An Outsider's Perspective on the Fabricated/Exaggerated/Unsubstantiated Suicide Statistic Debacle

[smac97]

Here: "Young, gay Mormons and suicide: The Salt Lake Tribune tries to do the real numbers" by Julia Duin.

Some excerpts;

Quote

It was one of the odder headlines I’ve seen lately: "Suicide fears, if not actual suicides, rise in wake of Mormon same-sex policy."

Underneath is a narrative of how last fall’s announcement of a revised policy on membership requirements for gay Mormons may have vastly increased Utah suicides.

After seven paragraphs came the whopper: The premise behind the story has no basis in fact. But it sounded true. It may still be true. Lots of observers think it's true.

We've heard this before: Truthiness strikes again. We can debate the facts later.

Meanwhile, LDS Church and its leaders and its doctrines and its members get beaten to a pulp by a mob of people who have been materially misled and egged on by fabricated data.

Quote

It’s not the way I would have written such a piece, but it does draw you in.  You almost have to read the entire overture up to the clincher paragraph to see how it is done. 

Well, it is Peggy Fletcher Stack and the Tribune, after all.  Her reporting on Mormonism is uneven.

Quote

Then the reporter quotes a state health department spokesperson as saying they monitor causes of death and had there been any tie-in with the LDS policy on homosexuals, the department would have noticed it. Suicide records are not broken down by religion or sexual orientation. Still, Montgomery’s figures were very dramatically off.

This article, which had 1,095 comments last I looked, illustrates a major dilemma in journalism.

What happens when a reporter is hearing a lot of talk about certain trends on, say, Facebook, but can’t find the data to support what a lot of people are saying must be true.

Well, to the Tribune's credit, they did some research.  But to its discredit, it buried in the lede.  Big time.

Quote

I’m mystified as to why we had to wait until well into the story to find out that Montgomery's claims can’t be substantiated. Her evidence is anecdotal: She's heard from families who've called her to say their son or daughter committed suicide because of the new policies that, among other things, disallow children of gay parents from being baptized until they are 18. And if they're baptized, they must disavow their parents' lifestyle. The fact that the her claims can't be independently verified hasn't stopped her from making them.

The answer, I think, comes in the next paragraph:

Quote

The lack of proof didn't matter to advocacy publications such as the Advocate, which ran with Montgomery’s claims nevertheless. So did Teen Vogue. They went with a story they believed to be true because, logically, it must be true, right?

These aren't the only news outlets that "ran with it":

• Months after LDS policy change, 32 Mormon youth have committed suicide
• Group fears youth suicides up since LDS policy about gay couples, children
• 'Shocking' Surge In Mormon LGBT Suicides Blamed On LDS Church Policy: Elders Respond To Rumored Connection ("A recent surge in suicides among Mormons is shocking locals.  Some mental health experts think they know why Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (or LDS) members are killing themselves: the recent policy change of the Mormon Church on the LGBT or LGBTQ community, namely children...")
• Affirmation (this is where Wendy Montgomery first aired her "statistics").

So the natural and expected result of Wendy Montgomery publishing horrendous (and now all but falsified) data about teen suicides was . . . vilification of the LDS Church and its leaders and members and doctrines.  Trying (and, it appears to some extent, succeeding) to make the Church and its beliefs and adherents look bad.

That, I submit, was the objective.  Pressure tactics against the Church by church members designed to foment popular opinion and ill will against the LDS Church so as to coerce the Church into capitulating to the preferences of "agitators."  Kate Kelly, take a bow!

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited February 4, 2016 by smac97

[The Nehor]

It is almost as if Satan's followers are encouraged to lie.

[Scott Lloyd]

On 2/4/2016 at 2:49 PM, smac97 said:

Here: "Young, gay Mormons and suicide: The Salt Lake Tribune tries to do the real numbers" by Julia Duin.

Some excerpts;

Meanwhile, LDS Church and its leaders and its doctrines and its members get beaten to a pulp by a mob of people who have been materially misled and egged on by fabricated data.

