For me the problem with that is that it doesn't take into account what the suicidal person's motivations and thoughts are.

For instance, in the case of (a)--

It does create an enduring grief for loved ones. However, to the suicidal person....and this is the crux of the matter....the grief created for loved ones by their suicide will be LESS than the grief created by their subsequent existence. And they may be wrong, but they may be right.

For instance, my own suicide will hurt my family. But they will not know it was suicide. However, the hurt that would be created if I continued to live would be exponentially greater. As a result, suicide may hurt them, but it will hurt them definitively less than if i lived.

Also, although suicide does "subject many to a life of emotional torment", it's not the act that does it. Part of life in many people's worldviews is that tragedy is inevitable, but it's how you deal with it. For instance, their family member being burned to death beyond recognition in an accidental fire would also be agonizing. But they'd have to move on from that as well, jsut as his suicide.

The problem with (b) for me is that it has two potentially faulty presumptions. First, this

Consciously acting in a way that will cause loved ones a lifetime of emotional torment is not an act of love.

is an assumption predicated on the idea that any act that causes beyond X amount of pain CAN NEVER be a loving act. However, there's no substance to that claim, and no specificty that defines what that "limit of moral pain on others" is.

For instance, let's say that my brother and I are dying in the desert. He's been wounded, and there's no way he'll survive barring a miracle. There's no way to get help. I can make it, but only if I leave him behind....but he's certain to die of dehydration, a horrible and lengthy death. Now, it would cause my family "a lifetime of emotional torment" for me to snap his neck and grant him a peaceful and quick death.....but it would still be a merciful loving act.

The crux of that problem is that people assume "any act that causes a certain amount of pain cannot be a loving one. But that's a shortsighted and narrowminded assumption.

The second problem is that

"it can't be an act of love Especially when the sacrifice is for material wealth."

But the wealth isn't for him. It's for his family. And so the argument is nullified, because now, it's about providing for his family, not "causing them pain for wealth.* Because he doesn't believe that he can do that while alive. Now, you and I may not agree, but we could be wrong.

I should make this clear....I'm not condoning, advocating, or agreeing with your suicide idea, OP. i don't know enough to make that call, and I won't. But I am trying to fight misconceptions about suicidal people and the act, because if there were less misconceptions, there'd be less suicides.