Some thoughts on #ZeroSuicide

(First thought: Gosh. Second post. Responding to media coverage was one of the aims of this blog, but not the first. I wasn’t expecting the government to launch a major new suicide prevention strategy less than a week after it went live…)

Balancing “It’s brilliant anyone’s talking about this at all” with my cynical “Yeah but…” face, from what I’ve read today, these seem to be the overriding thoughts and concerns:

  • Is timing stories about depression and mental health, however well-meant, to the baloney “Blue Monday” very sensible? I’m not sure. On one hand it deflects attention from a silly marketing stunt to a serious point. On the other, as this blog post from a few years ago says, using Blue Monday as a news peg risks conflating being a bit narked off with winter and fancying a holiday with having a suicide plan (edited to add: You can be both, too).
  • Where’s the money for all these resources coming from? Words aren’t helpful without funding attached.
  • Who and what defines someone “at risk” in a mental health context? If it’s defined as “likely to cause trouble in the community and create headlines we don’t want”, that’s missing a lot of people.
  • How does this square with policies which have made life more difficult for quite a lot of vulnerable people? We should be careful about directly linking policies – or any single cause – to suicide, but adding to environmental risk factors isn’t good practice.
  • Is this likely to help those in the middle ground between entry-level and crisis point – currently being neglected?
  • How about people who already have decent access to therapy (either on the NHS or privately) but are still greatly at risk? We need to address this too. And definitely not to think “Well, if a well-off person who can afford therapy until it comes out of their ears can die let’s not even bother with the poor.”
  • How is this initiative going to be communicated from now on? Announcing a “raft” of new measures and services (cf: Words Only Journalists Use) doesn’t mesh well with “cracking down” on “misuse” of services like A&E if people who don’t understand complex systems are going to end up there because they don’t know what else is available or how to access it.
  • Is this being developed in conjunction with suicide survivors/bereavement survivors based on what they think might have helped them/their loved ones? It’s great the message is being spread that suicide is preventable, but it needs to be an informed one.




    1. In a sense, with my media-trained hat, I can understand their reasoning but it’s like pegging an anti-obesity drive to the week before Christmas, which similarly implies “people who indulge a bit at a time when everyone does” and “people at serious health risk for multiple complex reasons” are in the same category.


      1. I was also uneasy about that bit re: self-harm – not its being included because for some people it is part of an experience that includes suicidal ideation, but I feel like when it gets brought up it needs a lot of caveats about how not everything doing it/feeling like doing it is suicidal, and – very importantly in the context of this initiative – not everyone suicidal is going to begin by self-harming.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s