Well, it is Peggy Fletcher Stack and the Tribune, after all.  Her reporting on Mormonism is uneven.

Well, to the Tribune's credit, they did some research.  But to its discredit, it buried in the lede.  Big time.

The answer, I think, comes in the next paragraph:

These aren't the only news outlets that "ran with it":

• Months after LDS policy change, 32 Mormon youth have committed suicide
• Group fears youth suicides up since LDS policy about gay couples, children
• 'Shocking' Surge In Mormon LGBT Suicides Blamed On LDS Church Policy: Elders Respond To Rumored Connection ("A recent surge in suicides among Mormons is shocking locals.  Some mental health experts think they know why Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (or LDS) members are killing themselves: the recent policy change of the Mormon Church on the LGBT or LGBTQ community, namely children...")

So the natural and expected result of Wendy Montgomery publishing horrendous (and now all but falsified) data about teen suicides was . . . vilification of the LDS Church.  Trying (and, it appears to some extent, succeeding) to make the Church look bad.

That was the objective.  Pressure tactics against the Church by church members designed to foment popular opinion and ill will against the LDS Church so as to coerce the Church into capitulating to the preferences of "agitators."  Kate Kelly, take a bow!

Thanks,

-Smac

It's an instance where writers want so badly for something to be true that they go to great lengths to disregard the real facts.

I've had editors before who have a preconceived notion of what a story is supposed to be, and when the facts don't sustain that notion, they blame the reporter for not getting it straight.

I think it's the same sort of phenomenon.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Nevo]

A couple of points:

•  First, suicide and suicide ideation among young gay Mormons is a real thing.

•  Second, Wendy Montgomery did not "publish data about teen suicides"—she reported what she had been told.

•  Finally, I don't think Montgomery or Gustav-Wrathall had any intention of "vilifying the LDS Church," "trying to make the Church look bad," or "fomenting popular opinion and ill will" towards the Church in order "to coerce the Church into capitulating." I think they were honestly alarmed and worried about what they were hearing.

If it turns out that no LDS youth killed themselves as a result of the policy change, then we should all be relieved and grateful.

 

[Russell C McGregor]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Here: "Young, gay Mormons and suicide: The Salt Lake Tribune tries to do the real numbers" by Julia Duin.

Some excerpts;

Meanwhile, LDS Church and its leaders and its doctrines and its members get beaten to a pulp by a mob of people who have been materially misled and egged on by fabricated data.

Well, it is Peggy Fletcher Stack and the Tribune, after all.  Her reporting on Mormonism is uneven.

Well, to the Tribune's credit, they did some research.  But to its discredit, it buried in the lede.  Big time.

The answer, I think, comes in the next paragraph:

These aren't the only news outlets that "ran with it":

• Months after LDS policy change, 32 Mormon youth have committed suicide
• Group fears youth suicides up since LDS policy about gay couples, children
• 'Shocking' Surge In Mormon LGBT Suicides Blamed On LDS Church Policy: Elders Respond To Rumored Connection ("A recent surge in suicides among Mormons is shocking locals.  Some mental health experts think they know why Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (or LDS) members are killing themselves: the recent policy change of the Mormon Church on the LGBT or LGBTQ community, namely children...")
• Affirmation (this is where Wendy Montgomery first aired her "statistics").

So the natural and expected result of Wendy Montgomery publishing horrendous (and now all but falsified) data about teen suicides was . . . vilification of the LDS Church and its leaders and members and doctrines.  Trying (and, it appears to some extent, succeeding) to make the Church and its beliefs and adherents look bad.

That, I submit, was the objective.  Pressure tactics against the Church by church members designed to foment popular opinion and ill will against the LDS Church so as to coerce the Church into capitulating to the preferences of "agitators."  Kate Kelly, take a bow!

