I thought of this question when wondering how I could mess with Thorne's mind next time ...

Seriously, though, it occurred to me as I was looking at articles posted on the net and read a paper by a psychologist which said that he had frequently been asked by convicted killers to give them the means to kill themselves as they could not live with the memory of what they had done.

As these killers were inmates of a secure psychiatric institution, it must be questioned whether they were capable of making such a decision, and, let's face it, people who are hardened killers will have no remorse and will certainly not voluteer.

We can't force people to kill themselves, that's just another form of execution, but if they no longer want to live, I can see a kind of sense in letting them.

As I said before, I'm equivocal on this question. I'm not at all influenced by cost considerations, nor am I moved by the "two wrongs" argument. But if a man's crime bears down on him so heavily, why not let him take the only way out?

So long as the state is not made culpable for allowing the suicide to happen.