Representing suicide: Giving voice to a desire to die?

Suicide and the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study of discourse on an online pro-choice for suicide discussion forum

The COVID-19 pandemic had a widespread impact on millions of individuals. Many turned to social media as an outlet for sharing personal experiences, such as the impact of the pandemic on suicidality. The purpose of this study was to understand the pandemic's impact on individuals who discuss their suicidality on social media. Keywords were used to search for discussion threads (N = 118) related to the pandemic on an online pro-choice for suicide forum. Using reflexive thematic analysis, six themes related to the pandemic's impact on mental health, suicidality, living conditions, and optimism were identified. Examination of the content from pro-choice for suicide forums may yield authentic information on the impact of the pandemic on those considering suicide. This study contributes to our understanding of the nuances of factors impacting mental health and suicidality during the pandemic, including unique risk and protective factors.

Qualitative research in suicidology: a systematic review of the literature of low-and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

Suicide is more prevalent among disadvantaged, discriminated, and marginalised people with the majority of global suicide deaths occurring in the low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). This can be attributed to sociocultural contexts and exacerbated by access to limited resources and services that can assist with early identification, treatment, and support. Accurate information on the personal experiences of suicide is lacking, as many LMICs legislate that suicide is illegal.

METHODS

This study aims to review the qualitative literature to explore the experiences of suicide in LMICs from the first-person perspective. Following the PRISMA-2020 guidelines, the search for qualitative literature published between January 2010 and December 2021 was undertaken. A total number of 110 qualitative articles from 2569 primary studies met the inclusion criteria. Included records were appraised, extracted, and synthesised.

RESULTS

The results provide lived experience insight into suicide from those living in LMICs, including understanding variations of the causes of suicides, the impacts on others exposed to suicide, existing support systems, and prevention measures to reduce suicide among LMICs. The study offers a contemporaryunderstanding of how people in LMIC experience suicide.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings and recommendations are derived from the similarities and differences within the existing knowledge base that is dominated by evidence from high-income countries. Timely suggestions for future researchers, stakeholders, and policymakers are provided.

The Googlization of Health: Invasiveness and corporate responsibility in media discourses on Facebook's algorithmic programme for suicide prevention

Big tech companies increasingly play a role in the domain of health. Also called the "Googlization of Health", this phenomenon is often studied by drawing on the notion of 'hostile worlds', where market values and common goods are incommensurable. Yet, the 'hostile worlds' theory is not uncontested; scholars for instance argue that the justifications of big tech companies are important analytical considerations as well. Building on this literature, in this paper I report on a case study of Facebook employing AI for suicide prevention, moving beyond Facebook's justifications only to study the ways in which media commentators and their audiences discussed Facebook's programme and the values they saw as being at stake. In the results, I show how invasiveness was, in different ways and forms, a main theme in thinking about Facebook using AI to do suicide prevention. Commentators and readers alike discussed how: 1) Facebook takes corporate responsibility with this initiative, or alternatively Facebook only has commercial interests and uses the notion of 'public good' to transgress spheres and sectors even further, thus being invasive; 2) Facebook's AI suicide prevention programme is invasive in relation to privacy and privacy laws, or, instead, people give up their privacy willingly in exchange for entertainment; 3) The programme undermines, rather than enhances, safety; 4) Suicide prevention in itself is already invasive. These different forms of invasiveness, I argue in the conclusion, also imply responsibility for different actors, from AI itself to Facebook through to medical professionals. Moreover, they show what values are at stake in, and transformed through, Facebook's AI suicide prevention programme, going beyond the frames of privacy and surveillance capitalism.