Thanks,

-Smac

I don't know if it's a characteristic of "truthiness" (but given its emotional basis, I wouldn't be surprised) but there's a particular rhetorical tactic associated with this phenomenon: anyone who dares to question the veracity of the asserted "truthy" facts, gets set upon by a righteously indignant, fully-roused rabble, and accused of not caring about all those victims.

All what victims, you may ask?

Why, all the victims who may or may not have committed suicide because someone they never met might have to wait until they are adults to get baptized. All those victims.

You callous, uncaring cad, you!

 

[Russell C McGregor]

18 minutes ago, Nevo said:

A couple of points:

•  First, suicide and suicide ideation among young gay Mormons is a real thing.

No-one says they're not. After all, given that homosexuals commit suicide at higher than normal rates everywhere -- including in those places where homosexuality is not merely accepted, but actually celebrated -- it would be astonishing if LDS Church membership (or family affiliation) was able to completely eradicate the problem.

18 minutes ago, Nevo said:

•  Second, Wendy Montgomery did not "publish data about teen suicides"—she reported what she had been told.

What she claims to have been told. Without bothering to check if it was true.

But hey -- why should she?

18 minutes ago, Nevo said:

•  Finally, I don't think Montgomery or Gustav-Wrathall had any intention of "vilifying the LDS Church," "trying to make the Church look bad," or "fomenting popular opinion and ill will" towards the Church in order "to coerce the Church into capitulating."

It just conveniently worked out that way.

Got it.

18 minutes ago, Nevo said:

I think they were honestly alarmed and worried about what they were hearing.

So they panicked and stampeded.

And this is a good thing, is it?

18 minutes ago, Nevo said:

If it turns out that no LDS youth killed themselves as a result of the policy change, then we should all be relieved and grateful.

So the accusation should be assumed true until it is proven otherwise?

Even after it's been shown to be supported only by bogus data?

 

 

[Storm Rider]

That is the part that troubles me.  I thought it was the role of a journalist to verify facts.  Why is it difficult to just listen to Ms. Montgomery and her load of hooey and then talk with the state and find out the numbers of suicides in target age bracket?  Then return to Montgomery and ask why the vast difference?  At some point a logical deduction is someone is not telling the truth.  Are parents and siblings over-reporting to Ms. Montgomery?  Is Ms. Montgomery exaggerating what has been said?  Is Ms. Montgomery taking a much longer period and then mis-characterizing the reporting period?  Regardless of the reason, Montgomery was not even close to the real numbers and it seems like the majority of people swallowed her line hook, line, and sinker.  

What is even worse is that even when caught in the lie, exaggeration, whatever one wants to call it, Montgomery's premise is held up to be worshiped and preached.  Everyone run pell-mell over the issue of LGBT and teens and the Mormons.  

Yup, almost like Satan and his followers would actually lie to achieve their ends.  Shocking. 

[smac97]

1 hour ago, Nevo said:

A couple of points:

•  First, suicide and suicide ideation among young gay Mormons is a real thing.

Nobody is denying that.  Nobody at all.  It is a terrible, horrific thing.  It is a tragedy.

All the more reason why, when discussing it, we should be cautious and circumspect about it.  We don't want to dwell on it in ways that may contribute to so-called "suicide contagion."  We don't want to ignore it, either, as it affects all of us as a community.  But what we really, really ought not do is fabricate data about it.  Or make public assertions about a huge increase in suicides and characterize them as being responsive to (and, hence the fault of) the recent policy changes by the LDS Church.  Or lie about this huge increase being "documented" when in fact it has not ("It’s not acceptable that, as one conference participant shared, there have been at least 32 documented LGBT Mormon suicides since the release of the new policy.").  Or publish these undocumented - and now pretty much falsified - numbers so that critics and enemies of the LDS Church can exploit them, can use them as rhetorical weapons against the LDS Church.

I feel the same way about false rape claims.  I acknowledge that rape "is a real thing."  But that does not justify or excuse people who make false accusations of rape, or who fabricate false or misleading data about the prevalence of sexual assault so that such information can then be exploited for rhetorical advantage.

