Recently, I have come across a debate on the movie that has swept our feet into an ecstasy of love, chemistry and romance in its 21st century plot. And while I too gush over the hormone induced thrill of its twist I noticed that there is something missing, and no I am not talking about the morals of assisted suicide or the rights to decide when to end life no not even going there not at all. But while the cheerful and bubbly Louisa Clark at the found herself going for her dreams, I mourn for the lost hope. Then I wonder, if only and if only mental health have been given a little role will it end differently?
While I can't speak for everybody, it is but understandable that often times the cheapest end to life for a person that has become angry, moody, bitter and disabled would seem a better option as opposed to preserving a life which would only cost so much more than living a lifestyle of an average person. But what about the person's rights to a positive, productive and encouraging life? or is it ending life the convenient option?
Stephen Hawking once said, "I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road." the point taken is, there is always something we can do about it. And this doesn't just include people who are confined to a wheelchair for the rest of their lives but for anyone who succumb to a life threatening experience or the trauma of surviving everyday and the important of mental health care. Living a positive and a life full of hope is still an option and We Can Do Something About it.
0 comments:
Post a Comment