That is a common meme, but it’s wrong. For every ten people who attempt suicide and fail, only one will eventually die by suicide[0]. 70% of survivors will never even reattempt suicide, and only 7% or so of suicide survivors will eventually successfully commit suicide.
Furthermore, I’m disturbed by the cavalier attitude here. Suicide isn’t a predestined thing that we’re helpless to prevent as a society. There is real suffering and we can do something about it in aggregate. Framing it as something “they’ll do anyways” is both factually incorrect, and absolves society of any responsibility to help prevent suicide.
> Suicide isn’t a predestined thing that we’re helpless to prevent as a society. There is real suffering and we can do something about it in aggregate.
I agree with most of your comment but somewhat disagree with this. Suicide is not, itself, suffering. It's the result of suffering. David Foster Wallace compared suicide to jumping from a burning building; it's not that necessarily that jumping seems like a way out, it's something you are driven to because of your fear of the flames.
Speaking only for myself, as someone who has been depressed to the point of being suicidal before and still has recurrent bouts of strong depression, I find the obsessive focus on the issue of suicide unhelpful and hurtful. It is, so to speak, putting bars on the windows so that we have to face the flames instead. It is hard to convey to someone who hasn't experienced depression how it can turn every second of living into pure agony.
I agree that taking away easy routes to suicide is a good thing. I accept the research which says that most people attempt it rashly, though I don't think you can say that a low re-attempt rate indicates a rash decision. Suicide hotlines are good things. I do believe strongly that people have a right to die, including for persistent depression, if they so wish.
If anyone out there actually cares about depressed people, the best way to help them is to help fix the depression; give us a better way out than suicide and we'll take it. This means fixing healthcare in America, for example; a top-class universal healthcare system with support for mental health would do a world of good. Secondarily, making sure people have financial security - lift people out of poverty and homelessness. Give them access to community resources and activities. The fact that people are so willing to take on suicide as a problem, but not willing to resolve its causes pains me.
Yes, I intended the phrase “suffering” to encompass the causes leading to suicide as well, and clearly cut my wording a bit too short for clarity. My apologies.
> Furthermore, I’m disturbed by the cavalier attitude here. Suicide isn’t a predestined thing that we’re helpless to prevent as a society.
That wasn’t the point that people were making. The point they were making is that removing fans doesn’t address the underlying mental health issues. If anything, arguing that everyone is ok now because fewer people are dying is the cavalier attitude because it overlooks the daily struggles that many will still be having.
Thus regardless of the points you’ve put excellently in your first paragraph, the students mental health issues do also need to be addressed too.
So I see your rebuttal as complimentary to the other points rather than fully dismissing them (ie it shouldn’t be “either/or” but rather “both things needs doing”).
> That wasn’t the point that people were making. The point they were making is that removing fans doesn’t address the underlying mental health issues.
That is a fair argument, but not how I interpreted GP. In the context it seemed like they were arguing against any measure that removes means of suicide away from people because “they’ll just do it regardless”.
> If anything, arguing that everyone is ok now because fewer people are dying
Literally nobody here is saying this. Everyone here has acknowledged that this doesn’t solve the underlying mental health issues (or material issues, per a now dead comment), but might be a good band aid (over a “bullet wound” per another commenter).
What’s more common here is the acknowledgment that this doesn’t solve the mental health issue, and the grim realization that the university won’t do anything about it either way.
This then demonstrates how hard it is to understand the full context of a comment from only the short post and, I hope, makes you appreciate how important it is to assume a more charitable interpretation.
As for the rest of your post: I think we are in complete agreement.
No, it's ab out removing important equipment. Fans in hot weather really help if you don't have AC, As far as I know it gets quite hot in (all of) India. Now their fans are gone as a "hack" for some other problem. At the very least, life of those students will be more uncomfortable. Ceiling fans also have a number of advantages over others, like being mostly noiseless and creating vertical movement, so replacing them with desk fans won't be as good.
> As far as I know it gets quite hot in (all of) India
Nope this is a myth. India has all sorts of weather (from snowy winters to hot/humid/arid climate and everything in between). The institute this article points to is in Bangalore. Where temperatures are between 15 degree Celsius and 30 degree celsius throughout the year (only during peak summer does it touch 38 to max 40 degree celsius). You don't even need fans for most of the year. Not to mention Bangalore rains.
Furthermore, I’m disturbed by the cavalier attitude here. Suicide isn’t a predestined thing that we’re helpless to prevent as a society. There is real suffering and we can do something about it in aggregate. Framing it as something “they’ll do anyways” is both factually incorrect, and absolves society of any responsibility to help prevent suicide.
0 - https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/means-matter/survi...