Quote

•  Second, Wendy Montgomery did not "publish data about teen suicides"—she reported what she had been told.

I fail to see the difference between "publish" and "report."  And she did a lot more than merely pass on "what she had been told."  She made public statements declaring that "there have been at least 32 documented LGBT Mormon suicides since the release of the new policy."  "Documented" is a word.  It means something.  And Wendy Montgomery used it to bolster the credibility of her claims.  

So when are we supposed to believe her?  When she said she have been "documented" suicides, or when she says she's "my numbers [aren't] verified?"  Was she lying when she publicly claimed these suicides were "documented?"  If so, has she retracted that claim and apologized?  If not, why not?

She also specifically told Affirmation that all 32 of these purported suicides occurred "since the release of the new policy [in early November]."  But she's now claiming that she "[doesn't] have death dates."  Again, when are we supposed to believe her?  Has she retracted or apologized for any of this?  If not, why not?  Is fabricating data okay as long as she's otherwise a nice person?  Is exploiting teen suicide to score rhetorical points and leverage public pressure against the LDS Church acceptable?

Quote

•  Finally, I don't think Montgomery or Gustav-Wrathall had any intention of "vilifying the LDS Church," "trying to make the Church look bad," or "fomenting popular opinion and ill will" towards the Church in order "to coerce the Church into capitulating." I think they were honestly alarmed and worried about what they were hearing.

I think they were honestly alarmed and worried too.  But this is not an either/or proposition.  These folks fomented ill will against the LDS Church for its recent policy changes by publicizing fabricated statistics about an increase in teen suicide and tying that increase to the LDS Church.  I simply do not believe that was not intentional.  That it was an oopsy daisy or an unintended side effect.  Part of that agenda is certainly to promote awareness of and attention to the problem of teen suicides.  But let's get real.  Wendy Montgomery wasn't talking about teen suicides in general, but about suicides which she (and several other groups) publicly attributed to the LDS Church's policy changes.  She isn't the first person to use fabricated claims about legitimate social ills to advance an agenda.  Nor is she the first person to use Alynskyite tactics to vilify the LDS Church (Rules 9, 11 and 13 appear to be most in play here).

Quote

If it turns out that no LDS youth killed themselves as a result of the policy change, then we should all be relieved and grateful.

We should.  Just like we should be relieved and grateful when we hear that a rapist is running loose turns out to have been a fabrication.  But that doesn't excuse or justify the fabrication, does it?

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited February 5, 2016 by smac97

[Daniel2]

59 minutes ago, Nevo said:

A couple of points:

•  First, suicide and suicide ideation among young gay Mormons is a real thing.

•  Second, Wendy Montgomery did not "publish data about teen suicides"—she reported what she had been told.

•  Finally, I don't think Montgomery or Gustav-Wrathall had any intention of "vilifying the LDS Church," "trying to make the Church look bad," or "fomenting popular opinion and ill will" towards the Church in order "to coerce the Church into capitulating." I think they were honestly alarmed and worried about what they were hearing.

If it turns out that no LDS youth killed themselves as a result of the policy change, then we should all be relieved and grateful.

 

Great observations--I fully agree.

In the desire to defend what many have perceived to be a deliberate attack on the church (although I never saw it as such), my concern is that there may be such an overcompensating effort to dismiss Ms. Montgomery's credibility and absolve LDS individuals and/or culture from any negative influence or contribution to the despair of suicidal gay Latter-day Saints that some kid, somewhere, decides to make another stupid and manipulative decision just to make the point that they ARE hurting and suicides DO exist--just like Stuart Matis' pointless, manipulative, and profoundly wasteful publicity stunt.  And as many have stated, even "just" one is one too many.

My concern is that in an effort to arrive at the truth of numbers, many may overcompensate by vilifying Ms. Montgomery by attributing motivations to her that I don't believe she ever had...

