[Leary]

"Among the many friends the entrepreneur made over his life, some said the cause of his death had spanned many months, in plain sight to those who surrounded him. Last summer, his Park City companions hired an on-call doctor. Unless Mr. Hsieh moderated his drug and alcohol use, the doctor said, he would die within six months."

It's one thing to overly indulge a billionaire friend, it's another to endanger his physical/mental well being to the point of death.

[rchaud]

You cannot forcibly make someone go to rehab. People are quick to blame his 'friends', but it appears that they hired a personal doctor, who gave doctorly advice. What more could they do?

[nickelcitymario]

I kinda agree. It's entirely possible that they were being callous and greedy, but from what I've read, it sounds like they made every effort short of getting fired. Now, maybe they should have all worked together and risked him declaring them all disloyal, but it's not like they didn't try.

Plus, if I had a close friend who was doing mushrooms and nitrous oxide, I wouldn't necessarily think that was particularly dangerous. I, perhaps ignorantly, would have considered those to be relatively safe things to experiment with.

It's so easy to say what should have been done after the fact, but it can be incredibly difficult to know the right thing in the moment.

[Drblessing]

+1, anyone that was telling him the truth gets removed, so what are they supposed to do? Looks like they tried with the wellness center and doctor. It's more grey than black and white.

[caycep]

In geriatric medicine, there is a somewhat defined, albeit difficult, process of declaring someone medically incompetent to manage their own affairs; they usually are committed to specialized (memory care) facilities. In some cases, the symptoms and rationale are clearly obvious. In others...these patients can be vulnerable to less scrupulous individuals.

For a wealthy high functioning billionaire, but one who is arguably affected by dopamine dysregulation that compromises his faculties, I'd imagine it's a trickier path to walk...

[rchaud]

The press have already painted his friends as opportunistic hangers-on. Imagine how it would have looked if they actually started making moves to take on power of attorney.

[caycep]

yeah...that's what seems to make it especially tricky. There would have to be a good lawyer involved, and I'm not sure how they would find a trusted third party to be the conservator...

[omginternets]

I've often wondered about this, in the abstract.

What if the reason someone isn't motivated to get better is precisely because of the acute drug dependency? In other words, what if getting someone through the initial withdrawal of, say, heroin stabilized them enough to feel motivated to improve their lives?

After all, we use this reasoning to prescribe medication for e.g. anxiety and depression. The reasoning is that drugs are sometimes very good at providing people with just enough stability to allow for long-term solutions like therapy.

If this is indeed the case, might there not be some situations in which forcibly taking someone to rehab would be helpful?

The "you cannot forcibly make someone go to rehab" seems like policy more than actual truth. It may even be a good policy, for all I know. But assuming I'm right, maybe we shouldn't confuse the two.

[sneak]

Our lives and bodies are our own, to use, build, and destroy as we see fit.

It's one thing to help a friend avoid an accidental death, but this speaks to a months long pattern of behavior that was clearly a deliberate personal decision.

What's the point of wealth if not obtaining the basic freedom to live (and die) how we choose?

[omgwtfbbq]

>a months long pattern of behavior that was clearly a deliberate personal decision

Drug/Alcohol addiction is hardly a personal decision... This is a dangerous point of view to take.

[sneak]

Whose decision is it, if not the person who opts to become addicted and continue that addiction?

People like to personify addiction, as if there is some outside force controlling the person, but this is to discount and discard every single addict who decided to clean themselves up. I know lots of addicts who chose to continue, and I know lots of addicts who chose to stop.

Don't personify the addiction: the brain of an addict is still that person's brain, and their decisions are still their own, even if they are de-legitimized in your own opinion due to their addiction. There is literally no one else who could possibly be responsible for the decisions of that human's brain and actions than that human being.

What goes in to our own bodies when we are not coerced by another person is our own decision, full stop.

[lolc]

"Opting" to become addicted?

I know one person who says of herself that some days she just can't go into the city. Because she knows on those days she'd get hooked again if she were to pass a place where she used to shoot. And she talks about "it", that urge, in the third person.

I fully "discount" her judgment in some areas and she would agree. Like I can't reason you into holding your breath for longer than a minute, I can't reason her into ignoring the urge. I would not treat as "legitimate" a decision she takes following that urge. Whether she stays clean or not depends a lot on her surroundings. Does that put responsibility on her friends? You bet.

I wonder, what do you make of Toxoplasmosis? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxoplasmosis#Rodents

[sneak]

> I know one person who says of herself that some days she just can't go into the city. Because she knows on those days she'd get hooked again if she were to pass a place where she used to shoot.

If one can opt out (by eg not going into the city), one can also opt in.

[lolc]

Looks like you wanted to build an argument but lost steam after one sentence. Here, let me continue for you: "So if she chooses to go to the city, it will be her decision and consequently her responsibility when she inevitably gets hooked again."

Oh but you see, it's her friends that give her the freedom not to go to the city: If they weren't there, she wouldn't have that choice.

[omgwtfbbq]

>opts to become addicted

?????

>I know lots of addicts who chose to continue, and I know lots of addicts who chose to stop.

I highly doubt you know any addicts full stop.

>Don't personify the addiction: the brain of an addict is still that person's brain, and their decisions are still their own

I just can't even, are you a scientologist or something? I have literally never encountered arguments like yours. Truly outlandish.

"Addiction exerts a long and powerful influence on the brain that manifests in three distinct ways: craving for the object of addiction, loss of control over its use, and continuing involvement with it despite adverse consequences. While overcoming addiction is possible, the process is often long, slow, and complicated."

"...we recognize addiction as a chronic disease that changes both brain structure and function."

https://www.health.harvard.edu/%E2%80%A6/how-addiction-hijac...

[datavirtue]

I saw no mention of addictive drug use. Whippits and mushrooms isn't going to throw you off the deep end. Something else was going on. Pills/meth/crack/coke? Those can lock you into addiction and rewrite your brain and you will not be in control.

[okareaman]

> Whippets ... aren't going to throw you off the deep end

That may be true in your experience, but not mine: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25327689

[datavirtue]

Ok, take that back. I have seen people go a bit crazy on NOS but at Hsieh's level I can see how this would have been over the deep end for sure.

[eli]

one can be addicted to drugs, even ones without severe physical dependency

[onetimemanytime]

Ultimately everyone makes his own decisions, especially someone with essentially unlimited funds. We can go through the moves and end at the same conclusion.