• 2-12% suicides worldwide • Approx. 4-5% of all suicides in Great Britain Railway Suicide • In 2017/18: • 310 suspected RS • + 3,345 suicide attempts and ‘pre-suicidal behaviour’ incidents
Epidemiology and Risk Factors (GB) • 73% incidents involving males • “No correlation between RS rate and national suicide rate of counties and boroughs” • Approx. half of all incidents at stations (access from platform) • Peak in April; Mondays (vs. weekend); 3-5pm or 10pm-midnight
Suicide Prevention on the Railway: Anthropology Project The QUEST Study Why do people take their lives on the Railways in Great Britain? Suicide on the Railways in Great Britain: A Multi-Disciplinary Analysis
Suicide Prevention on the Railway: Anthropology Project • 2016 Robin Pharoah (anthropologist) approached by Network Rail. Asked whether anthropological / ethnographic research might have something to offer field of suicide prevention on the railway • Research question: ‘How does the railway ever come to be in a list of options for taking one’s own life in the first place?’ – so not focussed on why people take their own life in the first place, or why people take their life on the railway. More interested in culture, specifically the cultural resources people draw on when thinking about / making plans for suicide • Might be useful for suicide prevention since if we can understand how the railway might get on to a person’s ‘suicide ideation menu’, then we might be able to identify ways it can be taken off that menu
• Focus on particular locations identified as being suicide ‘hotspots’ by British Transport Police (3 suspected suicides or injurious attempt incidents within a 12 month period) • Fieldwork study of local contexts – local communities and local community cultures (or discourses) that surround it. What wanted to understand was why people, in particular locations, might find they thought about / imagined / visualised taking their life on the railway, and this might be as much to do with the way the railway was seen and understood by non-suicidal people as by those who were suicidal • Initial research at 4 different stations. 10 days at each site. Tours of area & interviews with local residents, visits to local stakeholders, station staff interviews, mapping & observation of relevant local spaces, scanning of local news, social media & websites • Study was complex
• Conclusions o Which methods those with suicidal thoughts consider is an important question for the railways, along with the question of how the railway comes to appear in the ideation menu in the first place o Look at how certain locations can become ‘attractive’ to those with suicidal thoughts or intentions o Popular discourses define the social context in which railway suicides take place, and that suicidal individuals exist within, and come from within, that social context o Popular discourses around railway suicide must play a role in determining how the railway can come to appear in any given individual’s ideation menu o Discourses about particular locations must play a role in how certain locations become ‘suicide hotspots’ o Popular discourses around ‘hotspots’ (at least at local level) must also play a role in pushing the railway (or specific railway locations) on to the ideation menu of suicidal people o Some discourses might encourage people to consider railways, whilst others might discourage • Recommendations o Influencing wider narratives which encourage / discourage railway as a site of suicide o Use of industry ‘messaging’
• 1,804 survey responses • 353 rail-related suicidal thoughts The QUEST • 34 made an attempt at a rail location • 34 qualitative interviews (face-to-face; Study: telephone; email) • Analysis of CCTV footage (16 fatalities) • 21,810 news reports of suicidal behaviour Why do people (2012-2015) • 1,292 (5.9%) about suicide on the take their lives railways on the Railways • Internet searches • Suicide-related and rail-specific in Great Britain? keywords/phrases (240 sites) • 61,000 Tweets • 121 suicide-related • Staff survey (N=140)
The QUEST Study Why do people take their lives on the Railways in Great Britain? A research study Online survey: 1,804 responses, a total of 353 survey responders had considered and 23 had attempted suicide at rail locations (including railways and metro/underground). The most frequently reported motivations for contemplating or attempting suicide were perceptions of quick and certain lethality (54 and 37%, respectively) and easy access to rail settings (33 and 38%, respectively). The main factor discouraging people from rail suicide was its wider impact, especially on train drivers (19%). In qualitative interviews ( N = 34) the desire to avoid intervention from others was also a common motivating factor for attempting suicide on the railway networks.
Small Talk Saves Lives The rail industry is working in partnership with Samaritans and the British Transport Police on the Small Talk Saves Lives bystander campaign, launched in November 2017. The first campaign of its type on the railway, it encourages the general public to support those who may be in emotional crisis around them on the railway network. https://www.networkrail.co.uk/communities/safety-in-the-community/safety-campaigns/suicide-prevention/
• Multi-disciplinary insights • ‘Actionable intelligence’ Suicide o ide on t the e Railways i in Great • What associations do people Brit itain: in: make with suicide and the railways? A Mu Mult lti-Dis iscipl iplina inary Analy lysis is • What ‘myths’ exist? Dr Ian Marsh, CCCU • How can/should these be challenged? Dr Lisa Marzano, Ass Prof Social Psychology, Middlesex • What can the rail industry do? University Dr David Mosse, Professor Social Anthropology, SOAS
Phase 1: In-depth analyses of existing ethnographic, survey and interview data with individuals who have Sui uicide o on n the he contemplated or attempted suicide by train, to explore from an Rail ilways i in anthropological and social psychological perspective the ways in Great B Gr Britain in: which railway suicide is constructed in A Mu Mult lti- these accounts. Discip iplin linary Analy lysis is Phase 2: A series of workshops/consultation events with i) individuals with lived experience – suicidal &/or bereaved by suicide, ii) clinical and academic experts, and iii) rail staff
Research participants : Group A: For the purposes of this study, interview participants who had Phase 1 e 1: made a suicide attempt by walking, In-depth analyses of jumping, or lying in front a train. existing ethnographic, survey and interview Group B: For the purposes of this study, interview participants who had data with individuals survived a suicide attempt by another who have method, having considered and/or rejected a rail. contemplated or attempted suicide by Group C: For the purposes of this train study, interview participants who reported thoughts of suicide on the railways but had never made a suicide attempt.
Qualitative Thematic and Discourse Analysis of Railway Suicide Study Data Process of Perception of the deciding on Consideration for railway method, time and others environment place Presence of others Surveillance / as support / being seen / deterrent / human visibility contact
Understanding that people are seeing the railway environment through very different ‘lenses’ can inform prevention initiatives: • For those who describe experiencing distress at a railway site, the environment is often viewed through a ‘mental health’ or ‘help-seeking’ ‘lens’ – that is, opportunities and/or resources Perspecti ctives o of to ameliorate distress are looked for (eg Samaritans phone number, staff availability and parti tici cipants ts likely attitude to being approached, the availability of ‘safe’ spaces). • For those viewing the railway environment through a ‘suicide’ ‘lens’, then avoiding detection and possible intervention become key elements in the perception and appraisal of the spaces.
Open / plural readings of texts First-person accounts of the processes and planning involved in a suicide attempt on the railway • In-depth, qualitative interviews with those who have thought about or attempted to take their own life indicate that people engage in complex and fluid processes when planning and imagining a suicide attempt, ones that frequently involve a dynamic, iterative relationship between the person and their cultural, social and physical environments. • We argue that existing theories and models of suicide which start from assumptions of deficit and pathology underestimate the extent to which suicide, as the end result of an often-complex series of actions, requires a person to engage in logistical processes of planning, decision-making, imagination, and adaptation. • When people describe in their own words the processes they went through in planning and undertaking a suicide attempt, and by not interpreting such accounts through a lens of deficit and pathology, we can arrive at different understandings of suicide.
Recommend
More recommend
