Slashdot Mirror


Mental Health Experts Seek To Block the Paths To Suicide

HughPickens.com writes: Experts and laymen have long assumed that people who died by suicide will ultimately do it even if temporarily deterred. Now Celia Watson Seupel reports at the NY Times that a growing body of evidence challenges this view, with many experts calling for a reconsideration of suicide-prevention strategies to stress "means restriction." Instead of treating individual risk, means restriction entails modifying the environment by removing the means by which people usually die by suicide. The world cannot be made suicide-proof, of course. But, these researchers argue, if the walkway over a bridge is fenced off, a struggling college freshman cannot throw herself over the side. If parents leave guns in a locked safe, a teenage son cannot shoot himself if he suddenly decides life is hopeless.

Reducing the availability of highly lethal and commonly used suicide methods has been associated with declines in suicide rates of as much as 30%–50% in other countries (PDF). According to Cathy Barber, people trying to die by suicide tend to choose not the most effective method, but the one most at hand. Some methods have a case fatality rate as low as 1 or 2 percent," says Barber. "With a gun, it's closer to 85 or 90 percent. So it makes a difference what you're reaching for in these low-planned or unplanned suicide attempts." Ken Baldwin, who jumped from the Golden Gate Bridge in 1985 and lived, told reporters that he knew as soon as he had jumped that he had made a terrible mistake. "From the instant I saw my hand leave the railing, I knew I wanted to live. I was terrified out of my skull." Baldwin was lucky to survive the 220 foot plunge into frigid waters. Ms. Barber tells another story: On a friend's very first day as an emergency room physician, a patient was wheeled in, a young man who had shot himself in a suicide attempt. "He was begging the doctors to save him," she says. But they could not.

23 of 498 comments (clear)

  1. Maybe in a different country by damn_registrars · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If parents leave guns in a locked safe, a teenage son cannot shoot himself if he suddenly decides life is hopeless.

    People have been proudly campaigning for irresponsible gun ownership in the US for a very, very, long time. Suggesting things like locking up guns - even in the gun owner's home - will be quickly shot down by people claiming you are impeding on their constitutional right to overthrow the government.

    I really, really, wish I was exaggerating or kidding on this one.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:Maybe in a different country by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's a big difference between promoting gun safety at home, and putting it into law. The latter comes with regular, mandatory police inspections of gun owners' homes, to ensure guns are kept according to the rules. This is what we have in the Netherlands, where it's hard to get a gun license in the first place. Now I am not against such rules and inspections personally, but I can see how "freedom loving" gun owners in the US would object to that. However, the few of such gun owners that I know do voluntarily practise and advocate safe gun ownership, especially around kids.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:Maybe in a different country by damn_registrars · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's a big difference between promoting gun safety at home, and putting it into law.

      Which would make it political suicide to even propose here in the US.

      However, the few of such gun owners that I know do voluntarily practise and advocate safe gun ownership, especially around kids.

      The overwhelming majority of actual gun owners are responsible. There are a lot more guns than gun accidents in this country, that is clear. However every single day there is at least one innocent child in this county who is shot as a direct result of an irresponsible owner. And those irresponsible owners are the ones whose "rights" we see so much time and money spent to protect.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    3. Re:Maybe in a different country by dwillden · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Great points, and as demonstrated in Australia after their firearm ban and confiscation, removing firearms does not remove suicides. After the ban yes firearm suicides nearly vanished. But the overall suicide rate did not drop. In fact it spiked significantly the two years immediately following but then returned to the exact same level and gradual downward trend it had been running at in the years prior to the ban. But now suicide by firearm was a fraction of the occurrence that it had been before the ban and confiscation of most handguns and many rifles.

      Guns do not cause suicide. They are a convenient method when available, but if not available those determined to exit this sphere of existence will find a way to do so.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    4. Re:Maybe in a different country by Megol · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes one can make such an argument. It would however not be based on reality and would be easily disproved by research data and statistics.

      Most people that are suicidal don't want to suffer a painful death.
      Most people have their darkest moments while at home.

    5. Re:Maybe in a different country by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 3, Insightful

      First of all, they are dramatically underreported, as has been shown numerous times.

