As someone who's in the biomedical field, I feel like I need to comment on this.
Homeopathy helps in the sense that it is a placebo. It gives you more hope in recovering your health, helps you change your habits, etc... because you believe that this will help, thus tricking your mind. I'm not surprised if people think it helps with suicidal tendencies and even other diseases because of this.
In the physicochemical sense, it simply does not work. It is absurdly unlikely that a single bioactive molecule exists in the homeopathic product due to the nature of the dilutions that these are subjected to when prepared. Plus, their proposed physical theories, such as the "memory of water" that people evoke to counter the dilution question, have not been reliably reported to exist, even going against the fundamentals on how molecules interact with each other, H2O included. The nature of non-covalent bonds of H2O with other H2O molecules and other molecules, atoms and ions in solution is the same whether the bioactive molecule has never been in the solution or if it has been completely removed from the homeopathic product.
There are homeopaths researching the effectiveness of this approach. Unfortunately, the papers reporting their studies have severe flaws in aspects such as very small cohorts, biasing for positive results, poor quality of reported evidence (just because the p-value is significant, it doesn't mean that the measured effect is biologically relevant) and non-disclosure of potential conflits of interests. Granted, these are also present in papers that report results of normal clinical trials or that study conventional scientific questions. We even reached to the point where a replication crisis of scientific research exists due to people only publishing positive results, which is actively being discussed in academic circles. However, properly unbiased meta-analyses and systematic reviews tend to weed out these weak reports, and peer-review, subjected during the submission of the paper in high-quality journals and afterwards within the global academic community, also helps in pointing out flaws by assessing the findings on the context of current knowledge and methodologies and attempts to reuse the papers' protocols in other labs, which it's seldom found in homeopathy research (I am not aware of evidence for this method being published in rigourous journals like Science, Nature or The Lancet)
In short, please be wary of using homeopathic products as a first-line treatment. It may make you think you're feeling better by making you think you're feeling better, but if you really want proper help, do look for rigourous medical help. As a rule of thumb, it helps checking what is the consensus of global medical and scientific organizations on therapeutic approaches (this applies not only to psychiatric diseases, but also to cancer, COVID-19, neurological, immune...), even if you feel like you distrust these organizations (corruption is unfortunately rampant in this world, but it is unrealistic to think it will affect all thousands of researchers and medics worldwide at the same time - thus the importance of "scientific consensus"). It also helps if you're up to (re)learn some basic topics on physics, chemistry and biology, and go on from there. Having some commonly used textbooks or even checking Wikipedia as a first approach helps, and then you can read their references and the more influential reviews on these matters by searching on Google Scholar or PubMed. But always assess potential biases, by checking the authors' affiliations and clinical practices, the journal and the editorial board where the paper has been published, funding agencies... even I have unconscious biases that have influenced this reply.
Some references that could be interesting as entry points: PMID 29599397; PMID 30765373; PMID 12492603; PMID16125589; PMID 35292534; doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-7166.2012.01162.x - papers can also be found on PubMed about drug design and the pharmacodynamics of different potential molecules of interest. If you're lucky, you may even find some beautiful fluorescence microscopy images! If the paper is under a paywall, use Sci-Hub.
