The Suicide Train: Switching the Railway

Depression is the menacing conductor driving the runaway train that is willful suicidality into the approaching cliff. It has a wide variety of causes ranging from genetics, to faulty learning experiences, to chemical imbalances in the brain and/or body; all of which transcend our control. In response to the arbitrary variables that induce depression we created many defenses, such as Anti-Depressant medication and psychiatric help, which are just two of the strongest in the readily available aegis against this maniacal state. Despite these invaluable methods of managing depression, it has been estimated that nearly 80% of clinically depressed individuals are not receiving treatment for this crippling disability.

It is important to note that the deeply depressed (Those considering suicide) are sometimes disinclined from seeking therapy methods for reasons such as hopelessness which

“is a pattern of thinking where individuals believe they are trapped in misery with no expectation of things ever getting better, and self-loathing is a pattern of thinking where individuals believe they are bad, worthless, evil, unsuccessful, unlovable, and/or incompetent.”

While working in unison with self-loathing these two defining characteristics make us judgmental, skeptical and devoid of the intangible optimism displayed around us. Without hope and self-esteem we become unwilling and undeserving to actively seek and find help
But the ease of opportunity to fend off the disability is testament to the fact that deliberate aversion to treatment, and not the attributes of depression, is the true scapegoat for the creeping increase in suicidality since the year 2000.

There is an aggressor, a ravenous canine which prevents us from moving from our seats to stop the conductor of the train. Suicide stigmatizers lack consideration, and hold scorn for the perspectives of individuals who are contemplating suicide or have committed suicide. Some even feel obliged to aim hostilities and persecutions at different victims, namely those who are directly related to someone who has committed it and are already tormented enough. In addition to our depressive thoughts we are now faced with these stigmatizers making various misinformed and wrong psychological commentaries. We were already on the fence about accepting help, but now we must take an aggressive stance toward our own mind.

A stigmatizer wastes no time when attacking the assailant by claiming suicide is an act of cowardice, even referring to it as the, “the coward’s way out.” In an article entitled “Is Suicide Cowardly?” an anonymous user gives his honest and stigmatic opinion:

“However, by far the most common instances of suicide are when a person does not have the guts to face their problems, so they take what they see as an escape, and kill themselves. Escape is cowardly. Bravery would drive someone to face their problems, not run away from them.”

From this perspective, refusing to face difficulties is seen as cowardice, fear in the face of life and circumstances. They would simply prefer individuals face life head on rather than accept death. Stigmatizers believe that suicide is a sign of weakness, not having the “guts” to face life’s problems. Surely this weakness could have easily been rooted out if they had been in control of the situation. They belittle every accomplishment, talent, and goal ever achieved by the dead. None of it mattered; it ended in the ultimate form of cowardice.

The claim that “most” suicides occur when a person does not have the “guts” to face problems is entirely unfounded. Absolutely no evidence supports this; never has there been a study that lists cowardice as a cause of suicide. A stigmatizer rightly believes the term cowardice open to interpretation but then attempts to enforce his subjectivity upon others. Condemning another person’s decision-making based on a biased perspective of life is counterproductive and inconsiderate.

Furthermore, a coward succumbs to fear, which is a natural response according to Fredrick Nueman, a journalist for psychology today.

Feelings of fear are engendered by dangerous situations. The individual who feels fear is impelled into the “fight or flight” reaction. Someone encountering a threat gets ready to fight or to run away. This reaction serves an obvious purpose, as do all other feelings. In this case—and in the others—the action called for has a survival function. It is unpleasant to be afraid, but it is critically important.

The fight or flights response is by its virtue and incredibly unpleasant one, offering us two primitive solutions to complex problems which may require a new spar or sail response.
So then, the stigmatizer believes a paradox: suicide is a coward’s way of allowing fear, an instinctual life protecting mechanism, to protect us from living. The exact opposite of a coward is a hero, he who is courageous; disallowing fear to influence behavior. Suicide is often long thought about, people brave through their fears for months before deciding upon the final act. When faced with the great unknown, horror runs deep in the veins. The amount of charisma needed to override such terror is ample proof to define suicide as an act of bravery, extreme valor in the face of death, from which every fear stems. If a suicidal person was indeed a coward, and did allow fear to dictate their actions, then there would be the whole topic of discussion would be nonexistent.