      Well, it depends on what you mean by "dramatically." For example, the New York Times investigated this and estimates that about half of accidental gun deaths of children may not be properly reported or classified. A USA Today report said the actual numbers were 61% higher than the CDC numbers, perhaps getting up to 100 unintentional deaths in the year studied there.

      And that latter report was by an organization promoting gun safety, so I don't think they are lowballing the figure. On the other hand, that latter report doesn't define "child," so I'm not sure what age range is involved.

      In any case, while these gun deaths are deplorable and may be somewhat underreported, even organizations who are desperately looking for gun deaths don't seem to agree with your statement that "It is not hard to find an accidental shooting every single day in this country that involves a child." Maybe a couple times a week on average. But hardly "every single day."

      The CDC's numbers may be low. But your numbers are too high.

      And your bit about the age of a child is a straw man argument. I follow the standard definition of a child being under 18.

      The problem here is again a shift from possible underreporting to vastly overreporting that is characteristic of the other side of this argument.

      The unfortunate reality -- as is the case with many polarized topics in U.S. politics -- is that both sides lie and mislead. Gun advocates want these numbers to appear as low as possible. People who are anti-gun want them to appear as high as possible.

      And the anti-gun side has a strong tradition of including all sorts of misleading numbers involving teenagers to jack those numbers up -- trying to lump suicides, homicides, and accidents all into one category for example. Of course, most people recognize that teenagers below the age of 18 often are smart enough and competent enough to realize what they are doing, so you can't just lump all these things together.

      Anyhow, clearly you have your own biased perspective and are intent on exaggerating your data. Clearly GP has his own as well. The reality is probably somewhere in the middle.

    6. Re:Maybe in a different country by tibit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As someone who has attempted suicide and just barely made it, I think that the so-called mental health experts are a bit stuck up in seeing things from nobody's perspective but theirs. The freedom to lead your way the way you choose to must include ending your own life at any time of your choosing. It is true that quite often people who attempted suicide are happy with making it out alive, and being able to live their lives. I certainly am!! On the other hand, the thought that some "expert" who is not in my frame of mind would have the ability to, essentially, take over my ability to take my life - is downright scary. Just because I'm happy with the life I have now doesn't mean that I'd be happy about someone preventing me from attempting to take my life when I did so. Two decades later, I'd consider it a gross invasion of privacy, and a horrific, slippery slope takeover of basic human liberty.

      There is a very fine line between truly helping someone, and "helping" someone by - as you unashamedly admit - putting someone else's feelings over your own. Yes, as a society we have an obligation to give as much help as we can, but that help IMHO should not extend to overriding the decision of someone who wishes to take their life away. I find it, actually, completely incomprehensible that people think that preservation of human life over all else should be forced down everyone's throat. I also find it not all that clear that suicidal thoughts should be treated like a malaise in all cases. My attempt at my own life made me into a person that I am now, and who are you, or anyone else for that matter, to say that I'd be better off not having tried it? It's quite possible the worst case of "what if" imaginable, because you're not merely hypothesizing, you intend to take action.

      The implication that all people with suicidal thoughts have a "very real chance" of taking down someone else is just an icing on the cake. You're nuts. I'm not a murderer, and can't imagine how attempting to take my own life would have ever made me take the life of someone else while doing so - other than indirectly, say by someone close to me dying of a stress-induced heart attack. I can't imagine that any sort of a majority, or even a significant minority of people who attempt a suicide are murderers and would take down others with them - not unless they were murderers to begin with, and suicial thoughts were just an enabler, like alcohol or drugs would be for others.

      TL;DR: You're nuts, you really are.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    7. Re:Maybe in a different country by jjn1056 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Its a lot harder to kill yourself (or another person that is actively resisting) with a knife than with a gun. Having been in barroom brawls where knifes came out I can tell you that with certainty.

      People that kill themselves by cutting themselves typically have to do a lot to make it work (for example preparing a hot bath to prevent clotting, etc.). And they need to cut deep, and cut correctly (slashing up and down the wrist, not across for example, as typically shown in movies) to achieve the goal, which is rather painful unless again one takes the time to acquire pain medication and consume it. This increased preparation time increases the mental barrier one needs to overcome to order to actually complete the suicide attempt and the increased time required to perform the act makes it more likely that someone might catch you in the act and save you.

