Suicide is a perfect example of an anti-social behavior that must be stigmatized because the stigma itself serves as a major barrier to its proliferation. Removing the stigma might make it easier on survivors and family, but it will actually increase the suicide rate by legitimizing suicide as an option for people that otherwise wouldn't do it. It's one of those situations where life must be accepted as something of a living hell and we can't make it better anytime soon.
When we interview people who attempted suicide but somehow survived (they would have died if they hadn't got timely medical attention) we see shame is a common emotion.
These people know that ending their life is wrong, and this knowledge combined with their desire to end their life makes them feel worse, and it prevents them seeking help, and it makes it more likely that they will die.
Example: if a doctor asks you about suicidal thoughts in a negative phrasing (e.g. "No thoughts of harming yourself?" or "You're not planning on doing anything silly, are you?"), then you're significantly less likely to admit to suicidal thoughts. We have clinically effective interventions for reducing suicide risk, so even very subtle stigma could cost lives by stopping people from coming forward.
Would a student be more likely to admit to "thoughts of doing a school shooting" if school shootings weren't stigmatized? Yes, probably. Would an abuser be more likely to admit to "thoughts of beating up his wife" if domestic violence was not stigmatized? Yes, probably. But there is a very good reason why we stigmatize anti-social behaviors. They hurt other people. The stigma reinforces that message and removing the stigma hides that message. We are "the other people" and if you do that, you will hurt us too, not just yourself, so we aren't going to pretend it's okay because it isn't.
The removal of stigmatization might make it easier for us to identify people doing awful things, but just knowing about something doesn't stop them from doing awful things. You aren't fixing the problem by getting them to admit it, you're just becoming more aware of that particular person's problems while also green-lighting half a dozen other people to do the same.
Yes, I realize that removing the stigma around suicide might help that subset of the population that are already in the midst of it, but what about in five years? Ten years? What effect will that have on others?
We can't know for sure, but there is a common theme when it comes to the normalization of anti-social behavior. It helps the one, but hurts the many.
You can look those that have attempted suicide in the eye and tell them not to be ashamed, but could you preach that message to a group of bullied teenagers after seeing the results of this study?
Why should suicide be seen as anti-social? You are trying to force those who just want their unbearable pain to be over to continue to live. I never understood it being seen as selfish for a similar reason. I disagree stigma will reduce the suicide rate - when I do feel very suicidal, I can tell you I don't care what anyone thinks. Pretty much the only reason I am alive is I haven't figured out a way to actually end it that's somewhat guaranteed, painless, and irreversible - I know if I were to fail an attempt and end up in the hospital, people like you would force me to stay alive, weather it be throwing me in a padded white room or giving me drugs. Oh perhaps if I'm in enough physical pain, my pain will be legitimized and I'll be allowed euthanasia.
And yet, somehow I am the anti-social one.
[this is a throwaway account so that I can talk openly about being depressed and suicidal]
One of the most important things to understand about depression and suicide is that those who are in the middle of it are in an altered state of mind. They are locked into thought patterns that are self-reinforcing and prevent rational understanding. A person who is depressed and suicidal is literally unfit for making such decisions about their life.
When the suicidal thoughts and depressed state abate, it's as if the person is suddenly a different person, of a different mind. Problems that once seemed insurmountable are no longer so. Positive things that seemed irrelevant or invisible before are suddenly there again and meaningful. It doesn't mean that all of one's problems go away or don't matter; it means that life seems livable again--and the only thing that has changed is one's thought patterns.
It's almost like the mind is drunk on despair. And just like a drunk person is unfit to drive a car, a person who is "drunk on despair"--depressed and suicidal--is unfit to "drive" their own life.
If you recognize that you are in a state of mind like this, you must use whatever rational part of your mind that remains to reject all of the thoughts and impulses of the despairing part. Don't give the drunk the keys to the car; he will kill not only himself, but likely harm many others as well. And don't ignore him, because he'll probably get drunk again tomorrow and want the keys again. Go, take him to get help, now, while you can.
