It was reported last week that despite fears of the mental health crisis prompted by the lockdowns leading to a spike in suicides in 2020, the number of people committing suicide in the U.K. did not rise after the first lockdown. While the provisional rate of suicides for 2020 is lower than that of 2019, this may be due to delays to coroner inquests, meaning the actual figure could be much higher, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). The Mail has the story.
Registered suicides in England fell in 2020 as inquests were delayed during the coronavirus pandemic, official data shows.
Some 4,902 suicides were registered across the country last year – giving a provisional rate of 9.9 suicide deaths per 100,000 people, the ONS said.
That represents a fall from 2019, when the rate was 10.8 suicide deaths per 100,000 people.
The ONS said the fall “most likely reflects delays to coroner inquests, because of the impact of the coronavirus pandemic, as opposed to a genuine decrease in suicide”.
The 2020 figures are provisional and will be finalised by the ONS in late 2021.
All deaths by suicide are investigated by coroners, with deaths usually registered around five to six months after they occur due to the length of time it takes to hold an inquest.
Of the suicides registered in 2020, more than half (51.2%) occurred that year. Some 3,674 involved males, and 1,228 females.
Between April and June 2020, during the first national lockdown, the provisional suicide rate fell by 36.1% compared with the same period in 2019.
The number of registered suicides in this quarter was the lowest since 2001.
This is most likely to be due to the impact of the pandemic on the coroner’s service, such as delays to inquests as the service adapted to social distancing measures, the ONS said.
The number of registered suicides increased in the second half of 2020, most likely due to inquests resuming, the ONS said.
In November, the charity Rethink Mental Illness said the number of people turning to its website for support with suicidal thoughts had tripled in the first six months of lockdown. A new study also found that the lack of in-person treatments – because of lockdowns – has made mental health patients feel as though they “were missing out on care”.
The Mail’s report is worth reading in full.
Stop Press: A report from the Journal of the American Medical Association shows a decrease in U.S. suicides in 2020 by 2,700, from 47,500 to 44,800. But, at the same time, there was a substantial increase in the number of “unintended injury” deaths (an increase of 19,000 from 2019) which was “largely driven by drug overdose[s]”.
Dr Gary Ordog, MD, from the Department of Health Services in the County of Los Angeles (retired) said:
I was surprised by the suicide rate reported to have a major decrease in 2020. It seems from most other reports that the suicide rate has increased since the pandemic began. This may be explained by the fact that the category of “Unintentional Injury” had a major increase at the same time, and the fact that this category includes drug overdoses. As there is often inadequate history in a fatal drug overdose case, many of these may be purposeful and so suicidal. This would explain the perceived increase in suicide rate since the current pandemic began. Perhaps further analysis of the data would elucidate this incongruity.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I’m in two minds about trigger warnings, they’re fairly harmless and are certainly preferable to not putting on shows for reasons such as ‘political incorrectness’, and there are some shows you’d like to know about before bringing a prudish relative to.
Silly trigger warnings like this one create publicity which sells tickets.
Not that Oliver! needs much publicity nor would anyone ever dare try to ban it, one of the most enjoyable shows ever staged, with superb songs by the genius, Lionel Bart.
I loved watching Chicago. I wonder what trigger warnings a wokey theatre would put on that…
Personally, why even bother to report on this sort of thing anymore? It’s here to stay, I reckon, and now it’s just so humdrum it’s not even newsworthy. This sort of article drops, we all have a moan, make the same comments we’ve all said a million times before, then another similar article drops, concerning a museum, art gallery, literature or what have you…same old same old, nothing changes. I think the best thing one can do with regards to trigger warnings is just carry on as normal and ignore them. The less the insanity that surrounds us in Clown World is acknowledged the better.
Far from harmless
It reinforces the notion that offence is given, not taken
I didn’t say harmless, I said fairly harmless. There is a difference. I agree with Mogwai, they’re not something worth getting too worked up about. They can be useful in some cases, and when they’re silly, it’s best just to ignore them.
I know you said “fairly harmless”. “Far from harmless” also means “Far from fairly harmless”. Never useful. Definitely something to get worked up about.
I think it’s entirely harmless, so long as it just sits in the corner of a website minding its own business. It’s only when the production’s editors start caving to the woke brigade and start altering the race of Dicken’s characters and watering down the depictions of poverty and criminality that alarm bells should begin to sound.
It harms me! I’m sick of the professionally, perpetually offended and equally sick of the people that pander to them.
And “trigger warnings” are the start of a slippery slop.
All part of the great pandemic of safetyism.
So you’re triggered by trigger warnings. They’ll have to start issuing trigger warnings for trigger warnings.
Exactly
I avoid a lot of situations because of this stuff- just trying to live in my bubble
If were to borrow Dr Who’s TARDIS and travel back to the years prior to the 1990s, and show TV programmes and films from 21st Century, they would need a trigger warning: “Language and behaviour from a forlorn era”.
They would say that will never happen, and think you are joking.
I saw the show in Chichester last year (brilliant) and I don’t remember anything so silly. Then again, I didn’t buy a programme or look on-line.
“; depictions of violence towards men, women and children including gunshots; and themes of poverty, hunger and crime in Victorian society.”
How queer!
I’m reminded of mountains and molehills. For goodness sake, if you’re so hung up about unnecessary trigger warnings, then can’t you just ignore them? To be offended by a trigger warning that you don’t even have to look at is just as “snowflake” as being offended by the content (which, by the way nobody will be).
This all sounds a bit Twisted! 🙂
I think trigger warnings trigger people.🤭
Better not tell them the man who takes Oliver under his wing is Jewish!
To paraphrase Scrooge, It offends because there are no foodbanks no social housing. Also I believe from memory of the films no ethnic representation
Bill Sykes may have homosexual traits…who knew…🤔
I don’t even think it’s the “snowflake” audiences that are bothered by this (on the whole, with a few exceptions) but rather the theatre/theatre companies themselves wanting to a) look caring and progressive and woke but perhaps mostly b) not wanting to get sued or even worse cancelled for somehow causing offence.