> Are you implying a significant enough fraction of people that it bears discussing tries to commit suicide but doesn't really want to die
Yes. This is why some countries use "accidental death with undetermined intent" as part of their definition of suicide.
Some people self harm frequently and severely. When we talk to them we find out that they do not want to die; that they fear death. But their self harm is so severe and extensive that they are at risk of death. For example, we see people trying to engage with mental health services, trying to get treatment for their self harm, but continuing to self harm and then accidentally dying by overdose.
> I don't understand why you are suddenly making this about one specific set of people.
Suicide kills significant numbers of people. It's important that advice is evidence based. "Have company" is not evidence based. When we give incorrect advice it increases risk; people die.
It's important that advice is evidence based. "Have company" is not evidence based. When we give incorrect advice it increases risk; people die.
A former homemaker telling her story on a discussion forum does not carry the same weight of authority as, say, the CDC in the US putting out official guidelines on how to deal with a suicidal person.
I'm not the only person who has found it helpful to deal with my own suicidal tendencies by seeking a "babysitter" in my social circle. President Lincoln was prone to being suicidal. It was his policy to never carry a pocket knife and to have friends keep him company when his dark moods struck.
I know there are other things I've read pertinent that support the idea that this is an effective approach for some people. I can't currently recall more and I'm in the midst of moving right this minute, plus you have an extremely long history of attacking me personally, wildly misinterpreting my remarks, etc.
I do my level best to view that pattern as due to you being British and me American -- "two nations separated by a common language" -- but the pattern is so consistent that it's quite difficult for me to keep doing that. I cannot recall a single instance where your interaction with me did not feel like a personal attack.
Taking it down from actively and openly ugly and hostile to politely shooting me down doesn't read on my end like you've had a change of heart and are trying to build bridges. It reads on my end like you've just gotten better at politely following the rules while pursuing a personal campaign to go after me for some reason.
If your actual concern is that you believe me to be giving advice in some authoritative fashion that suggests "this is the one and only proper answer" -- which I generally do my best to not do -- there are many ways to address that concern that don't come across like you don't want me speaking on this subject at all.
I will keep your stated concern in mind and perhaps not intro my remarks with PSA in the future. However, that wasn't used to suggest "this is authoritative advice on the topic." It was used to suggest "This is not a suicidal person crying on your shoulder. It is intended to be a constructive and thought-provoking addition to the conversation." because it's really common for people to engage with my remarks as if I'm looking for sympathy or advice or otherwise make it about me rather than about the topic at hand.
I'm well aware that I can opt to not tell my story, but other people here are usually not told they should never ever say anything about themselves if they don't want intrusive attention of that sort. There seems to be a gendered component to the pattern where simply knowing I'm a woman inspires a lot of people to want to make a personal connection with me, regardless of what I say, rather than engage with my point.
I've been here a decade. I've put in considerable effort to figure out how to better engage here to reduce the worst of the drama, but the reality is that I can't control nor even anticipate every single reaction of the five million people a month that visit this site and it's a moving target. If I solve for x, five minutes later I will be dealing with some new iteration of the problem.
Yes. This is why some countries use "accidental death with undetermined intent" as part of their definition of suicide.
Some people self harm frequently and severely. When we talk to them we find out that they do not want to die; that they fear death. But their self harm is so severe and extensive that they are at risk of death. For example, we see people trying to engage with mental health services, trying to get treatment for their self harm, but continuing to self harm and then accidentally dying by overdose.
> I don't understand why you are suddenly making this about one specific set of people.
Suicide kills significant numbers of people. It's important that advice is evidence based. "Have company" is not evidence based. When we give incorrect advice it increases risk; people die.