There are people whose entire life's work is to help people in need like this. Let them help you.
The problem is that for some people, that 'drunk' state is chronic, never-ending and for all intents and purposes, permanent.
Depression isn't just the low feeling after a bad breakup, or a job loss or some other life hurdle. Sometimes it's a chronic condition that may not ever end because it doesn't have any of those typical 'triggers', it's clinical and relentless.
When you understand that, you'll see why that in telling someone their planned suicide is merely 'a permanent solution to a temporary problem' they look at you with nothing more than contempt.
Because you don't understand what its like. You never will.
Your comment may be an example of what I'm talking about: it's not a rational response to what I said, so you may be inhibited from understanding my comment rationally. Let's look at each part:
> The problem is that for some people, that 'drunk' state is chronic, never-ending and for all intents and purposes, permanent.
There is undoubtedly an element of "talking past each other" here. There are degrees of despair, of depression. There are permanent circumstances and temporary ones. But you have generalized to one extreme while ignoring the other, which isn't right or fair.
There are many people who want to commit suicide and even attempt it due to truly temporary circumstances. It is absolutely true that in such cases, the real problem was the state of mind and not the circumstances. So it's absolutely right to remind such people that they are contemplating "a permanent solution to a temporary problem."
And it's absolutely wrong for you to lump such cases into others, as if they were right to consider or actually commit suicide.
Beyond that, there are many people who live fulfilling, meaningful lives despite debilitating, permanent circumstances. What is the difference between their difficult yet livable lives and those who choose suicide? The difference is state of mind. This does not belittle their suffering--it honors those who carry on despite suffering. Their example edifies us all--if we are willing to see it.
> Depression isn't just the low feeling after a bad breakup, or a job loss or some other life hurdle. Sometimes it's a chronic condition that may not ever end because it doesn't have any of those typical 'triggers', it's clinical and relentless.
> When you understand that, you'll see why that in telling someone their planned suicide is merely 'a permanent solution to a temporary problem' they look at you with nothing more than contempt.
> Because you don't understand what its like. You never will.
That is definitely an irrational response to my comment. You have no idea who I am and what my experiences are. You have created an image of me in your mind and are misdirecting your anger toward it.
I have no idea who you are or what your experiences are; I don't know if you are seeking escape from your own problems, or whether you feel guilt about others' poor choices that you weren't able to prevent.
But your judgment regarding these issues is definitely impaired by your current state of mind. This is plain because you are not responding rationally.
This is not necessarily something to be ashamed of; it's part of the human condition. We all suffer this at times in our lives.
The question now is whether you will remain angry and in denial, or whether you are willing to recognize the problem and seek help to grow. Maybe you are going through the stages of grief, in which case you should recognize that and give yourself time; recognize that what has happened, has happened, and what remains now is to adjust your state of mind and move on.
In any case, what is clear from your comment is that your current state of mind is unfit for interpreting and judging rationally. You absolutely can see circumstances and past events differently in the future, if you will allow yourself.
There are people who make it their life's work to help people in need like this, to solve serious problems, to adapt, to grieve, to grow. This does not promise solutions to all problems, nor permanent ones. But life remains livable and worth living. Let those people help you find a way forward.
I'm trying to interpret your post in the most charitable way possible but the common theme I'm seeing (and I apologise if I'm wrong) in all those paragraphs is
"You are not fit to make decisions regarding your own life because your are broken. Live is awesome, accept it."
You are never going to reach anyone suffering from a mental illness with that attitude. You simply will not.
Let's first address the fact that you seem to be addressing me as if I'm the one currently struggling with suicide (I'm not). You're telling me that my opinions on the subject are invalid and dismissable simply for that reason. Not only does that break HN's guidelines, but it's a complete non-sequitur and a poison pill to the debate.
This is why people who actually need help won't listen to you and others like you, regardless of how well-meaning your intentions, because you are not actually interested in listening to them which is what they need most. You want them to stay alive, but beyond that people don't really give the depressive much thought.
