ending up in the emergency room

killing yourself is easier said than done. potent drugs for a quick and secure departure from life are quasi unobtainable these days. and if you then have to choose a more painful, or more prone-to-failure method, there’s plenty of potential for you to fail and end up in an even worse state than you were before, and/or, plenty of potential to be rescued and because of that interference to end up in an even worse state than you were before. once the hospital staff gets its hands on you, your will will get pushed aside, and following tenet implicitly but un-misunderstandably brought forth…

“we, as licensed protectors of the species and members in good standing of the master-class of the race, by the power invested in us by those who wish to survive and reproduce, vow to enforce the fiction that life is worth having and worth living come hell or irreparable brain damage”
-Frankenstein’s oath, from “the conspiracy against the human race”

assuming you'll be brought to a hospital, almost everything (except for organ transplantations) will be done to keep you alive, whether this is what you want or not.

"physicians who deprive individuals of the freedom to kill themselves call what they do "suicide prevention". regardless of what they actually do, physicians like to define themselves as helpers and like to be so defined by the society they serve [...] rarely, a physician acknowledges that what he or she actually does and loves to do is excercise power over powerless persons" 
-Thomas Szasz, "suicide prohibition", p.46

once stabilized, your next stop will be the mental hospital, where the suicide prevention intervention continues, despite the fact that "there is no evidence that suicide prevention prevents suicide. psychiatrists and psychiatric hospitals are regurarly sued and found liable for patient suicides. psychiatrists kill themselves at three times the rate of the general public" 
-Thomas Szasz, "suicide prohibition",p.69

now, once finally arrived, this is what you can expect

"several months ago I was involuntarily committed to a psychiatric ward [...] there I was placed in a lobby with several psychotic patients.  I remained there for 5 hours before I was evaluated by a psychiatrist.  she spoke to me for approximately 10 minutes before she decided that it was in my "best interest" for me to be committed to a psychiatric ward.  I protested, of course, believing that wrenching me away from life would cause far more harm than good.  she expressed no empathy, however, and sent me back to the lobby.  I remained there for 12 more hours, during which time she passed by me numerous times without bothering to make eye contact [...] after being transferred to the hospital ward, I was placed in a room with an actively psychotic woman. I remained there for the weekend, during which time not a single hospital employee asked me why I was depressed. I was offered Celexa and took it only when a nurse suggested that my refusal to take medication might be perceived as "resistant" and thus delay my discharge. the Celexa made me so ill that I could hardly get out of bed; although the ward psychiatrist was aware of my reaction to the medication, he did not consider changing the drug or the dosage. on monday morning, I met with the ward psychiatrist, who told me that I would have to remain in the hospital. I asked him how he had come to that conclusion, 
given that he hadn't spoken to me once since my arrival at the hospital. he replied, "I have experience."  he went on to tell me that I had a "control problem" and that I refused to relinquish control to the hospital staff. I was stunned. I had never before thought that a goal of psychiatric care was to rob the patient of control. apparently patients who ask questions are considered insolent. I was finally released from the hospital five days after my arrival. I can certainly say that I received no benefit from my stay in the psychiatric ward.  I am more depressed than I was before, having been traumatized by my experience with the mental health care system. I have been alarmed by the utter arrogance of the psychiatrists I have encountered within the last several months. after leaving the hospital, I visited a psychiatrist in private practice who informed me that I would not get better unless I took medication.  during her initial interview with me, she failed to even ask what life events had brought on my depression. she did, however, tell me that I had a chemical imbalance"
-"what is it like to be committed the psychiatric ward of a hospital?" from 2001, http://antipsychiatry.org/e-mail.htm#whatsitlike

which, btw, is the standard mantra that is being indoctrinated into psychiatrists during their time at university, at least these days. things have not been always this way.

