is not a suicide, obviously, attempted suicide could be punished but suicide ... nope.
Re: (Score:2)
A failed suicide is not a suicide, obviously, attempted suicide could be punished but suicide ... nope.
A fine could be taken from the estate.
Re: (Score:2)
One common punishment was burial in unhallowed ground, perhaps under the road. For a religious person who has certain beliefs, that threat might be enough to stop them from suicide.
Re:...French law there is no prosecution for suici (Score:4, Informative)
Suicide hasn't been illegal in the UK since 1961.
Re: ...French law there is no prosecution for suic (Score:2)
If its not illegal, how do you require them to go into treatment for their mental health issues? Without something in law, the government is not supposed to be able to force you to action. But I know little about laws in the UK, maybe you guys are a lot less free than you let on.
Re: (Score:2)
How is forcing someone to get treatment for clinical depression productive or in the interests of freedom?
Re: (Score:2)
A danger to themselves or others has always been the criteria for intervention. You, in fact, have made this argument ad nauseam. I am just curious how and why you are reversing your stance. So again I am asking, is mental health a criteria for the government to come in and force you into treatment, and/or any other sort of intervention or forfeiture of estate?
Re: (Score:2)
The UK law is described here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
As you can see where it is possible to treat someone without detaining them that must be the chosen option, so it's pretty rare in suicide cases. For detention to take place two* doctors have to diagnose them with a mental illness that cannot be treated any other way, although short term detention in order to make that assessment is possible. Legal appeal is always possible.
* Normally it's two, at the moment it's one due to coronavirus. I am ver
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If its not illegal, how do you require them to go into treatment for their mental health issues? Without something in law, the government is not supposed to be able to force you to action. But I know little about laws in the UK, maybe you guys are a lot less free than you let on.
The way I believe it works in my own jurisdiction is that if you're medically deemed as a real and imminent threat to the physical safety of yourself or others you can be taken into the care of the state far as long as the immediate threat persists. A decision is signed off by a doctor but only valid for a short period of time, that is automatically reviewed by a panel of psychiatrist to whom you also can submit your own evidence they can then decide for a somewhat longer period but has to make a new decis
Re: (Score:2)
Sectioned under the Mental Health Act (1983) [www.nhs.uk].
Seeing it as a involuntary action may be helpful (Score:2)
Like in the book: "Out of the Nightmare: Recovery from Depression and Suicidal Pain"
by David Conroy
From my comments on the book here: https://github.com/pdfernhout/... [github.com]
====
From: https://www.amazon.com/Out-Nig... [amazon.com]
"Out of the Nightmare. An all-out assault on the barriers that stand between you and recovery from depression and suicidal pain. decomposes recovery from depression into recovery from envy, shame, self-pity, grandiosity, fear, stigma, social abuse, and the double binds and vicious circles of the mytho
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the policy. In Japan life insurance/assurance usually covers suicide. In the UK it is usually excluded.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: ...French law there is no prosecution for suic (Score:2)
The punishment should be mandatory therapy. Let the punishment fit the crime. The only crime is having poor mental health. Require him/her to go through treatment.
Re: (Score:2)
If a person has committed suicide I believe no amount of therapy will help. Attempted suicide on the other hand it may be possible. If you are painfully dying of terminal illness as with this case I don't see why you need to be mentally ill to want to die. Like many pro abortion activist like to say It their body they should be able to do with it what they will, and there is no law that tells men what to do with their body, oh wait, that is what every law I can think of tells what to do with your body. The
Re: ...French law there is no prosecution for sui (Score:2)
I cannot imagine a terminally ill person failing in their suicide attempt. Overdose on heroin and throw yourself into the pool. They will be so busy trying to revive you from drowning they wont even suspect the overdose. And you wont feel a damn thing.
Re: (Score:2)
An extreme example would be a terminally ill quadriplegic as someone who is likely to fail at suicide without help. Can't give themselves a shot of heroin, little well throw themselves anywhere.
Re: (Score:1)
It's possible pretty much anywhere, a lot of people, in the act of committing suicide have put others in danger in the process or damage property.