I have to wonder how much they just want to stop something they find deeply uncomfortable, not for the sake of the depressed person, but for themselves.
> And it's absolutely wrong for you to lump such cases into others, as if they were right to consider or actually commit suicide.
Nowhere did I say they should definitely commit suicide so I'd appreciate it if you didn't heavily imply that. I simply said that you telling them that their problem is temporary is not going to help as much as you think. Simply pointing out the obvious to these people isn't the profound insight you think it is. They've heard it a million times before and it doesn't help.
And then there are the people for whom the problem is simply not temporary, but chronic.
> But your judgment regarding these issues is definitely impaired by your current state of mind. This is plain because you are not responding rationally.
Again. Awesome way to completely dismiss what I'm saying. Address what I'm saying, not the reasons you have invented in your head for why you think I might be saying them.
And be charitable with your interpretations of what I'm saying. It's an HN guideline.
> That is definitely an irrational response to my comment. You have no idea who I am and what my experiences are. You have created an image of me in your mind and are misdirecting your anger toward it.
When I said 'you' here I wasn't referring to you specifically. I meant you as in people who try to reason with depressives in this way by telling them their problems are temporary. Even if that was true (which you acknowledge in some cases it simply isn't) I'm, just telling you that it is a seriously unhelpful and often condescending manner to take with such a person.
> But your judgment regarding these issues is definitely impaired by your current state of mind. This is plain because you are not responding rationally.
You keep attacking me rather than the points I am making. You are really not coming across positively by doing this. It is completely toxic to a debate. It may also come as a surprise to you but people with depression or anxiety or whetever else are still capable of critical thinking and reasoning. They are not psychotic.
In fact the next four paragraphs are more the same dismissive crap without subtance. You've broken at least two of the site guidelines regarding charitable interpretations of another user's posts and addressing the point of their posts instead of shallow dismissals in the form of ad-hominem attacks on their character.
You are only interested in being listened to, not in listening. That there, is the crux of my argument. You suck at reasoning with depressives, and apparently people who disagree with you.
And in spite of me knowing nothing about you or your life, I'm comfortable making the assertion that you know nothing about this subject and have had very little exposure to people who do. You are no more than an armchair psychologist.
That much is clear to me simply because you clearly have not the first idea of how to actually talk to someone with these kinds of issues.
The common theme in your writing is projection and hypocrisy.
> "You are not fit to make decisions regarding your own life because your are broken. Live is awesome, accept it."
People are broken. Life is not always awesome. We live, we suffer, we die. Along the way, we cause suffering for others and ourselves. Do you deny this?
Yet, that is not the totality of human existence. We have the capacity for good as well as evil.
What you should accept is that circumstances can be interpreted and handled in many ways; some are productive, some destructive. The choice is yours.
> You are never going to reach anyone suffering from a mental illness with that attitude. You simply will not.
I hate to sound petty, but must I direct you to the post from "sad-throwaway" in which he indicated that I did? Perhaps your beliefs do not encompass the entirety of human experience. [1]
> Let's first address the fact that you seem to be addressing me as if I'm the one currently struggling with suicide (I'm not).
I'm glad you're not suicidal.
I did not say that you were. Unlike you, I did not make such unfounded assumptions. I said that it was a possibility, which, not knowing you, it was.
> You're telling me that my opinions on the subject are invalid and dismissable simply for that reason.
No, I said that your reaction to my comment was objectively irrational, which it was.
> Not only does that break HN's guidelines, but it's a complete non-sequitur and a poison pill to the debate.
Had I taken all the poison pills you have deposited here, I'd be dead many times over.
> This is why people who actually need help won't listen to you and others like you, regardless of how well-meaning your intentions
See #1.
> because you are not actually interested in listening to them which is what they need most
As I said, you have conjured an image of me in your mind. That is irrational. I am not the other people you have dealt with in your life. Stop treating me as if I am. [2]
> You want them to stay alive, but
"Yeah, you want to save their lives, but you don't actually care about them!"
