1810 England, the height of the Napoleonic wars. It was thought that humans walked the path of enlightenment leaving monsters and dark things behind. However, those monsters and night stalkers merely hide in the darkness, as a young maid, Bernadette, soon finds out.
A person stands at a cliff, they will commit suicide. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but someday. It's inevitable. You offer, in exchange for something, to push them off the cliff. They comply. Now, have you just commited murder, or assisted suicide and does it matter morally?
These are general questions, but beware of general answers because I will try to call you out with specific situations. Protip: avoid using all-encompasing words such as never and always.
Depends on the situation, circunstances, oneself mental state, morlas, principles and various other variants.
And if it should be a murder or an assisted suicide, that´s for the people to decide, you may think that you commiteed suicide but other people when they see the scene might call a murder or the other way around.
Lets start by the opinion that suicide is not inevitable. Suicide is a choice. Even if it's triggered by an illness or a drug, there are ways to help.
Helping someone to die when there's other ways to help the person is a murder. It's taking advantage of the person's weakness. For example, you don't kill depressed persons just because they want to die.
Helping someone to die when there's no other existing methods to help, like someone who is strapped to an hospital bed suffering from a terminal illness, is, for me, assisted suicide. But, for the law, it's still a murder (in my country).
A murder can be a mercy killing. Like killing someone who is extremely disabled. It is a murder because the disabled person cannot choose death. Is is that wrong to kill someone who is in a vegetated state (if there's no way that state will change)?