      People also tend to kill themselves in private, in their home, where they can't be interrupted and have had a lengthy time of isolation to deepen their depression. A handgun in the bedroom drawer "just in case" is a very easy way to attempt suicide and is in the ideal, private and quiet location that most people seek when trying to kill themselves. Other means that people choose in private, such as hanging themselves, typically have large mental barriers to overcome. Its not easy to correctly form the type of noose one needs, for example and also the death itself (by a possible lengthy suffocation) is a scary barrier to overcome. One must be very depressed to overcome that, and often when someone is that depressed they are not capable of the work involved to make it happen (and also there is a bigger chance for another person to notice how depressed they are, and offer help).

      Although it is easy to crash a car as you mention, typically this is not what people want to do to kill themselves (typically, but yes there are always going to be outliers). As pointed out most people seek privacy and a period of isolation. Driving on the highway at speeds enough to cause death is not private nor isolated. And bridges can be better secured such as to make it harder (using fencing for example) and we can place emergency help phones on the bridge as well, which have been known to save people by giving them a person to speak with when they need it most.

      The study is suggesting that people when deprived of an easy, private death in the convenience of their own home act on suicide impulses a lot less simple because its harder to do in the conditions one typically seeks.

      --
      Peace, or Not?
    8. Re:Maybe in a different country by jjn1056 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because we know that many people that kill themselves do so because they are in the grips of simple biochemical processes related to a certain age, such as a teenager when their growth hormones are at full speed. This is something people don't have control over and its worse for some people than it is for others. These people have no rational reason to want to be dead other than they can't control their emotions. Typically the problems they have are not anything out of the ordinary, and certainly not a problem that one might rationally choose death to avoid.

      For example many young people just kill themselves because they don't feel they fit into the world, or because they fall in love with someone that doesn't reciprocate. These problems are common ones. These a solvable problems that no rational person would think are so terrible that death is truly a more desirable choice. They simple need help and support to get through that difficult time of life after which the vast majority go on to be happy and live meaninful lives and are glad that they didn't die at a younger age.

      On the other hand some people when faced with the certainty of a lingering, painful and undignified death (such as when someone is diagnosed with a fatal illness) might choose to rationally seek a death that they have control over, and that meets the criteria of suffering (or lack of it) that they desire. Personally I think that I'd rather die when I still have most of my wits about me and when I still have some type of control over what I am doing than to die strapped to some hospital machine, barely aware of what is going on. I don't think that people should feel forced to make that choice, but I do think I can understand the rationality behind it. On the other hand as someone that was very depressed and unhappy as a young adult, I a glad it was not easy for me to kill myself (my parents did not own a gun and I lived in a location with strict gun control laws, NYC) because now as a middle aged person I am very happy with my life and I feel I am making a contribution to society in the open source work that I do and in other ways.

      I don't think life is cheap, and I am sorry you feel that way :( I hope you also find happiness in some point of life

      --
      Peace, or Not?
    9. Re:Maybe in a different country by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I really hate the phrase "accidental shooting" and don't believe in them. Given every thing that I have ever been taught about how to handle and use firearms every "accidental shooting" really is a negligent shooting. There are so many thing that have to go wrong when a shooting happens that I would support charges of criminal negligence every time. Lets take a couple of common examples. First and most trotted out one is a small child finds the parents loaded hand gun usually in some place like a night stand or purse. In this case there are 3 things that have all gone wrong:
      1. The gun was kept where a child could find it
      2. The gun was not locked with a trigger or barrel lock
      3. The gun was loaded
      Avoiding any one of those things would have prevented the shooting but no 3 negligent actions all had to happen. Lets look at another common one, teenage kid shoots a fried with parents gun that was believed to be unloaded. Here again multiple things have gone wrong. In addition to the 3 mentioned in the previous example 3 more things have gone wrong. The first was that the individual who shot their friend was pointing a firearm at something they didn't intend to shoot. Second the individual handling the firearm was not handling it like it was loaded. Third the individual did not check and make the firearm safe upon picking it up. So in this tragic case we have a grand total of 6 negligent actions that if just one of them was avoided the tragedy wouldn't of happened.