> beyond that people don't really give the depressive much thought. I have to wonder how much they just want to stop something they find deeply uncomfortable, not for the sake of the depressed person, but for themselves.
See #2.
> Nowhere did I say they should definitely commit suicide so I'd appreciate it if you didn't heavily imply that.
I need not imply that; your other comments in these threads have shown that you don't actually object to suicide when you think it's justified. Why you think you're qualified to make such decisions is unknown; regardless, you are not.
> you telling them that their problem is temporary is not going to help as much as you think. Simply pointing out the obvious to these people isn't the profound insight you think it is. They've heard it a million times before and it doesn't help.
See #1.
There are many truths in any circumstance. Depending on one's state of mind, some are more acceptable than others.
So what is your argument? Should there be a decision tree, used to decide which truths to present to which people, depending on their state of mind? Who will make it? You?
Or is your argument that, if I present one of those truths in a case in which you, personally, don't think it will be effective, that it is proof that I don't care about other people and their suffering? Such an argument would be plainly illogical, yet it seems to be what you're getting at.
I suggest you stop wasting time--write your dissertations and journal articles and books, and get yourself on the DSM committee, so your profound insight can start benefiting the mental health community. Or you can keep pontificating on the Internet.
> And then there are the people for whom the problem is simply not temporary, but chronic.
Such profound insight. I have never experienced nor thought of such a thing. Thank you for sharing!
> Again. Awesome way to completely dismiss what I'm saying.
It is awesome, because your reponse to my comment is objectively irrational. It's amazing, actually, because rather than deal with that problem, you double-down on it, accusing me in your next sentence of your own irrational behavior:
> Address what I'm saying, not the reasons you have invented in your head for why you think I might be saying them.
See #2.
> And be charitable with your interpretations of what I'm saying. It's an HN guideline.
Practice your own admonitions.
> When I said 'you' here I wasn't referring to you specifically. I meant you as in people who try to reason with depressives in this way by telling them their problems are temporary.
Stop saying "you" when you don't mean me. Stop attacking me for what other people do. See #2.
If you want to address "people" who do something you don't like, go write a blog. Don't respond to me personally complaining about other people's actions.
> Even if that was true (which you acknowledge in some cases it simply isn't) I'm, just telling you that it is a seriously unhelpful and often condescending manner to take with such a person.
More profound insights from you! Thank you so much!
Meanwhile, see #1.
Also, lose the weasel words. "Often condescending" means that it's not always condescending, which means that it can be helpful. See #1.
What is condescending is your attempting to assume a position of authority, presuming to instruct others as to what is and is not universally helpful--in direct contravention of the evidence staring you in the face. See #1.
Open your mind to the possibility that your experiences are not universal, and things that you haven't found helpful may in fact be helpful to others.
> > But your judgment regarding these issues is definitely impaired by your current state of mind. This is plain because you are not responding rationally.
> You keep attacking me rather than the points I am making.
No, I attacked your response, which was irrational. I then drew a conclusion about your state of mind based on your making an irrational response. Your words and yourself are not the same thing.
> You are really not coming across positively by doing this.
Do you mean that you don't like me? Or that I won't get as many upvotes as you unless I talk like you? Thank you for telling me! I'll be sure to adjust my performance for our audience.
> It is completely toxic to a debate.
So we're having a debate? Well then, what is actually toxic to a debate are these things you have done:
1. Ascribing to me thoughts, beliefs, and motivations which I have not exhibited.
2. Attacking me for other people's actions.
3. Doubling-down on those mistakes rather than admitting and correcting them.
4. Refusing to account for evidence which contradicts your assertions.
> In fact the next four paragraphs are more the same dismissive crap without subtance. You've broken at least two of the site guidelines regarding charitable interpretations of another user's posts and addressing the point of their posts instead of shallow dismissals in the form of ad-hominem attacks on their character.
