The foundation of all valuing — for a person who chooses to live — is the value of one’s own life. But one’s own life can only be a value if one chooses it. Since all other values, including moral values, depend on the value of one’s life, there is no basis for any moral requirement to value one’s life. The value of life — and with it all values and all morality — rest on the choice to live.
Objectivist ethics points out that it’s not an unchosen burden, as ethical systems based on duty or altruism are. It’s the means to an end you have to choose — your life, your flourishing, your happiness.
If life is a choice, death is an option. Because the choice to live is the foundation of morality, moral arguments do not apply to a person who has opted to die. There is, therefore, no basis to condemn a person who has chosen to die.
Accepting that you have the option to die does not have to mean rejecting the value of life
Accepting that death is an option, and that people who see no reason to live for themselves don’t owe it to others to live for them, rules out the possibility of a life worse than death.
If you are not willing to live for the sake of others, and if others will not force you to live for their sake, then you can never be trapped in a life so miserable that you would rather not exist at all. And if you know that those who matter to you would not want you to live in such misery for their sakes, then you can never be held to such a life by your feelings for them.
If you accept that you are free to die, then you can seriously consider the choice to live. You’re free to choose your life based on the values you see in it—and so long as values are open to you, you can focus your life on the things that make it valuable to you.