Most people who commit suicide suffer from bipolar disorder, depression, or some other form of mental illness that significantly impairs the ability to make a rational decision. The number of circumstances in which suicide is rational is very small.Stopping anyone about to commit suicide is not equivalent to saving them. The only people you "save" from suicide are those who are below the age of consent and those with mental disabilities (in some cases, euthanasia might be good for them), removing them, we can now deduce that those who are suicidal are reasonable people, no different to you and I. When someone is on a ledge of a building, having made up their mind to kill themselves, there are two ways of stopping them, the first is to change their mind and the second is to pull them away from the ledge. In short, to stop someone from committing suicide, you either manipulate their mind or you physically coerce them not to commit suicide.
Suicide is a rational conclusion one reaches when they assess their current situation. When someone has made up their mind that they are going to kill themselves, the people around him stop him for various reasons, such as 'life is worth living' or 'there is so much to live for'. Why would you stop a rational man or woman from killing themselves? Their problems might not be worth dying for and are easily solved, but the option they have assessed to be the best is to commit suicide. Who are we to question their reasoning at that point in their lives and have the gall to tell them that they should not kill themselves? Are we better than those who are suicidal? It is their choice to commit suicide, let them do it in any manner they see fit, as long as it does not interfere with other people's business. From a utilitarian point-of-view, when you let someone commit suicide, you save him and his family from the enormous financial burden of therapy and anti-depressants. The cost of one funeral is lower than the overall cost of medical bills one will accrue over coming months and the family must be able to find solace in the fact fulfilling the dead man's wishes of being forgotten.
When someone is named in a suicide note, the people named must be able to cope with the facts with any manner they see fit, some of them might kill themselves from the guilt, but then again, who are we to stop them?
When people say suicidal people are selfish their reasoning goes as follows: when you kill yourself, you are selfish for depriving the people around you the memories you can make with them and giving them the burden of your death for the rest of their lives. Is it also not unreasonable to ascertain that to let someone deny the right to end their own lives, the person stopping another person from committing suicide is not only prolonging their pain and suffering that they feel, but is also removing their inherent right to pursue their own happiness? Must they also manipulate the suicidal person's mind by giving him drugs and let the suicidal man shoulder the costs of medicine he did not want to take in the first place? Who is more selfish in this situation? In the end the more selfish will be those who stop people from killing themselves. One must be able to have the freedom to choose what they can do to their lives, ending their own life is one of them. The only way to stop a person from killing themselves is to let the suicidal man change their minds ON THEIR OWN from committing suicide, they are also reasonable and rational people such as you and I, who is to say that they might change their minds in the end and ultimately decide not to commit suicide?
Don't stop people from killing themselves because FREEDOM