“[in] those days (1961/1962) there were 2 kinds of mental illnesses, organic and functional [...] everything is now considered to be an organic disturbance [...] the standard argument now is that mental illness is due to a chemical imbalance in the brain. has anybody seen that chemical imbalance?”
-Thomas Szasz, "the last interview", http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A63AVMEjYho

treating patients without the dignity they'd deserve, however, is a comportment that dates back to even ancient Greece. Plato explains.

"now have you further observed that, as there are slaves as well as free men among the patients of our communities, the slaves, to speak generally, are treated by slaves, who pay them a hurried visit, or receive them in dispensaries? a physician of this kind never gives the servant any account of his complaint, nor asks him for any; he gives him some empirical injuction with an air of finished knowledge, in the brusque fashion of a dictator, and then is off in hot haste to the next ailing servant - that is how he lightens his master's medical labors for him. the free practitioner, who, for the most part, attends free men, treats their diseases by going into things thoroughly from the beginning in a scientific way, and takes the patient and his family into his confidence. thus he learns something from the sufferer, and at the same time instructs the invalid to the best of his powers. he does not give prescriptions until he has won the patient's support, and when he has done so, he steadily aims at producing complete restoration of health"
-Plato, "laws"

today, have you further observed, as there are slaves (those deprived of liberty, due to having been labelled as mentally ill) as well as free men among the patients of our communities, the slaves, to speak generally, are treated by slaves (those who professionally submit themselves to the dogma of mental illness), who pay them a hurried visit, or receive them in dispensaries? a psychiatrist of this kind never gives the servant any account of his complaint, nor asks him for any, he gives him some empirical injunction with an air of finished knowledge, in the brusque fashion of a dictator, and then is off in hot haste to the next ailing servant...

"veni, vidi, vici" (i came, i saw, i conquered) is a famous phrase by Julius Caesar.
"veni, vidi, medicavi" (i came, i saw, i medicated) is the habitus and implicit slogan of the contemporary psychiatrist

how could such a person ever have gathered "experience" when every patient he ever encountered, he treated based on predefined abstract guidelines & his own caprices, thus shielding himself from any understanding of the individual problems the individuals he treats, have. with this kind of work philosophy, he's doomed to learn nothing. what he then gathers, is not experience, but seamlessness in his workflow in his mechanic, stubborn way to conduct work that is becoming more and more monotone with each passing year, as he gets habituated to doing the same stuff over and over again.

"the whole of living that we see before our eyes today is from inmost to outmost enmeshed in repressional mechanisms, social and individual; they can be traced right into the tritest formulas of everyday life. though they take a vast and multifarious variety of forms [e.g.] isolation [...] by isolation I here mean a fully arbitrary dismissal from consciousness of all disturbing and destructive thought and feeling. (Engstrom: "one should not think, it is just confusing.") a perfect and almost brutalising variant is found among certain physicians, who for self-protection will only see the technical aspect of their profession. it can also decay to pure hooliganism, as among petty thugs and medical students, where any sensitivity to the tragic side of life is eradicated by violent means"
-Peter Wessel Zapffe, "the last messiah"

administering neuroleptics is one out of the plethora of violent means, which are in vogue among psychiatrists. even more so than straitjackets previously, because now, psychiatrists can successfuly delude themselves into thinking they aren't exerting any violence, when they actually are.

“when patients had to be restrained by the use of force – for example, by a straitjacket – it was difficult for those in charge of the care to convince themselves that they were acting altogether on behalf of the patient…restraint by chemical means does not make (the psychiatrist) feel guilty; herein lies the danger to the patient. this, then, was the glorious – but unacknowledged and unacknowledgeable – psychopharmacological breakthrough: restraint could be put in the patient instead of on him and be defined as “drug treatment” (of and for the patient). it was obvious from the start that neuroleptic drugs benefit psychiatrists, not patients.”
-”mendacity by metaphor”, http://www.szasz.com/freeman30.pdf