I hope we all don't forget that suicide and suicide ideation IS a thing, and take enough care to remember that there ARE impressionable and hurting youth who are out there, listening and watching, and that what we say and how we say it can have a profound effect on them, for good or ill.

[smac97]

34 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

That is the part that troubles me.  I thought it was the role of a journalist to verify facts.  Why is it difficult to just listen to Ms. Montgomery and her load of hooey and then talk with the state and find out the numbers of suicides in target age bracket?  Then return to Montgomery and ask why the vast difference?  At some point a logical deduction is someone is not telling the truth.  Are parents and siblings over-reporting to Ms. Montgomery?  Is Ms. Montgomery exaggerating what has been said?  Is Ms. Montgomery taking a much longer period and then mis-characterizing the reporting period?  Regardless of the reason, Montgomery was not even close to the real numbers and it seems like the majority of people swallowed her line hook, line, and sinker.  

What is even worse is that even when caught in the lie, exaggeration, whatever one wants to call it, Montgomery's premise is held up to be worshiped and preached.  Everyone run pell-mell over the issue of LGBT and teens and the Mormons.  

Yup, almost like Satan and his followers would actually lie to achieve their ends.  Shocking. 

I doubt you intended to characterize Wendy Montgomery as a follower of Satan, but the last line above sort of comes across that way.

I think Wendy Montgomery is in many ways (most ways, even) a genuinely good and decent person.  But I think she has become seriously misguided as to the issue of homosexuals and the LDS Church.  She has a gay son, and she wants to protect him.  That is laudable and commendable.  She apparently has some grievances with how homosexuals are treated by members of the LDS Church, and about how LDS doctrines and policies affect people like her son.  That is understandable and commendable.  But she is way, way off the grid here.  I will give her the benefit of the doubt and surmise that her zeal to protect her son has, to some extent, morphed into something off balance and not altogether healthy.  I am reminded of Paul's caution in Romans 10: 

Quote

 1 Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.

 2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.

 3 For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

If this scripture is applicable to her, then she's not alone.  I must admit that there have been too many times when I have let my zeal to defend the Church morph into . . . something else.  I have apologized many times on this board for saying things in the heat of the moment.

I hope Wendy Montgomery takes this unfortunate event as an opportunity to step back and re-evaluate what she is doing and why.  I think we should all do that on a regular basis.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Russell C McGregor]

I previously wrote:

1 hour ago, Russell C McGregor said:

I don't know if it's a characteristic of "truthiness" (but given its emotional basis, I wouldn't be surprised) but there's a particular rhetorical tactic associated with this phenomenon: anyone who dares to question the veracity of the asserted "truthy" facts, gets set upon by a righteously indignant, fully-roused rabble, and accused of not caring about all those victims.

And look out baby, cause here they come!

 

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

It is almost as if Satan's followers are encouraged to lie.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Nevo said:

A couple of points:

•  First, suicide and suicide ideation among young gay Mormons is a real thing.

•  Second, Wendy Montgomery did not "publish data about teen suicides"—she reported what she had been told.

•  Finally, I don't think Montgomery or Gustav-Wrathall had any intention of "vilifying the LDS Church," "trying to make the Church look bad," or "fomenting popular opinion and ill will" towards the Church in order "to coerce the Church into capitulating." I think they were honestly alarmed and worried about what they were hearing.

If it turns out that no LDS youth killed themselves as a result of the policy change, then we should all be relieved and grateful.

A far calmer and solidly based discussion was held on KUER radio a couple of days ago, and I highly recommend it:  Doug Fabrizio, “LGBT Suicide and the LDS Church,” Radio West, Feb 2, 2016, online at http://radiowest.kuer.org/people/doug-fabrizio ,  His guests were all professionals, John Gustav-Wrathall, Philip Rogers, and Kendall Wilcox.

Wendy Montgomery of Mama's Dragons had no actual support for her off-hand figures, and should certainly not be compared with Gustav-Wrathall.