I could also cite you for multiple violations of The Guidelines. I'll settle for admonishing you for the general "charitable interpretation" one, which should cover things like attacking your made-up image of me and blaming me for others' actions. If you stop breaking your rules, then you can complain.
> You are only interested in being listened to, not in listening. That there, is the crux of my argument. You suck at reasoning with depressives, and apparently people who disagree with you.
So you finally admit it: according to you, the crux of your argument is based entirely on your mind-reading me through the Internet. And you think you are an authority on reasoning with people! I rest my case.
By the way, telling me that I suck is definitely against The Guidelines. It's also an ad hominem. I'm only telling you because, apparently, you aren't aware, otherwise you wouldn't have said that, right?
> And in spite of me knowing nothing about you or your life, I'm comfortable making the assertion that you know nothing about this subject and have had very little exposure to people who do.
If this were a debate, why would I need to argue after your saying this? Of what value is an admitted argument from ignorance?
And why would I bother, since it shows that you are not arguing with me, but with your preconceived notions.
By the way, it's not merely an assertion, it's an assumption. See #2.
> That much is clear to me simply because you clearly have not the first idea of how to actually talk to someone with these kinds of issues.
"I favor a different approach, therefore you know nothing and have no experience." Solid argument. Definitely a winning line in this "debate."
If there's any rational part of your intellect available for talking to, that doesn't have a preformulated response ready, please pass this along: Notice a key distinction between us: I have never assumed your experiences or lack thereof. In fact, I have explicitly admitted my ignorance of them. In contrast, I have lost count of the number of times you have accused me of ignorance and assumed my experiences or lack thereof. You are not being rational, nor logical, nor (to the extent relevant) scientific You are simply regurgitating attacks against people who are not myself.
Quite frankly, it's a waste of our time. Either step up to the plate, or go back to the dugout. Standing outside the batter's box, saying, "The pitcher made a face at me," swinging the bat, and circling the bases, doesn't count as a home run.
Because the pain is bearable if you've survived this long. Emotional pain can be controlled in ways physical pain can't. I wouldn't dare delegitimize your feelings, so understand that isn't what is intended when I say that it is all in your head.
>when I do feel very suicidal, I can tell you I don't care what anyone thinks.
That right there, thats antisocial. You aren't considering those around you. Do you have no family? No friends? No coworkers? Nobody? Even people who "truly have nobody" usually have people around them that they aren't appreciating. People who would be devastated, and feel guilty for the rest of their life.
It also is murder of your future self potential. You have absolutely no clue what the future holds, what your interaction with it might be, and in a sense you have no right to take that from your future self. Personally I see this as equivalent to murder. I've been in dark places before, and I am very very very happy that my past self didn't kill present me.
Suicide is a bug in the human program, it must be allowed in order for us to be able to think freely, but it is absolutely never the correct option for anyone that isn't terminally ill and on their deathbed already. (assisted suicide for physical issues with no potential good future makes sense. Suicide for anything else is almost certainly a mistake, an incorrect action)
Please get help, talk to people around you. Look at what causes the pain you feel and think about if you maybe are holding onto assumptions about how the world works that are keeping you from exploring what's good in life. One perspective I've seen is that nobody should be truly suicidal ever, because once you are, you may as well just do anything and everything you can imagine, you're already going to die, so why not during something exciting. Theres an irony in it, since someone suicidal often may not feel they even have doing anything they could imagine as an option, and if they were to actually do such things, they'd likely no longer be suicidal. If you at all can, try to do the things. I don't know what else to say, I've been in a place where I'd say similar things as you do, and looking back it was absolutely wrong. Not that you are bad at all, but you are wrong in the way you are looking at things, and that, at least in part, is causing your pain. The real cause of the pain is something only you know, best of luck dealing with it.
Suicide causes long-term emotional pain for your family and friends.
>this is a throwaway account so that I can talk openly about being depressed and suicidal
Do you want people who don't know you and know hardly anything about your pain to engage in discussion with you? I will, but full disclosure -- it's because I don't want you or anyone to commit suicide.