"as to diseases, make a habit of two things - to help, or at least to do no harm."
-Hippocrates, "epidemics I", part 11, p.153, http://www.chlt.org/hippocrates/HippocratesLoeb1/page.152.a.php

this principle, "first, do no harm.", in its more common Latin form "primum non nocere", "is one of the principal precepts of bioethics that all healthcare students are taught in school and is a fundamental principle throughout the world. another way to state it is that, "given an existing problem, it may be better not to do something, or even to do nothing, than to risk causing more harm than good""
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primum_non_nocere

in contrast with this, "primum nocere" (first, do harm) is the principle of the psychiatrist. another way to state it is that, "first i'll lock you up, then i'm going to talk down to you, then insult you, alleging a "mentall illness" as my excuse, if you'll give me philosophy, i'll give you ad hominems, and i'll poison you via drug treatments for the invisible chemical imbalance i've made up. and then i'm going to kill myself, while depriving you of your opportunity to do so yourself"

you can't expect anything but relentless loyality from the rest of the mental hospital staff, who can't help but agree with anything the psychiatrist proclaims. "io canto per chi mi dà da mangiare" (i sing for the one who gives me to eat) as well as "as long as i do as i'm told, i can't do anything wrong" are their slogans, closing the circle of the intellectual incest that's going on behind closed doors.

now, why do psychiatrists, those people who so self-confidently come up with treatments for anything they deem worth treating (which is everything, and especially suicidal "ideations"), kill themselves so often? don't they have any treatment for their own dilemmas?
i suppose they do. Micheal Shapiro (alias Ishmael) brings an ancient, today often suppressed and thus merely latent wisdom to explicity, when he retrospectively concludes "death is the only cure I know for being stupid."

sooner or later, some of them will realize that reverting to "help" in terms of medical treatment, when medical treatment alleviates nothing but medical symptoms, can't logically help solve problems whose existence exists on nonmedical grounds, but until then, they'll keep scratching on the nerves of many. being located in the very heart of the psychiatric propaganda machinery, it can be difficult at times (or even at all times) to know one's anus from one's mouth but eventually it'll dawn on certain psychiatrists that everytime they opened their mouth and thought they were speaking, that which came out were not wisely chosen words, but shit. disgusted, they then kill themselves

just like little children who kill time by tearing off the legs of grasshoppers just to still their own curiosity as to what's going to happen when you tear away the foundation of someone's life, the other group of psychiatrists, being the spoilt parasitic brats they are, living off the misery of others, like to play around with patietnts and torture them for their own entertainment and for their salary at the end of the month. there's no insight to be expected from them. no reasoning worth your time.

"you can't have a cup of icecream just yet, we've just had lunch a moment ago"
"but i want it now!"
"you'll get yourself stuffed and then you'll complain about your belly aching"
"i want it. i want it. i want it!"

as it sometimes occurs in conversations between a mother and her stubborn child

"we have only just met"
"but prior to any further proceedings, i want to stigmatize you with a diagnosis of mental illness"
"every rational person will think you're a presumptuously arrogant ignorant"
"but i want to, i want to, i want to!"

as it always implicitly occurs in convesations between a patient and his stubborn psychiatrist.

"although I was distrustful of psychiatrists by this point, I spent over a month trying out Effexor, then Prozac, then Wellbutrin. I was unable to tolerate the side effects of any of them. only when I went off medication altogether did I begin to feel "normal" and more like myself. when I informed my psychiatrist that I was unwilling to try more medication, she told me that I was being irrational and risking my life. well, I guess I will just take that risk. I am frankly sick of being patronized by psychiatrists who uncritically subscribe to biological theories of depression and who ignore obvious psychosocial factors that contribute to depression. the belief that the treatment of depression requires medication has been reified by the psychiatric community. I don't believe that all psychiatrists are as incompetent as the ones who I have encountered. I do, however, believe that psychiatrists should question the "bible" of their profession, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). just because a certain cluster of symptoms is defined as a disorder does not mean that these symptoms are indicative of an underlying chemical imbalance that requires treatment with psychotropic drugs."
- "what is it like to be committed the psychiatric ward of a hospital?" from 2001, http://antipsychiatry.org/e-mail.htm#whatsitlike