The guests were concerned with the tendency toward reductionist and over simplistic headlines, which can lead to self-fulfilling suicides (“suicide contagion”), and can lead to belief that it is the only option and that everybody is doing it.  Social media are particularly prone to this hysteria or frenzy.  Pain and hopelessness typically accompany suicide.  So we need to reduce the pain and increase the hopefulness.  Gustav-Wrathall's experience in his ward is very hopeful and heartwarming.

It is clear from a USC study that those LGBT persons who remain in their churches are unlikely to commit suicide, but that those who leave are much more likely to do so.  Perhaps we all need community.

[Nevo]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

I think Wendy Montgomery is in many ways (most ways, even) a genuinely good and decent person.

That's my sense, too, from reading her comments.

Here's what she wrote a few days ago in response to Geoff B.'s post at Millennial Star:

Quote

The number was released by John Gustav-Wrathall, president of Affirmation, in an article he wrote, after I had a conversation with him about it. I had been sitting on the accumulating numbers for weeks. I likely would not have gone public with it, since I had promised privacy to the family members who reached out to me. But once the number was out there, I answered questions asked of me as best I could without breaking the privacy of those who had lost loved ones. I responded to the Deseret News and the Salt Lake Tribune, which are the articles I posted on my FB wall. Where it spread from there was out of my control. So I would hardly say that “Given the ghoulish way that they are glorying in their claims …” is an accurate statement. How am I glorifying any claims?

I get that it’s hard to wrap one’s head around this. If I hadn’t personally spoken to a family member from each of these cases, I’d have a hard time believing it too. So I’m not upset at the skepticism. I cannot provide you the proof you want. Not only would that be breaking my promise of privacy to the families, I can’t even prove it without a doubt. Unless they sent me autopsy reports or suicide notes (if there was one), I can’t prove it. Which is what I made clear to the Deseret News and SLTrib. They made that clear in their articles as well. I only know what people confided in me. They were deeply grieving and I tried to grieve with them.

http://www.millennialstar.org/about-that-claim-of-suicides-by-lds-teens-with-same-sex-attraction/#comment-154183
 

You've accused her of "fabricating the data" but I haven't seen anything yet that would support that conclusion. Regarding the disparity with the state's data, her husband has noted that "if you look into how suicide data is classified, anything that can be attributed as an accident and/or incidents of drug overdoses whether via legal or illegal drugs are not classified as suicides unless there is a specific note of intent. A majority of the suicides we know of were via drug overdoses (legal and illegal.)" I think the most we can say at this point is that the claims remain unverified.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Nevo

[Calm]

Quote

 I think the most we can say at this point is that the claims remain unverified.

I think we can at least say it is impossible that her numbers are connected with the policy to even close to the level many assumed, even it is possible they might be related to other aspects of the Church if they were deaths from past months and years.  (there not enough teen deaths in general to meet her numbers given since November even if one assumes every accidental and unknown death was a suicide (23 as opposed to 26), all suicides were LGBT and all were also LDS)

Edited February 5, 2016 by Calm

[Russell C McGregor]

15 minutes ago, Nevo said:

That's my sense, too, from reading her comments.

Here's what she wrote a few days ago in response to Geoff B.'s post at Millennial Star:

You've accused her of "fabricating the data" but I haven't seen anything yet that would support that conclusion. Regarding the disparity with the state's data, her husband has noted that "if you look into how suicide data is classified, anything that can be attributed as an accident and/or incidents of drug overdoses whether via legal or illegal drugs are not classified as suicides unless there is a specific note of intent. A majority of the suicides we know of were via drug overdoses (legal and illegal.)" I think the most we can say at this point is that the claims remain unverified.

We can also say that the number of claimed suicides exceeds the total number of recorded deaths.

Granted that it exceeds it only by one, is it really likely that no young people died from accident or illness in that time? Did no straight kids die at all? No non-LDS kids? Were all the 25 deaths in that age group gay Mormon kids committing suicide?

How credible is that, really?