In accordance with cowardice a stigmatizer also asserts that anyone who has committed suicide is an overly selfish individual. Another article on Debate.Org asks the question, “Is Suicide Selfish?” and again we have a stigmatic, anonymous commenter.

“Suicide is a very selfish act. Suicide ends the problems and troubles for the person committing it. Suicide opens a ton of issues and problems for the loved ones left behind who have to live with many disturbing emotions…. The loved ones who are left behind never get over the trauma caused by having a suicide in the family – they live with it for the rest of their lives.”

By solving problems with suicide the dead are negligent to the feelings of their loved ones and peers. They had no consideration for their death, and how it might affect the emotions of others for possibly the remainder of their life. Having generally never met any victim of suicide, they are quick to call them selfish individuals.
The stigmatizer now quite distastefully insults not only memories of the dead but families, and friends also. When someone close to us commits suicide, the last thing loved ones want to hear from some unfamiliar oaf on the internet is that their cherished friend was selfish. The everlasting traumatic emotions are justified, in that we should consider ourselves the selfish ones, for not knowing, recognizing, or helping. A revolting hypocrisy lies in asking a suicidal person to be selfless and endure against their will. Live for us, we who have no idea how badly you hurt, how long you have felt this way, and remained oblivious to every warning sign offered to us. The stigmatizers speak of selfishness but then call someone a coward for not being capable of overcoming something a stigmatizer considers trivial.

There is little ground to the claim that the suicidal and already dead are/were selfish. Week after week we hear stories like Madison Holleran, a 2014-2015 freshman at University of Penn who took her own life.

“My daughter’s stress was self-induced, and although we had started her in therapy to address her issues, she hid the severity of those issues from everyone…Madison also left her parents a note as well as gifts for the family on top of the parking garage.”

Madison also left nice note and gifts to her parents, in her last moments she thought about the people that cared about her. In many cases, suicide is one of the only selfish acts the victim has ever committed. Hiding true emotional issues from loved ones is common among the suicidal, as it excuses others from being obliged to cheer them up. Refusing to tell people about a life struggle is an act of selflessness, not wanting others to be burdened by these feelings of anguish.

The most destructive claim in a stigmatizer’s arsenal: Suicide is the result of unintelligent, faulty, or crazy thinking. According to the stigmatizers, only the insanity can drive someone to override their instincts. Again, they attack the intellect and sanity of the dead, and perhaps insult those who have witnessed such a tragic event. This claim is backed by some evidence; truthfully we are frightened beneath the surface and unwilling to take the leap from ideation of death, to committing self destruction. It goes against our very nature to cause our own death. Our brain

“is a survival organ. It is designed to solve problems related to surviving in an unstable outdoor environment and to do so in nearly constant motion (to keep you alive long enough to pass your genes on). “

Only after years with this debilitating disease can we override our instincts, and the truth is many of us are simply not ready. Again, attacking the intellect and sanity of the dead, and perhaps insulting those who have witnessed such a tragic event.

Admittedly it would be false to say that every act of suicide is completely logical and sane. In fact according to E.C. Harris and B. Barraclough, in their article “Suicide as an outcome for mental disorders”: “virtually all mental disorders have an increased risk of suicide excepting mental retardation and dementia.”

Stigmatizers are overgeneralizing this information, which is dangerous. The stigmatizer refers to these disorders as insane, which implies a level extremely illogical thinking. Trouble is depression isn’t always insane thinking, especially regarding learned behavior. From their own perspective they are completely logical. Furthermore sometimes the assailant is fully aware of the implications of his/her action. Someone who perceives incredible anguish for whatever the reason has a right to his own reality. Reality is directly related to the perception of individuals. Despite being capable of speech, it is impossible for us to know the feelings and implications related to a death wish. Who are we to say they are wrong? Simply because we fear the unknown alternative, we find it more comforting to say that life should be cherished and anyone who goes against this is obviously unstable.

