Protecting Life or Managing Risk? Suicide Prevention and the Lure of Medicalized Control

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Warren Kinghorn
{"title":"Protecting Life or Managing Risk? Suicide Prevention and the Lure of Medicalized Control","authors":"Warren Kinghorn","doi":"10.1093/cb/cbad010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Suicide is a leading cause of death in the United States and in many other parts of the world. As such, suicide is frequently framed as a medical and public health problem for which solutions are best recommended by medical and public health authorities. While, medicalized suicide prevention strategies often resonate with traditional Christian commitments to preserve life and to discourage suicide, there is little evidence to date that medical approaches to suicide risk-reduction decrease population rates of suicide. Further, by treating suicide as a phenomenon that can be eliminated through technical managerial control, modern suicide prevention efforts construe suffering persons as carriers of risk best managed by standardized and often dehumanizing environments of care. This emphasis on the medical management of risk also erodes the clinician–patient relationship and inappropriately centers medical (e.g., systematic health screenings) rather than non-medical (e.g., access to housing) forms of response. Although, medicalized suicide prevention efforts should not be dismantled, those working to prevent suicide would do well to prioritize a positive commitment to human dignity and worth and to engage social and political systems beyond medicine and public health, while drawing on specific contributions that clinicians can offer.","PeriodicalId":42894,"journal":{"name":"Christian Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Christian Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/cb/cbad010","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Suicide is a leading cause of death in the United States and in many other parts of the world. As such, suicide is frequently framed as a medical and public health problem for which solutions are best recommended by medical and public health authorities. While, medicalized suicide prevention strategies often resonate with traditional Christian commitments to preserve life and to discourage suicide, there is little evidence to date that medical approaches to suicide risk-reduction decrease population rates of suicide. Further, by treating suicide as a phenomenon that can be eliminated through technical managerial control, modern suicide prevention efforts construe suffering persons as carriers of risk best managed by standardized and often dehumanizing environments of care. This emphasis on the medical management of risk also erodes the clinician–patient relationship and inappropriately centers medical (e.g., systematic health screenings) rather than non-medical (e.g., access to housing) forms of response. Although, medicalized suicide prevention efforts should not be dismantled, those working to prevent suicide would do well to prioritize a positive commitment to human dignity and worth and to engage social and political systems beyond medicine and public health, while drawing on specific contributions that clinicians can offer.
保护生命还是管理风险?自杀预防与医疗控制的诱惑
在美国和世界上许多其他地方,自杀是导致死亡的主要原因。因此,自杀经常被界定为一个医疗和公共卫生问题,医疗和公共卫生当局最好建议解决这个问题。虽然,医学自杀预防策略经常与传统的基督教承诺产生共鸣,以保护生命和阻止自杀,但迄今为止,几乎没有证据表明医学方法可以降低自杀风险,降低人口自杀率。此外,通过将自杀视为一种可以通过技术管理控制消除的现象,现代自杀预防工作将痛苦的人视为风险的携带者,最好通过标准化且通常是非人性化的护理环境来管理。这种对风险的医疗管理的强调也侵蚀了医患关系,并且不恰当地将医疗(例如,系统的健康检查)而不是非医疗(例如,获得住房)形式的反应作为中心。虽然,医疗预防自杀的努力不应该被取消,但那些致力于预防自杀的人最好优先考虑对人的尊严和价值的积极承诺,并在医学和公共卫生之外参与社会和政治系统,同时利用临床医生可以提供的具体贡献。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
33.30%
发文量
15
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信