      All of that said I do believe in accidental discharge of a firearm as I have had such a situation happen to me. While out hunting in rather inclement weather I had some sleet land on the bolt face and temporarily freeze the firing pin forward so when I closed the action after loading my SKS it discharged the round it chambered. In this case because I was practicing proper handling the only thing that happened was that the bullet went into the ground about 10 feet in front of me. Immediately after that I went back to my truck and tore down, inspected, cleaned and oiled my sks to verify that noting was wrong with it and was able to get the pin to freeze forward again to verify that that is what happened. I have never had that problem since and now when I am out with it know to check it before closing the action in addition to all of the other safe firearm handling procedures.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    10. Re: Maybe in a different country by the+grace+of+R'hllor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Stop in vitro fertilization and medical treatment for everything except accidents too, then. After all, if you get a heart attack and we help you, we're just encouraging people with genes that provide medical risk factors to continue. In fact, we should probably take out your kids.

      Depression is an illness, not a choice, and you're arguing letting people die from a disease where it's possibly preventable.

    11. Re: Maybe in a different country by ultranova · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not trying to be mean, just thinking clinically.

      No you aren't, you're simply trying to appear tough by spouting sociopathic garbage. Such emotionally motivated behaviour is the very antithesis of "clinical", and not the least bit impressive. Please grow up.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  2. We've redefined success! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since we've made remarkably limited advances in the treatment of patients who think that the world is worth escaping; we've decided to just start blocking the exits. On the plus side, we have some emotionally salient anecdotes, of the sort that will probably cheer you right up unless you are one of those pesky people we can't really treat!

    1. Re:We've redefined success! by javilon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So it is forbidden to make a decision about your life. WTF?

      I am allowed to marry the wrong person and ruin my life at the drop of a hat. I am allowed to have kids where I may not be qualified to provide a decent life. I am allowed to sign a mortgage that I know I can't pay. I am allowed to try to climb the K7 if I am 70 years old, wich is very close to suicide.

      But I am not allowed to take my own life.

      Bollocks.

      --


      When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
  3. People are creative by thisisauniqueid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This feels pertinent to me because this morning I was woken up at 6:45am by a loud helicopter hovering overhead for over an hour. A teenager had jumped in front of the CalTrain by where I live in Palo Alto in an apparent suicide. Turns out this is the 8th such CalTrain suicide so far this year, up from 8 suicides total (10 deaths) over the whole year last year. Locals are loudly requesting for the crossroads to be made into underpasses, and for improved fences etc.

    On the one hand I keep thinking that if someone is determined to commit suicide, they'll find a way. (There was a police guard posted at the crossing after previous suicides to prevent this, but the teenager simply jumped the fence 200 yards from the crossing and jumped in front of the train there instead.)

    On the other hand, I see the wisdom in trying to make the world a place where it's in no convenient way to commit suicide. As Banksy tweeted this morning, "Suicide does not end the chances of life getting worse, suicide eliminates the possibility of it ever getting better."

  4. Treating symptoms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Suicide is a symptom of mental illness. Taking away the possibility to commit suicide doesn't solve the underlying cause.

    As someone who suffers from medical depression I feel pretty strongly about this subject, at least as strongly as I can allow myself to feel.
    It may sound paradoxical but having the option to commit suicide was one of the things that helped me to finally seek treatment. Before I approached counseling I decided on method and location for a possible suicide. Had that option not been available to me I might not have been able to push through.
    Had there been a policy in place to put people with depression on a 24/7 watch-list to prevent suicide the I would have probably gone for the suicide option first.

    When the subject of suicide comes up I often see people claiming that suicide is the "easy" way out. What they don't seem to realize is that more importantly it is a way out.
    Some people support assisted suicide for non-treatable painful diseases. Typically autoimmune disorders or certain forms of cancer where the body attacks itself. They have seen how much victims of those diseases have to suffer.
    It is much harder to see how much you suffer when the mind attacks itself. People think that therapy cures those problems. It doesn't. Bipolar disorder, schizophrenia and depression are permanent. You can only learn how to endure it or acquire the discipline to keep it back.
    To me the depression is much like one would expect from alcoholism. I function, but I can not allow myself to think freely. I have to keep my mind busy in complex projects and not let it wander off. Some relatives seem to have a hard time understanding that I will never want to talk nostalgia with them, ever.
    Preventing suicide kind of lacks relevance since the person my mind was before died with the depression anyway.

    Taking away to option of suicide doesn't solve anything of that. It only removes the inconvenience of having to deal with a body.

