One of the most established “truths” in suicidology is that almost all (90 % or more) of those who kill themselves suffer from one or more mental disorders, and a causal link between the two is implied. Psychological autopsy (PA) studies constitute one main evidence base for this conclusion. However, there has been little reflection on the reliability and validity of this method. For example, psychiatric diagnoses are assigned to people who have died by suicide by interviewing a few of the relatives and/or friends, often many years after the suicide. In this article, we scrutinize PA studies with particular focus on the diagnostic process and demonstrate that they cannot constitute a valid evidence base for a strong relationship between mental disorders and suicide. We show that most questions asked to assign a diagnosis are impossible to answer reliably by proxies, and thus, one cannot validly make conclusions. Thus, as a diagnostic tool psychological autopsies should now be abandoned. Instead, we recommend qualitative approaches focusing on the understanding of suicide beyond mental disorders, where narratives from a relatively high number of informants around each suicide are systematically analyzed in terms of the informants’ relationships with the deceased.

Applying a cognitive approach, the purpose of the present study was to expand previous research on stress-vulnerability models of depression and problem-solving deficits, as it relates to suicide attempt. Structural equation modelling, involving latent variables, was used to evaluate (a) whether low self-esteem, a low sense of self-efficacy, loneliness, and divorce constituted vulnerability factors for the development of depression; (b) whether hopelessness and suicidal ideation mediated the relationship between depression and suicide attempt; and (c) whether problem-solving deficits mediated the relationship between the vulnerability factors and suicide attempt, separate from depression/hopelessness. A total of 123 individuals, aged 18-75 years, participated in the study (72 suicide attempters and 51 psychiatric outpatients with no history of suicidal behavior). The results indicated a two path model of suicide attempt. The first path began with low self-esteem, loneliness, and separation or divorce, which advanced to depression, and was further mediated by hopelessness and suicidal ideation which led to suicide attempt. The second path developed from low self-esteem and a low sense of self-efficacy and advanced to suicide attempt, mediated by a negative appraisal of one's own problem-solving capacity, and poor interpersonal problem-solving skills. The importance of addressing both depression/hopelessness, and problem-solving deficits when working with suicide attempters is noted.

Too often ethical boards delay or stop research projects with vulnerable populations, influenced by presumed rather than empirically documented vulnerability. The article investigates how participation is experienced by those bereaved by suicide. Experiences are divided into 3 groups: (a) overall positive (62%), (b) unproblematic (10%), and (c) positive and painful (28%). The positive experiences are linked to processes of meaning-making, gaining new insight, and a hope to help others. Objective factors concerning the gender of participants, their relationship to the deceased, the method of suicide, and time since loss were largely unrelated to their experience of the interview.

No abstract

This study explores barriers to help-seeking among young men prior to suicide. We analyzed 61 in-depth interviews with parents, siblings, friends, and ex-partners of 10 young men (aged 18-30) with no record of mental illness, as well as 6 suicide notes, using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Three barriers emerged: (a) a total defeat; (b) no room for weakness; and (c) fear of mental disorder. The shame from falling short of standards (own/significant male others') could be a considerable barrier to help-seeking in a suicidal crisis.