 

[Calm]

58 minutes ago, Russell C McGregor said:

We can also say that the number of claimed suicides exceeds the total number of recorded deaths.

Granted that it exceeds it only by one, is it really likely that no young people died from accident or illness in that time? Did no straight kids die at all? No non-LDS kids? Were all the 25 deaths in that age group gay Mormon kids committing suicide?

How credible is that, really?

 

One death was homicide and another was illness, so 23 deaths (10 ruled suicide, 11 ruled accidental and two unknown).

Edited February 5, 2016 by Calm

[Nevo]

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

I think we can at least say it is impossible that her numbers are connected with the policy to even close to the level many assumed, even it is possible they might be related to other aspects of the Church.  (there not enough teen deaths in general to meet her numbers given since November even if one assumes every accidental and unknown death was a suicide, all suicides were LGBT and all were also LDS)

Yes, you're right. I stand corrected. I guess I should have read the latest Salt Lake Tribune article before posting. I agree that the Utah number that she provided (26) seems too high.

[Scott Lloyd]

36 minutes ago, Nevo said:

That's my sense, too, from reading her comments.

Here's what she wrote a few days ago in response to Geoff B.'s post at Millennial Star:

You've accused her of "fabricating the data" but I haven't seen anything yet that would support that conclusion. Regarding the disparity with the state's data, her husband has noted that "if you look into how suicide data is classified, anything that can be attributed as an accident and/or incidents of drug overdoses whether via legal or illegal drugs are not classified as suicides unless there is a specific note of intent. A majority of the suicides we know of were via drug overdoses (legal and illegal.)" I think the most we can say at this point is that the claims remain unverified.

The deaths of teenagers since November compiled by the state agency were mostly accidental. What do we know about the types of accidents?  

I tried to make the point earlier but was pretty much ignored, that, with the exception of drug overdose, it's hard to commit suicide and make it look accidental, especially for a desperate and irrational youth. Consider the common means: gunshot, hanging, poison, asphyxiation, stepping in front of a train or other vehicle, jumping from a building or bridge. 

Edited February 5, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Russell C McGregor]

2 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

Great observations--I fully agree.

In the desire to defend what many have perceived to be a deliberate attack on the church (although I never saw it as such), my concern is that there may be such an overcompensating effort to dismiss Ms. Montgomery's credibility and absolve LDS individuals and/or culture from any negative influence or contribution to the despair of suicidal gay Latter-day Saints that some kid, somewhere, decides to make another stupid and manipulative decision just to make the point that they ARE hurting and suicides DO exist--just like Stuart Matis' pointless, manipulative, and profoundly wasteful publicity stunt.

So, we should all shut up about the bogus suicide claims. Because if we don't, some kid somewhere might decide to commit suicide in order to prove us wrong. And that will be our fault.

Is that what you're trying to say?

Isn't it just possible that if the only messages a young, confused, depressed teenager hears about this is that all the others are jumping off the cliff, and nobody dares to contradict that message, it could contribute to "suicide contagion?"

In fact, isn't that at least as likely as your model of "suicidal defiance of facts?"

2 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

And as many have stated, even "just" one is one too many.

My concern is that in an effort to arrive at the truth of numbers, many may overcompensate by vilifying Ms. Montgomery by attributing motivations to her that I don't believe she ever had...

That's right. Ms Montgomery announced these "documented" suicides that didn't happen out of entirely pure motives. Or something.

Howsoever that may be, is it a bad thing to question the numbers?

Isn't it true that the real problem is the willingness of "activists" to weaponise anything and everything that comes to hand?

Because once that mindset is in place, it's not that huge a step to say, "we've got no handy materials from which to fashion a weapon, so let's just manufacture something home-made" is it?

2 hours ago, Daniel2 said:

I hope we all don't forget that suicide and suicide ideation IS a thing, and take enough care to remember that there ARE impressionable and hurting youth who are out there, listening and watching, and that what we say and how we say it can have a profound effect on them, for good or ill.

