Gendered experiences of unemployment, suicide and self-harm: a population-level record linkage study

BACKGROUND

Unemployment and being not in the labour force (NILF) are risk factors for suicide, but their association with self-harm is unclear, and there is continuing debate about the role of confounding by prior mental health conditions. We examine associations between employment status and self-harm and suicide in a prospective cohort, taking into account prior mental-health-related factors.

METHODS

We used linked data from the New Zealand Integrated Data Infrastructure. The outcomes were chosen to be hospital presentation for self-harm and death by suicide. The exposure was employment status, defined as employed, unemployed, or NILF, measured at the 2013 Census. Confounders included demographic factors and mental health history (use of antidepressant medication, use of mental health services, and prior self-harm). Logistic regression was used to model effects. Analyses were stratified by gender.

RESULTS

For males, unemployment was associated with an increased risk of suicide [odds ratio (OR): 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20-1.84] and self-harm (OR: 1.55, 95% CI: 1.45-1.68) after full adjustment for confounders. NILF was associated with an increased risk of self-harm (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.32-1.55), but less of an association was seen with suicide (OR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.94-1.49). For females, unemployment was associated with an increased risk of suicide (OR: 1.30, 95% CI: 0.93-1.80) and of self-harm (OR: 1.52, 95% CI: 1.43-1.62), and NILF was associated with a similar increase in risk for suicide (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 0.98-1.75) and self-harm (OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.26-1.40).

DISCUSSION

Exclusion from employment is associated with a considerably heightened risk of suicide and self-harm for both men and women, even among those without prior mental health problems.

Eating disorders in New Zealand: Implications for Māori and health service delivery

OBJECTIVE

Lifetime prevalence rates in Te Rau Hinengaro (The New Zealand Mental Health Survey) suggest eating disorders are at least as common in the Māori population as the non-Māori population, yet little is known at a population level about those accessing specialist mental health treatment for eating disorders in New Zealand. The aim of this study was to describe the population undergoing specialist mental health treatment for eating disorders and compare Māori and non-Māori clinical characteristics and service use.

METHOD

This study uses the Programme for the Integration of Mental Health Data data set, managed by the New Zealand Ministry of Health to describe the characteristics of people with eating disorders and their use of specialist mental health services from 2009 to 2016.

RESULTS

There were 3,835 individuals with a diagnosed eating disorder who had contact with specialist mental health services in this time period, 7% of whom were Māori. Within the cohort, Māori had a higher prevalence for a bulimia nervosa diagnosis, fewer diagnosed with anorexia nervosa, and a higher prevalence of other psychiatric comorbidity than non-Māori.

DISCUSSION

There is discrepancy between the proportion of service users accessing specialist mental health services who are Māori and the assessed crude prevalence of eating disorders for Māori in national estimates. Once Māori are in specialist services; however, their use of services is comparable to non-Māori. Further research is needed to highlight the experiences of those Māori with eating disorders and address barriers to accessing services for Māori with eating disorders.

Is there systemic bias for Māori with eating disorders? A need for greater awareness in the healthcare system

The New Zealand Mental Health Survey, Te Rau Hinengaro, indicated that eating disorders are at least as common in Māori as non-Māori, which is consistent with international findings that eating disorders exist in other indigenous and ethnic minority groups. Specific factors may be relevant to the development and treatment of eating disorders in the Māori population. We suggest this may include differential exposure to risk factors, the impact of acculturation, changing body image ideals and systemic bias reducing access to treatment and research participation. However, an absence of high-quality research regarding eating disorders in Māori makes it difficult to be certain about this. We suspect that Māori do not receive treatment in specialist eating disorders services at a level commensurate with comparable prevalence data in New Zealand and that a significant contributory factor to the apparent unmet need for Māori with eating disorders is likely to be systemic bias. Urgent attention to this area of research is required.