Zoraya ter Beek, 28, lives in a quiet Dutch town near the German border with her boyfriend and two cats. Though physically healthy, she says years of depression, autism, and borderline personality disorder have made her life unbearable. In early May, she plans to undergo euthanasia—a “nice nap,” as she calls it—and not wake up. In the Netherlands, euthanasia and assisted suicide are legal under strict conditions. Patients must make a voluntary, well-considered request, and their suffering must be deemed unbearable with no chance of improvement. A doctor administers life-ending medication or provides it for the patient to take themselves, followed by a formal review.
Ter Beek says her psychiatrist told her there was nothing more to try. She has chosen a quiet farewell at home: no music, her partner nearby, a sedative first, then medication to stop her heart. She wishes for her ashes to rest in a forest rather than a grave. Her decision has reignited debate about assisted dying, especially for those with psychiatric illness. Critics argue that euthanasia has drifted from a last resort for the terminally ill to a normalized response to mental suffering. Others warn that some patients may recover with time or new treatments. Supporters emphasize autonomy and relief from unending pain when all hope is gone. Opponents stress that mental illness can fluctuate and that despair may not be permanent. Both sides agree: the outcome is irreversible.
Around the world, laws on assisted dying vary. The Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, and parts of Australia and the U.S. allow it under certain safeguards, each grappling with ethical limits and oversight. Ter Beek once dreamed of becoming a psychiatrist but says her conditions destroyed that goal. Her calm plan reflects control—her critics see a system that failed to protect her. Her story forces society to ask: when suffering feels endless, who decides enough is enough?
