RicOlie_2 said:
Post Praetorian said:
...a fair answer from the view point of the individual so afflicted for certain...but what of the same scenario viewed from the vantage point of his/her child/children? Would such as these consider an early or later exit to be the most beneficial to themselves?
The best option, it seems to me, would be for the gambler to make a real effort to quit, for the sake of those he was harming. I think it would be better that the gambler didn't kill himself in any situation, but whether that would actually cause less harm would depend on the specific situation.
The concept is that the gambler knows/strongly suspects/or greatly fears he will not stop before some great damage is done. He knows it as surely as a dieter might know the proximity of chocolate cake may pose a real threat to his resolve. Therefore out of love for his family he considers which is the better option: to knowingly cause them harm immediately in a once and final fashion, while he might still hold their esteem, or to remain so as to harm them by degrees, ending as a figure worthy only of scorn in their eyes?
Essentially, given that both paths might be expected to cause pain, is it best to depart whilst one's image may still be honestly remembered in a positive light or is it preferable to linger until one's final departure may be considered more of a relief...?