>Suicide causes long-term emotional pain for your family and friends.
I have been in long-term emotional pain, and likely will be for the rest of my life. Yes, I do not want to cause others to feel pain - but why should I continue to deal with crushing pain just to spare others from pain that will likely pass?
>Do you want people who don't know you and know hardly anything about your pain to engage in discussion with you?
I don't see how that makes a difference.
When I do speak to people in my life, it's not like it's helpful in any way. They just seem worried and concerned. That's touching, sure, but does not actually help.
If anything, people often say to speak to a therapist - someone who doesn't know you.
It's a nerd thing. If I see someone's shoe untied I tell them. If I see someone trying to cut their steak with the dull edge of a knife I tell them to flip it over. If I see someone forgetting that this world is big, and being alive is interesting, I tell them not to commit suicide.
A good therapist probably exists. You should figure out how to find her or him.
[EDIT] Admittedly, the untied shoe and the steak knife are trivial problems that disappear once corrected, while the suffering that leads to ideas of suicide isn't, but it's the same internal motivation for me in all three cases. I'll also add that although this is the main reason I don't want people to commit suicide, there are others. One of these is that people who seriously consider suicide are different thinkers than I am, and a diversity of minds is useful and interesting.
I think its selfish and unfair to judge other people selfish and unfair just because you want to save yourself the pain of loss.
That said, I do think people have the right to voluntarily end their own existence, but clearly many suicides are a result of temporary mental problems like severe depression, or temporary life problems like crippling debt, job loss or loss of a relationship. These things could have potentially been resolved.
I also think it's totally possible to have just had enough of life as well. It's an unpopular opinion because survival instinct is such a strong force, but I really don't think life is for everybody, and if that person wants to check out they are going to do it whether you like it or not.
A comedian once said;
“Life is like a movie, if you've sat through more than half of it and it’s sucked every second so far, it probably isn't going to get great right at the end and make it all worthwhile. None should blame you for walking out early.”
I tend to agree with that. Not all suicides are the result of mental illness. Some people just want to check out early because they never enjoyed being here, despite not having what outside observers may identify as mental or personal problems.
Some societies glorified suicide, or held it as a way out of dishonour (think the ship's captain locking himself in a room with a bottle of whiskey and a revolver, or the Samurai that accepted their own deaths long before they walked on the battlefield).
I think our attitudes towards suicide are partly social (it alarms us to see members of our own species ending their lives, as it doesn't jive well with our world view) and partly cultural/religious (Abrahamic religions treated suicide as a mortal sin) and other cultures may see the act of self-termination differently.
I also don't think its helpful to throw accusations of 'mental illness' around as easily as we seem to. Whether it is a suicide or a mass murder, instantly jumping to mental illness absolves us of the need to understand this uncomfortable aspect of humanity.
It is easier than accepting the cultural and philisophical factors at play, and the realisation that we are all capable of these acts given the right set of circumstances.
Philosophers have long pondered this question. You can find arguments for and against here;
> Because you have value. Unless you're literally hitler, you have value, and probably a lot of it actually.
This is such an economists view on humanity and I can't help but wonder that assigning 'value' to people is part of what leads to increased suicide rates in the West in the first place.
You want this person to stay alive and continue suffering, because they represent value to you. Dead, they are of no value to you.
It's not the person's well-being you're interested in, it's what they can offer you to make your own life easier.
How is that not selfish but ending your own suffering is?
You've got a cynical view of things. Fact is, I and grandparent were reassuring sad-throwaway that they are worthy and valued. Your skepticism just throws another negative data point about humanity on the huge pile sad-throwaway has to contend with. Not cool, bro. You chose darkness.
But then you run afoul of those seeking to having euthanasia viewed as a right. And as for the distinction between the two topics, people will commonly give a distinction that seems reasonable at the 50K' view but which breaks down at the 500' view.