Re: (Score:2)
So don't fail. Easy, small cylinder of nitrogen, a breathing mask, a tube to connect cylinder to mask. Put mask on ensuring it will not come loose, lie back and on turn up gas and go to sleep (it works because you brain does not detect a build up of carbon dioxide and thinks all is right with the world until it stops thinking). I suppose you can also take other intoxicating substances and enjoy the trip on the way out. Your life your choice. You are not a slave to society and do you know why the abrogation
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
I suppose the argument for making it illegal is that it would provide legal grounds for intervention to try to help the person. Whether that theory holds up I do not know.
A second consideration is more ghoulish, but I suppose life insurers might support making it illegal because life insurance doesn't reward suicide and if it's illegal the state would have to make that determination, giving a more solid legal s
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
He should have transferred (Score:2)
To Belgium, Luxembourg or the Netherlands where he would get euthanized if he wanted to.
Re: (Score:2)
Or board any flight bound to the US and shout allahu akbar, to get the same service quicker and free of charge.
Re: He should have transferred (Score:2)
Or just get on a US plane and work on some math problems
Re: (Score:3)
Nah. If you do math problems, you get shipped off to Gitmo and locked up for life. Shouting something in Arabic gets you shot by the air stosstruppen nice and clean.
Re: (Score:2)
Precisely zero people have been killed in this way so what's the basis for getting the same service quicker and free of ... do you have any idea how much a fucking plane ticket to the USA costs vs driving 100km?
Re: (Score:3)
To Belgium, Luxembourg or the Netherlands where he would get euthanized if he wanted to.
Or he could instead try to raise awareness of a contentious political issue through his act hoping to incite change.
I mean black people in the 60s could have just used their dedicated bathroom as well if they wanted too right? No need to change anti-discrimination laws either, they still have the ability to pee and poop right!
Re: (Score:2)
To Belgium, Luxembourg or the Netherlands where he would get euthanized if he wanted to.
Or he could instead try to raise awareness of a contentious political issue through his act hoping to incite change.
I mean black people in the 60s could have just used their dedicated bathroom as well if they wanted too right? No need to change anti-discrimination laws either, they still have the ability to pee and poop right!
Old guy here.
The dedicated bathroom for blacks is kind of a myth. The general practice was no bathroom whatsoever for black people except in black establishments.
Re: He should have transferred (Score:2)
I should mention that my comment only applies to where I'm from which is the deep South.
Last Statment (Score:4, Informative)
And FB stops it.
All I can say is let him speak.
I watched my mum die over 4 days, day 2 it was obvious but "sensibilities" did not allow a quick relief. Fuck that.
It was against her stated will.
Re: (Score:2)
Which the guy who is dying wants to make.
And FB stops it.
All I can say is let him speak.
Speak away. Just not on my platform (or Facebook's).
I am American, not French, so I do not know the relevant laws/culture in France. Here we have the right to speak, but not the right to use someone's platform to speak from.
It must be horrible for him ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Stopping food/drink (especially fluids) will be very unpleasant. He is doing it as the only way of bringing on his death which he wants as his illness causes him great suffering. If you had a dog or horse with this disease and stopped food/drink to kill it then you would be prosecuted for animal cruelty. Why is it OK to make a man suffer but not an animal ?
Re: It must be horrible for him ... (Score:2)
He is chosing to do so. Your analogy has you forcing an animal to do so. It is the forcing that is illegal. If your horse or dog won't eat or drink and dies (there is some evidence animals will do that) you won't get charged with animal cruelty.
Re: It must be horrible for him ... (Score:5, Insightful)
If an animal had this incurable, painful disease then, to stop it suffering, it would be put to sleep - ie killed, but in a way that avoids distress. This man is not given the option, he has to either continue to suffer the painful disease or suffer a slow, unpleasant death by dehydration. How horrible it must be to die of thirst!
Religion. (Score:1)
That's it, really. I live in a bible belt state and separation of church and state is barely even paid lip service.
Re:It must be horrible for him ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is it OK to make a man suffer but not an animal ?
Same reason abortion isn't legal everywhere for grounds of suffering or medical issues. Morals are feel good issues that people pat themselves on the back for when they preserve life. No consideration to the quality of the life is ever given.
