I found myself at J.K. Rowling’s X page by happenstance. Her recent post on assisted suicide caught me off guard.

Here’s what she wrote, “When you stop and think about it, assisted dying’s a bit like salted caramel ice cream or shuffle dancing, because they’re choices, too. Or Lynx Africa body spray — use it, don’t use it, nobody else’s business.”

Comparing a serious topic like assisted suicide to gelato flavors and dancing? The contrast was jarring. I was tempted to push away both comparison and argument like a plate of Bertie Bott’s Every Flavour Beans.

Instead, I read the tweet again.

Following Rowling’s advice, I decided to stop and think about it. Is choosing euthanasia and assisted suicide (the intentional ending of, or helping to end, a person’s life) similar to picking strawberry over mint chip? In Rowling’s words, is it “use it, don’t use it, nobody else’s business”?

In one sense, she’s right. Choosing death over life is just as much a “choice” as choosing shuffle over swing dancing. The difference is in consequences.

Every choice has repercussions. The smaller the choice in its context, the smaller the impact. Choosing salted caramel ice cream over red velvet cake isn’t that big of a decision. Unless you have a dairy allergy. The context determines the magnitude of impact for any given choice.

Humans, likewise, have a context. Our context consists of things like our relationships, personalities, parents, our environment, our friends, and yes, our previous decisions. As we grow older and assume more responsibilities, our context grows. So does the impact of our decisions, for good or ill. What used to be simple grows more complex. A husband’s choice must now factor in the needs and desires of a wife. A job change or drastic move affects a whole family. Our choices involve more and more people as our context grows larger.

Assisted dying is not a choice in a vacuum. Unlike ice cream flavor options, the ripple effects last a lot longer than the extra calories. Yes, it’s a choice. But it’s not a flippant one. There are no refunds and no second tries on death. It’s a choice that extends far beyond the individual and onto society as a whole.

What we say about life and death speaks volumes on who we are and what we value. To quote from Rowling’s own Harry Potter series, “It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.” According to available data, loss of autonomy and decreased quality of life are the primary drivers behind assisted suicide requests. This sends the subtle message that a life with less autonomy is undesirable.

Some, like Ben Colburn, professor of Political Philosophy at the University of Glasgow, argue against this line of reasoning. “The argument from disrespect is mistaken in two ways. The first is that it misreports the core of the argument for assisted dying, which is not that some lives are less worth living than others, but rather that each individual must decide what makes their life worth living, whether it remains so in their own eyes, and what to do about it, including seeking an assisted death if that is what they judge to be right for themselves. This principle — of equal respect for each individual’s autonomy — involves no comparative judgments about how worthwhile different lives are.”

There are two items to consider with this argument. The first is the concept that individual choices are neutral actions (i.e., involving no comparative judgments on the worth of other decisions). Perhaps this would be the case if we were completely detached from our context. But again, the consequences of any action cannot be limited to a single individual in one moment in time. We are not wholly autonomous. We exist within a community, and people are watching. What we fight for and what we fail to fight for both speak to what we value. The very definition of culture is “the combined pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior” transmitted to the next generation. Our individual choices fuel the culture and thus influence broader views on the meaning and worth of life.

Consider the increase in death cases in areas where euthanasia or forms of physician-assisted suicide are permitted. Asher D. Colombo, professor of Sociology at the University of Bologna, and Gianpiero Dalla-Zuanna, Professor of Demography at the University of Padova document, “In 2021 alone, more than 10,000 Canadians died from euthanasia, an increase of 32.4 percent from 2020.”

Similarly, Sillitti P., Meier C., Blanc S. et al., writing for The Lancet note, “Assisted deaths rose steadily and substantially over the past decade, particularly in the use of euthanasia. Between 2014 and 2023, the average annual growth rate for euthanasia ranged from 4·79% in the Netherlands to 200·32% in New Zealand, where the proportion of deaths attributed to euthanasia among all deaths increased from 0·16% in 2021 to 0·84% in 2023.” While the authors are clear that more study needs to be done on these trends, the data still demonstrates how people’s choices create a growing acceptance for more of the same.

The second item to consider is the principle of self-determined worth. The troubling factor with Colburn’s logic is that anyone’s assessment of his or her life determines the intrinsic worthiness of their lives. If a person determines any one factor makes their life unlivable, do they have the right to end it? Would dementia, for instance, qualify for assisted suicide?

We are already seeing these implications discussed among the medical community. Colombo and Dalla-Zuanna write, “Use of EAS [euthanasia and assisted suicide] among people with dementia is low, but growing. Since this illness makes it difficult to discern the patient’s will, ethical concerns loom large. If the view that this kind of existence is ‘not worth living’ becomes widespread, then aging populations and high incidences of dementia could further accelerate EAS use.” If followed to its logical conclusion, Colburn’s line of reasoning would justify all forms of suicide, so long as the individual was convinced his or her life no longer had worth, and that ending it would be right for them.

The topic of assisted suicide is complex and nuanced, but choosing premature death is not an option without consequence. It is not “use it, don’t use it, nobody else’s business.” How we value or devalue life does impact our culture, and hence, everyone else. It is our business to discuss these issues and encourage a valuation of life over expedience to end it. Salted caramel, shuffle dancing, and suicide are all choices. But they are not equal choices. In the words of J.K. Rowling herself, via Kingsley Shacklebolt, auror for the Ministry of Magic, “We’re all human, aren’t we? Every human life is worth the same, and worth saving.”