Self-inflicted. Deliberate. Death-intentioned. A critical policy analysis of UK suicide prevention policies 2009-2019

IF 1.6 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Public Mental Health Pub Date : 2022-01-17 DOI:10.1108/jpmh-09-2021-0113
Hazel Marzetti, A. Oaten, A. Chandler, Ana Jordan
{"title":"Self-inflicted. Deliberate. Death-intentioned. A critical policy analysis of UK suicide prevention policies 2009-2019","authors":"Hazel Marzetti, A. Oaten, A. Chandler, Ana Jordan","doi":"10.1108/jpmh-09-2021-0113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nWith encouragement from the World Health Organisation, national suicide prevention policies have come to be regarded as an essential component of the global effort to reduce suicide. However, despite their global significance, the construction, conceptualisation and proposed provisions offered in suicide prevention policies have, to date, been under researched; this study aims to address this gap.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nwe critically analysed eight contemporary UK suicide prevention policy documents in use in all four nations of the UK between 2009 and 2019, using Bacchi and Goodwin’s post-structural critical policy analysis.\n\n\nFindings\nThe authors argue that across this sample of suicide prevention policies, suicide is constructed as self-inflicted, deliberate and death-intentioned. Consequently, these supposedly neutral definitions of suicide have some significant and problematic effects, often individualising, pathologising and depoliticising suicide in ways that dislocate suicides from the emotional worlds in which they occur. Accordingly, although suicide prevention policies have the potential to think beyond the boundaries of clinical practice, and consider suicide prevention more holistically, the policies in this sample take a relatively narrow focus, often reducing suicide to a single momentary act and centring death prevention at the expense of considering ways to make individual lives more liveable.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nUK suicide prevention policies have not been subject to critical analysis; to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study represents the first attempt to examine the way in which suicide is constructed in UK suicide prevention policy documents.\n","PeriodicalId":45601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Mental Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jpmh-09-2021-0113","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Purpose With encouragement from the World Health Organisation, national suicide prevention policies have come to be regarded as an essential component of the global effort to reduce suicide. However, despite their global significance, the construction, conceptualisation and proposed provisions offered in suicide prevention policies have, to date, been under researched; this study aims to address this gap. Design/methodology/approach we critically analysed eight contemporary UK suicide prevention policy documents in use in all four nations of the UK between 2009 and 2019, using Bacchi and Goodwin’s post-structural critical policy analysis. Findings The authors argue that across this sample of suicide prevention policies, suicide is constructed as self-inflicted, deliberate and death-intentioned. Consequently, these supposedly neutral definitions of suicide have some significant and problematic effects, often individualising, pathologising and depoliticising suicide in ways that dislocate suicides from the emotional worlds in which they occur. Accordingly, although suicide prevention policies have the potential to think beyond the boundaries of clinical practice, and consider suicide prevention more holistically, the policies in this sample take a relatively narrow focus, often reducing suicide to a single momentary act and centring death prevention at the expense of considering ways to make individual lives more liveable. Originality/value UK suicide prevention policies have not been subject to critical analysis; to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study represents the first attempt to examine the way in which suicide is constructed in UK suicide prevention policy documents.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
自己造成的。经过深思熟虑的。Death-intentioned。2009-2019年英国自杀预防政策的关键政策分析
在世界卫生组织的鼓励下,国家自杀预防政策已被视为全球减少自杀努力的重要组成部分。然而,尽管具有全球意义,迄今为止,自杀预防政策的构建,概念化和拟议条款一直在研究中;本研究旨在解决这一差距。设计/方法/方法我们使用Bacchi和Goodwin的后结构批判政策分析,批判性地分析了2009年至2019年期间英国所有四个国家使用的八项当代英国自杀预防政策文件。研究结果作者认为,在这些自杀预防政策的样本中,自杀被构建为自我造成的、故意的和有死亡意图的。因此,这些所谓的自杀中立定义产生了一些重大而有问题的影响,通常是个体化、病态化和非政治化的自杀,使自杀与发生自杀的情感世界脱节。因此,尽管自杀预防政策有可能超越临床实践的界限,更全面地考虑自杀预防,但本样本中的政策所关注的范围相对狭窄,往往将自杀减少到单一的瞬间行为,并以考虑使个人生活更宜居的方法为代价,将死亡预防作为中心。独创性/价值英国自杀预防政策没有受到批判性分析;据作者所知,这项研究代表了第一次尝试检验自杀在英国自杀预防政策文件中被构建的方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Public Mental Health
Journal of Public Mental Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
32
期刊最新文献
Overcoming challenges of embedding child and youth mental health research in community NHS services Psychological wellbeing and avoidance strategies as moderators between excessive social media use and academic performance among Indian college students Pain and associated functional impairment in the Danish general population: the role of mental well-being Impact of nature on the mental health and well-being of the ICU survivors: an interpretative phenomenological analysis Public mental health and wellbeing interventions delivered by allied health professionals (AHPs): mapping the evidence and identification of gaps. A systematic review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1