That and everyone seems to always know better than the person involved, apparently. Who is this person? I don't know, never met him, never heard of him, but my god says life is sacred so he's clearly not sound of mind. - Religious Fanatics.
Suicide has to be taboo to stop death cults (Score:2, Insightful)
It's the same reason why Homosexuality is taboo. As a ruler you need to be firing on all cylinders, e.g. everybody needs to be cranking out babies for y
Censorship evasion through reporting (Score:2)
He should just have his page reported as fake news violating Facebook's T&C by a few hundred friends and followers, that seems to be the best way to keep a controversial page up and avoid any action from Facebook until after the event has taken place - whereupon it will be highlighted as violating Facebook's T&C, taken down, and held up as an example of Facebook self-regulation working as intended.
If you don't like what you see (Score:5, Insightful)
Change the channel.
Re: (Score:2)
Change the channel.
Unless of course it is "misinformation", or might help the other guy win an election, or ...
We are very selective these days about our free speech.
Re: If you don't like what you see (Score:2)
"Unless of course it is "misinformation", or might help the other guy win an election, or ...
We are very selective these days about our free speech."
The man is trying to end his own life due to a painful illness. I respect that, but Facebook is right to not air it because there are vulnerable people out there grappling with depression to consider, and it's Facebook's right to be mindful of that.
We're talking about this man's case and how awful it is, that should be enough to catalyze change in France. It
Re: (Score:2)
Then how are they going to get ad revenue? It's the channel's advertisers that are offended, not the viewers.
Re: (Score:2)
Well that's too bad, they're not the target audience and should just hand over their money. Nobody gives a fuck about advertisers anyway, anyone with a functioning brain runs a pihole or ublock. They should be sucking fuckerberg's dick raw in thanks for even being ALLOWED to advertise on one of the world's largest social media platforms.
Re: If you don't like what you see (Score:2)
It was done for suicide prevention. I respect the man's wishes, but if we can avoid a spike in depressed teenagers committing suicide, that would be great.
Re: (Score:2)
And what empirical evidence is there that people watching will cause a spike in suicide? This is just someone making a hypnosis without actually doing the experiment. I could also make up some nonsense that if people see this video they may be more aware of suicide and provide people help people therefore reducing suicide. That too would be unsubstantiated and without proof and only useful as a suggestion to what we should be looking into.
Facebook is following French law (Score:4, Interesting)
In France, while suicide is not illegal, promoting it is.
Maybe Facebook is overly cautious here but I am not a lawyer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you a lawyer who knows French law?
One thing to realize is that freedom of speech is more restricted in France than in the US. For instance, hate speech is illegal, and Facebook gets a lot of attention for it.
Here Cocq is voluntarily ending his own life by refusing treatment and his intention is to advocate for "assisted dying". Sounds a lot like suicide. I am with him on that one, but his announcement was probably overheard by some overcautious corporate lawyer who decided that there was less risk block
i think euthanasia should be legal (Score:2)
Wow FB, Wow (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, they don't (Score:2)
They stopped him from streaming his dying days on facebook.
You're going to have to decide if you believe in freedom of speech, or if facebook should be forced to carry this content.
Mobius Law (Score:3)
Bans dying with dignity, Promotes ethnic cleansing (Score:2)
Facebook is a social MANIPULATION platform.
I wasn't even aware ... (Score:2)
Poor guy (Score:2)
Not French but Francophone here.
I do not understand why France does not have an assisted suicide/euthanasia law like several other European countries have. It is not the first time a well covered case of a person having some horrible disease is forced to suffer until the bitter end. Google Chantal Sebire, i warn you the pics aren't easy to watch.
This stubborn backwardness reminds me a bit the hysteria from all the religious nutjobs when same sex marriage law was proposed. Again after other European countri
Re: (Score:2)
Correction:Chantal Sébire wasn't a very good example: She had medical opportunities she refused because she believed in quack remedies.
Re:Facebullshit! (Score:5, Insightful)
He wishes to stop medical treatment. They're not getting in the way of that.
He also wishes to use their platform to disseminate his message. That wish does not override Facebook's right to manage their platform to protect other people in lawful ways. Do you think a dying person should be able to use Facebook to broadcast racist or sexist messages just because they are dying?
