Scientific paper which finds good in SaSu

[2messdup]

Has anyone read this paper I found by following a link on Wikipedia? It's an interesting read. It's not anti-Sasu and should be required reading for all mental health workers and helpline/charity anti-suicide workers. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8674799/

 

[ShatteredSerenity]

I appreciate that they more accurately described pro-choice reactions to suicide by train. Reactions on SaSu are almost always questioning of that method. People always bring up a list of reasons why it could fail or harm other people, even if they don't outright forbid it. That's a more nuanced perspective than reporters who tend to portray pro-choice groups as pro-suicide zealots.

 

[2messdup]

From the abstract of the paper "The accounts described here, gathered using two different methodological approaches, highlight the ethical issues which can surface when there are competing claims to (expert) knowledge, as well as differences in beliefs, attitudes and moral stance towards life and death. We argue that researchers need to reflect on their own ethical-moral position in relation to suicide, and on the practical consequences of their privileging of some voices at the expense of other, less well represented, ones.". I like this. That they are challenging the accepted norm that pro-choice views and suicidal ideation are abnormal and pathological, and questioning that pro-life claims to legitimacy above pro-choice are right. They also attempt to debunk the "suicide is always impulsive" since they've observed that discussions on pro-choice groups often involve planning and organisation. And well said those authors!

I appreciate that they more accurately described pro-choice reactions to suicide by train. Reactions on SaSu are almost always questioning of that method. People always bring up a list of reasons why it could fail or harm other people, even if they don't outright forbid it. That's a more nuanced perspective than reporters who tend to portray pro-choice groups as pro-suicide zealots.

Absolutely agree. I felt more understood individually as well as part of this community when I read the paper. Instead of the usual demonising, it was a far more accurate portrayal of SaSu (although not mentioned by name) and other forums.

 

[tartvinegar]

We should have the right to chose our own death on our own terms. There's nowhere you can safely talk about SI and S without the risk of being involuntarily committed, it's such a taboo in society. Otherwise people think you're "weaponing" suicide as a manipulation tool.

Everyone I've interacted with here has been nice and supportive in their own ways, genuinely one of the most supportive forums I've been in and a lot nicer than people I know IRL.

If someone is already suicidal and they managed to find this website (which is hard to find), then that's their right. I haven't seen anyone encouraging people to CTB, in fact the opposite has even happened. Getting information about a peaceful way to CTB isn't the same as egging someone on to CTB.

The website does share knowledge about how to have a peaceful death with no risk of disability. What people do with that information is up to them. I think we should all be entitled to that knowledge.

 

[2messdup]

We should have the right to chose our own death on our own terms. There's nowhere you can safely talk about SI and S without the risk of being involuntarily committed, it's such a taboo in society. Otherwise people think you're "weaponing" suicide as a manipulation tool.

Everyone I've interacted with here has been nice and supportive in their own ways, genuinely one of the most supportive forums I've been in and a lot nicer than people I know IRL.

If someone is already suicidal and they managed to find this website (which is hard to find), then that's their right. I haven't seen anyone encouraging people to CTB, in fact the opposite has even happened. Getting information about a peaceful way to CTB isn't the same as egging someone on to CTB.

The website does share knowledge about how to have a peaceful death with no risk of disability. What people do with that information is up to them. I think we should all be entitled to that knowledge.

My psychiatric nurse accepts this site as a relevant and good source of support for me. It's referred to as "online peer support group" on the safety plan they have for me in case any of the handwringers come across the plan

 

[NonEssential]

I appreciate that they more accurately described pro-choice reactions to suicide by train. Reactions on SaSu are almost always questioning of that method. People always bring up a list of reasons why it could fail or harm other people, even if they don't outright forbid it. That's a more nuanced perspective than reporters who tend to portray pro-choice groups as pro-suicide zealots.

My feelings on that method are always pretty conflicting, especially as someone who lives pretty near a train station and fantasizes about using it.

 

[quietism]

"compulsory ontology of pathology"- what a great phrase.

Thank you for sharing this lovely paper. It gives a modicum of hope that suicidism may be destigmatised in the future.