Antonio Aramayona committed suicide in 2016. His case is not comparable at all with that of Ángel Hernández's wife, because Antonio, despite having a serious disability and a huge physical deterioration, could be wrong that good by itself, and not I wanted to go to the extreme of having to ask for help to die. For that reason, their situation posed many more ethical dilemmas, and even made some activists doubt the right to die with dignity. Jon Sistiaga told his last weeks in a special chapter of his series Taboo (titled And in the end, death), in which I appear, because I was Antonio's friend, who was my teacher. In 2017 I published The look of the fish, a book based on my relationship with him and the catharsis that his death caused, and some readers and critics were surprised (I do not know if reproaching him) that in his pages there was no reflection on the right to suicide, euthanasia and worthy death
There was no such reflection, not only because it was irrelevant as I proposed the book, but because I had already resolved the dilemma: there was no room for Antonio's decision. Literature is done with doubts, not with certainty. In addition, I believe that the issue of dignified death is so delicate (painful for those who have to decide, not because it stimulates and excites anyone), we must avoid any intervention that adds anger and screaming. Asaetear with questions to Angel Hernandez and trivialize his act as part of the electoral noise is deeply regressive. I do not understand the unleashed hysteria, which almost deafened the majority sadness and outrage that the Spanish legislation is not able to give shelter to cases like this. Is it too much to ask for a little silence? Or speak quietly, at least.