Yes, and that that applies to the Montgomerys of this world.

"Suicide contagion" is a thing, too.

And apparently -- and contrary to one of your more oft-repeated refrains -- gay kids leaving the Church puts them more at risk of suicide than staying.

 

[Calm]

There is one practice that has been becoming popular that could confuse accidents (can't remember if I read this here or elsewhere) and that is intentionally choking oneself for a high from oxygen deprivation.  If we had the accident reports, we could at least rule out those where someone else caused the accident or where it was unlikely to have been staged...such as a slip on the ice or water causing a head injury, being shot by someone else, being driven in a car by someone else or where the accident was caused by a different car and not one's own crossing the line.

Quote

In 2013, the top five injury-related deaths in Utah were suicides, poisonings (excludes suicides), unintentional falls, motor vehicle crashes, and unintentional suffocation.

http://www.health.utah.gov/vipp/

Edited February 5, 2016 by Calm

[Scott Lloyd]

41 minutes ago, Nevo said:

That's my sense, too, from reading her comments.

Here's what she wrote a few days ago in response to Geoff B.'s post at Millennial Star:

You've accused her of "fabricating the data" but I haven't seen anything yet that would support that conclusion. Regarding the disparity with the state's data, her husband has noted that "if you look into how suicide data is classified, anything that can be attributed as an accident and/or incidents of drug overdoses whether via legal or illegal drugs are not classified as suicides unless there is a specific note of intent. A majority of the suicides we know of were via drug overdoses (legal and illegal.)" I think the most we can say at this point is that the claims remain unverified.

Did Smac say she had fabricated the data? I thought his point has been that she has been careless in her assumptions. I think he or perhaps someone else used the word "sloppy." That's pretty much how I see it. 

[Avatar4321]

I'd still like to know how suicides among lgbt in the church compares to lgbt outside the church.

for all we know rates in the church are far lower. But we have literally no data on the subject

 

[Russell C McGregor]

9 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said:

I'd still like to know how suicides among lgbt in the church compares to lgbt outside the church.

for all we know rates in the church are far lower. But we have literally no data on the subject

 

But Avatar, even if that was the case, don't you know that "Even one is too many?"

So that even if the Church's teachings and support system were able to prevent all but one suicide, that one would still be the Church's fault?

Get with the program! Suicide stats are rhetorical weapons!!

 

[Russell C McGregor]

Here's something I wrote elsewhere on this topic.

Let's accept the fact that the claimed numbers -- 26 suicides in Utah, all gay Mormons -- are bogus. Which they are.

Let's look at the actual number of suicides for that age group, which is 10.

Let's also, for the sake of argument, assume that the two additional deaths from unspecified causes were also suicides, which brings us to 12.

Then, in the absence of any real data, let's apply some assumptions.

First, let's assume that half of the 12 suicides were LDS. That's a reasonable assumption, since a little over half the population of Utah is LDS, and LDS Church activity has been shown to have a protective effect against suicide.

Second, let's assume that half of the 12 suicides were homosexuals. That's a little bit shakier; the GLBT (or whatever the alphabet soup designation is these days) population is only about 2% of the total, but being "gay" does seem to increase the risk of suicide. (And it does so everywhere: in Greenwich Village, San Francisco and Holland as well as in Alabama, Tennessee and Utah.)

Incidentally, the notion that any group of 2% of the population was contributing 50% of the suicides is ghastly, and if true, would indicate a desperate problem in that group that needs immediate attention. I don't know if it really is that high; it's an assumption just to give us something to go on.

So, at the intersection of the Mormon fraction and the "gay" fraction, we have a possible 3 suicides of GLBT Mormon kids.

That's very sad, but is there any real reason to connect this to the recent policy changes?

Mind you, numbers like three and six (and even 26) are too small to be statistically significant. And I stress, these are only assumptions. But they give us a baseline number to work with until we get some reliable statistics.

Which we need not expect from "activists" with an axe to grind. (Or a slogan to chant.)