  5. Barking up the wrong tree? by jandersen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Trying to address the issue of suicide by taking away the means of killing yourself is probably entirely the wrong way to go about it. People who are serious about suicide will always find a way, for starters, and unless something substantial is done to address the mental suffering that drives a person to suicide, all you achieve is to prolong the suffering. It is the kind of boneheaded, incompetent idiocy that you get from politicians, when their only goal is to get re-elected.

    I think a much better approach would be

    1) Give people the right to suicide and the help to do so safely, if that is the right word. This will show people who are suicidal, that you respect them, something is all too often not the case. I think respect is crucial, because if you see suicide as the only way out, you don't want to seek help if you fear that this way out will be taken away; so you have to know that you can go ahead, if you really want to.

    2) Make that right dependent on them having been through good quality advice and assessment. Many people only want kill themselves because they can see no other way - they can often be helped to find a better way out.

    There is still too much religiously motivated prudishness towards death - life does not belong to some 'God', it belongs to the individual and it is ultimately the responsibility of the individual what they want to do. It is IMO deeply unethical to force life on somebody who really doesn't want it.

    1. Re:Barking up the wrong tree? by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Insightful
      A lot of these seem to be impulsive in nature. Depression is a cyclical thing, and eliminating an opportunity from presenting itself could mean the difference between someone dying and their outlook brightening enough for them to realize they have other options. I spent the weekend worrying about a skydiving friend who had to go jail yesterday. If he'd opted to pound in, no one could have stopped him. I wasn't about to tell him to spend the weekend not skydiving, though. I did make sure to talk to him when he needed it, letting him know that the sky and all his friends would still be here when he got out. I think that could have made the difference between the world closing up on him. He was much more of a loner a year ago and the outcome might have been different if he'd been in this position then.

      There's a pretty decent support network over at the dropzone. Good folk there. A lot of them know their way around the prison system. Society tends to look down on people with criminal records, but I've trusted my life to a lot of those guys and am going to do it again without hesitation. There's a lot broken with our society, but we should fix what we can.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  6. Crayons and safety scissors for everyone! by sjames · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I understand the motivation, but there are simply far too many ways to die if you want to. Even if we nerf the whole world and baby proof everything, we won't stop an adult or teen that wants to die from doing so. But we will make the world a worse place to live.

    There is a significant chance that we will just force people to choose a horrific way to die or (perhaps worse) a way that is as likely to leave them in a horrific but not dead state as it is to kill them.

    Besides, how will we cook without knives?

  7. Cost of making the entire world 'safe'? by burtosis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can only imagine the costs of changing every last bridge, high area, train track, city sidewalk, etc. into hampster style fenced off tunnels to be, at a minimum, in the hundreds of billions of US dollars (world costs in the tens of trillions) while leaving hundreds of millions of homes in the US alone still chock full of methods to commit suicide anyway. Not to mention natural areas - are we going to fence off every cliff within a few miles of a homestead too?
    Here's a thought that's way out there; let's spend those billions on research and development of new medication and treatments instead - that would likely have a far bigger impact. Sadly it's just poorly thought through emotional click bait instead of a sane approach to solving a serious problem. It's as if the rationality of humans is as well evolved as our lower spines.

  8. Not true by aepervius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "People who are serious about suicide will always find a way"

    No You don't. At some point in my teenage life I came to that dark place. But since the easy method was removed from my reach, I did not go for other method. the moment *passed*. In fact suicide is not always associated with a mental illness. I see many poster here pretend that, but it is not. Suicide is a symptom that somebody feels is in a situation where living further is more painful than dying. It CAN be a symptom of mental illness but also simply a symptom of intense physical pain or a symptom of plain stupid teenage angst. And for the last group, removing the easy means can simply make the person force to have more time to think.And thus prevent suicide. And then post about it on slashdot 25 years later.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  9. Re:The roots of suicide are buried in religion by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The primal roots of suicide are buried in religion and thoughts of an after-life. The sooner people wake up to that fact and seek to correct it, the better.

    Oddly enough, most religions do not predict a pleasant afterlife for suicides.

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  10. Re:Suicide: the planners and the spontaneous by StikyPad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just one point: Talking or "joking" about committing suicide are high risk factors. It may be "attention seeking" as well, but in many cases, suicidal people feel socially isolated and genuinely need attention.