Silence is the final weapon in the arsenal of the stigmatizer. Interestingly the less verbal stigmatizers often recognize the hateful hindsight and refuse to spew further obnoxious opinions, or fear combating it will just lead to more hateful hindsight. The others hesitate to voice their opinions on the controversial issue for many reasons: fear of intellectual solitude, or even invoking the wrath of someone louder in their contradictions, namely cowardice. Though it is apparent that not every intention is cruel, they still contribute the stigma.

Everyone who remains muted (from those who agree with a stigmatizer philosophy, to those who don’t but appease them with silence) indirectly allow the vocal hatemongers to dictate philosophical debates. They wrongly consider themselves exempt from the stigma simply because they believe that it only applies to those who actively aim their prosecutions and hostilities at the victims. But refusing to talk about the stigma can easily be attributed to the stigma itself. It seems too often in the grand sociological scale, that whosoever speaks the loudest is heard the most. That being said the stigmatizer appear to have the upper hand in this debate

Rather than making a conscious effort to avoid it, addressing suicide in an appropriate manner should be mainstream. Surely the media, societies’ most readily-available source of information, should have provided the amplifier by now. It too remains silent and has learned to not acknowledge suicide because it has a specific effect:

According to numerous research studies, prominent media stories about suicide are associated with a significant increase in suicide attempts within the media outlet’s coverage area. Adolescents and young adults seem to be especially susceptible to suicide contagion.

Media coverage of suicidality inadvertently caused more suicides, and compassionately, the media is now reluctant to take on such stories. They have acknowledged their part in the ruthless cycle and excused themselves from responsibility. The media’s so called “suicide contagion” is an ample excuse to not reveal many of these innumerable stories. The media depicts extraordinary events with standout characters, and seeing others with such tenacity sometimes energizes us. When we witness someone who acts willingly on our shared idealizations we become encouraged to follow in the steps of the unlikely hero.

The so called “contagion” only results from poor coverage of the event. In the article, “Did Kurt Cobain’s Death Lower the Suicide Rate in 1994?” Zach Schonfeld shares that after the death of the influential rock legend Kurt Cobain, there was no spike in suicide rates. This was astonishing strictly due to the number of followers and beloved fans he had. Schonfeld applauds the media for providing reach out opportunities to crisis centers and covering Cobain’s suicide in a manner that would not idolize his final choice. This would seem to contradict the media’s behavior in refusing to examine any suicides.

Even still, there are an infinite number of ways to avoid the contagion but still confront suicidality. The media could very easily expose the idiotic stigmatic culture, or even perhaps tell stories of people who faced similar hardships and emerged triumphant. What about the conductor, why not simply examine him, his rationale, help him discover the error in his ways. Maybe shedding a light on the illusory depression could help us better understand conscious suicidality, and the stigma associated with it.

When a stigma one of the only consistent opinions voiced, it appears the stigma is mainstream. Our impressions of oppression are not entirely illogical. When we see others who have unequivocally dealt with the same stigma and struggles we have, it substantiates our ideals. The problem is that we as a society have neglected to address the stigma of suicide, which is the underlying cause for increasing suicide rates.

Though we may be over-exaggerating the extent and strength of the stigmatizers, their simple existence is enough to silence innumerable people, who now consider suicidality taboo. The stigmatizers inadvertently gain new members daily, as more and more refuse to talk about it. The acknowledgement of the suicide contagion though appearing to be a noble solution is in actuality a passive aggressive one. We actively a search and blame extraneous causes for suicide, and as result have sat idly and allowed the beast to intimidate us to death. Why has it never occurred to anyone to instead simply command the dog to sit?