Re: (Score:2)
He wishes to stop medical treatment. They're not getting in the way of that.
He also wishes to use their platform to disseminate his message. That wish does not override Facebook's right to manage their platform to protect other people in lawful ways. Do you think a dying person should be able to use Facebook to broadcast racist or sexist messages just because they are dying?
That's my take on it as well, but I would simplify my position by saying he can sream his own death on his own platform. He can rent servers, setup a website and stream whatever he wants, or pay someone to do all that for him. He can even do a pay-per-view.
We just cannot force FaceBook to stream it for him.
Or more to the point, should Facebook show videos of suicides done under duress? If no, that means FB is going to have to try to figure out which videos were completely voluntary and which videos involved
Re: (Score:2)
Is anyone talking about forcing Facebook to stream this? Or just exercising their right to express an opinion about it?
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of mentally troubled people are tempted to commit suicide. Facebook would seemingly prefer they seek counseling to help them recover, rather than ending their lives prematurely.
I refer you to Munroe, R., "Free Speech", 18 April 2014.
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
Don't blame only the Facebook. Blame also the many US christian sects that will be up in arms because they're against "the mortal sin" of suicide, and the advertisers, who will bend over to not upset the feelings of those religious snowflakes.
These are, of course, the same snowflakes that authored the "fuck your feelings" slogan and make fun of their Muslim soulmates, who in turn are ready to get violent about some French magazine with a circulation of few tens of thousands printing Mohamed caricatures; but
Re: (Score:2)
Re: He got what he wants and they got what they wa (Score:4, Insightful)
If the law is based on emotion, and a dose of religion, then yes, you are going to have to appeal to emotion to change it. There is no reason why a competent adult, of sound mind and not under duress, should not be able to terminate their own life if they desire to do so.
Re: (Score:1)
If the law is based on emotion, and a dose of religion, then yes, you are going to have to appeal to emotion to change it. There is no reason why a competent adult, of sound mind and not under duress, should not be able to terminate their own life if they desire to do so.
All laws are based on religion, or at least morality.
Even if murder or fraud helped the economy or something, we'd still ban them because they are wrong.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
are based on religion, or at least morality.
The fact you phrased that statement as one being a subset of the other is scary. There's nothing moral about religion, and there are many laws based on morality that specifically oppose decrees from a religion, especially if you're the kind of infidel which doesn't follow *my* God.
Re: (Score:3)
Even if murder or fraud helped the economy or something, we'd still ban them because they are wrong.
No we wouldn't and we don't, Countries have gone to war for resources plenty of times, murdering people quite "legally". Every day murder is illegal and harmful to the economy since having to worry about being randomly killed is very inefficient. I don't even get why people that truly believe in heaven believe murder is wrong, all you are doing sending them to paradise if the all knowing god deems it the right thing to do.
Fraud is allowed e.g. "up to 50% off" with up to in tiny print, it happens all the tim
Re: (Score:2)
Your statements are self-contradictory.
"they" shouldn't be deciding what can be streamed, but YOU should.
Appeals to emotion are what create most laws, mostly knee jerk terrible ones with doublespeak names.
You're posting on a private company platform which embraces censorship. Not saying it's right, just ironic.
Re: (Score:3)
I have no problem with either stance. If he wants to live stream his death, that's his business, and if Facebook doesn't want to stream it that's their business. Government censorship is bad, private censorshipi simply property rights, or do you think I have the right to erect signs in your livingroom?
Re: (Score:2)
But the point is that they can. They have the right to do with their property as they please, and you have the freedom not to use their property. Thu don't owe you any favors, and neither do you owe them. You see, that's how freedom works
Re: (Score:3)
A lot of other things they should clean up on that crappy platform first. But what to expect from a megalomaniac that lives on viral falsehoods being posted there.
Run it as a political ad and I'm sure it will get through fine.
Re: (Score:2)
So? their life, their choice, not mine, not yours. The an argument we need to be wary of is people being manipulated into suicide for someones gain, e.g. inheritance.
Do not get me wrong, I think every life is special, and unless you are dying from a painful disease you should not take your life you are special and I want them to live. However in the end it is their choice to make not mine. I can only state my opinion that I think they should not do it, and society should provide help if they need it.