Religious Influence in LGBTQ Suicide may be Overblown

[Calm]

Daniel, My degree is in psychology, though for health reasons academically or professionally it never got farther than that.  Just mentioning that to give the context I have studied mental health for years in the past and have always been fascinated by motivation and the contrast between what is said and what is done.

I mistrust the accounts of personal struggles of LGBTs to the same extent I mistrust the accounts of anyone about our personal struggles.  There are a lot of us out there who lack insight into our motivations for our choices and I have seen plenty of evidence that even those who devote their lives to becoming more mindful of their choices and behaviour can still be completely clueless in interpreting their own behaviour when it comes to behaviour arising from personal trauma   As an easy example, my mother sees herself as someone whose ideal life is being actively involved in family, surrounded by grandchildren, going to family gettogethers, etc.  Her mother made choices that my mother saw as taking her away from the family and left her to be mother to her younger siblings and even her parents (in high school, for example, she would have to come home to make lunch for her dad).  However, her choices through the decades show that what she experiences as being most nuturing is being off by herself, reading and studying whether in her bedroom behind a locked door or moving away from family so it was impossible for anyone to visit more than once a year if lucky and even after Dad died choosing to live on her own rather than moving in with me as we had talked about since I had pretty much married the perfect son in law in her view.  She even now appears to enjoy visits more when from nonfamily members than family, I am guessing because she feels bad about not being the contributor/caregiver she has always seen herself as (and has been in many wonderful ways).

I include myself in my distrust of "personal insight".  I recognize the necessity to depend on it given we have no other way to really determine internal states on a day to day basis and given the complexity of human behaviour, I also recognize the limitations of statistical research, but if decently done (which unfortunately is not a given), I am likely going to trust statistical measures of behaviour more than anecdotal explanations in terms of generalized behaviour.

Edited January 17, 2019 by Calm

[provoman]

 

37 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

My biggest frustration with this topic is that so many seem to willingly ignore or mistrust the personal accounts that so many LGBT Mormons ourselves share about our own personal struggles with and overcoming suicide, and instead try only to discern the answers  from purely data-driven numbers by those who actually succumb to suicide without leaving clear or traceable answers/motives behind.

Exactly, "without leaving clear or traceable answers/motives", yet what did Ellen DeGeneres say on her show? She claimed that the 141% percent increase in suicide amongst teenagers was cause by the Mormon Church.

[Daniel2]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

Daniel, My degree is in psychology, though for health reasons academically or professionally it never got farther than that.  Just mentioning that to give the context I have studied mental health for years in the past and have always been fascinated by motivation and the contrast between what is said and what is done.

I mistrust the accounts of personal struggles of LGBTs to the same extent I mistrust the accounts of anyone about our personal struggles.  There are a lot of us out there who lack insight into our motivations for our choices and I have seen plenty of evidence that even those who devote their lives to becoming more mindful of their choices and behaviour can still be completely clueless in interpreting their own behaviour when it comes to behaviour arising from personal trauma   As an easy example, my mother sees herself as someone whose ideal life is being actively involved in family, surrounded by grandchildren, going to family gettogethers, etc.  Her mother made choices that my mother saw as taking her away from the family and left her to be mother to her younger siblings and even her parents (in high school, for example, she would have to come home to make lunch for her dad).  However, her choices through the decades show that what she experiences as being most nuturing is being off by herself, reading and studying whether in her bedroom behind a locked door or moving away from family so it was impossible for anyone to visit more than once a year if lucky and even after Dad died choosing to live on her own rather than moving in with me as we had talked about since I had pretty much married the perfect son in law in her view.  She even now appears to enjoy visits more when from nonfamily members than family, I am guessing because she feels bad about not being the contributor/caregiver she has always seen herself as (and has been in many wonderful ways).

I include myself in my distrust of "personal insight".  I recognize the necessity to depend on it given we have no other way to really determine internal states on a day to day basis and given the complexity of human behaviour, I also recognize the limitations of statistical research, but if decently done (which unfortunately is not a given), I am likely going to trust statistical measures of behaviour more than anecdotal explanations in terms of generalized behaviour.

By the same token, I could ask what value you place in the testimonies shared in every fast and testimony meeting...? Do you find those compelling and believable?

I agree that a healthy dose of skepticim about and accounting for individual’s personal biases and blindspots in their own accounts isn’t a bad thing, but to dismiss any significant value in similar trends of collected accounts across specific populations in the name of “but individuals can’t truly know themselves or their motives” strikes me as an attempt to justify a worldview that tries to ignore collective stories that may not match your own values.    

Edited January 18, 2019 by Daniel2

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Daniel2 said:

to dismiss any significant value in similar trends of collected accounts across specific populations 

I would say I don't dismiss out of hand, but I definitely look for confirming evidence and question the narrative if I see contradictions....for example, how teens talk about how their parents treat them and how their parents actually treat them in my personal experience often doesn't line up very well in terms of deprivations (why the kids aren't given something or allowed to do something), so my skepticism towards teens talking about mistreatment by parents tends to be higher than adults talking about mistreatment by their spouse.  However, research detailing typical interactions between teens and parents I have often found useful.

-----

Realized I skipped this part of the question first time around:

As far as testimonies being compelling, I don't think I have ever looked on others' experiences as "compelling" in the sense of causing me to want to live like them.  Thinking "hey, that's cool" is probably as far as it goes.  I never had a role model, but there would be bits and pieces of people's lives that I thought I would like to have in my life.  Don't think I ever consciously modeled myself after anyone to get them though...the life I want has never been close enough to anyone else's to do that really (believe that through imitation I could achieve it) and I have as long as I can remember seen people's experiences as a whole...what makes them who they are...as unique.  My parents pushed us to be independent and think for ourselves in theory (that is what they talked about and admired), but they were authoritarian in other ways...not terribly comfortable if we started to explore new ways of doing things if it intruded on their spheres.  So I was taught to see myself as unique and then given opportunity to rebel when I felt I was being pushed to fall in line too much.  Not that I looked rebellious I am sure, also being painfully shy I kept to the norms in many ways.

As far as believeable, if it is extraordinary, I have to know the person to not be skeptical when I think about it, but I feel no need to challenge most things in real life unless I see actual damage being done because people learn in different ways and I doubt I know best for how that should be for anyone, except myself...and even there I would phrase it as knowing better than others, but still having the level of an idiot probably.  In that sense of believing people's descriptions of their own experiences, I am probably not a very trusting person.  I don't really believe my own, probably ask for reality checks to the point of annoyance from my friends and family who know me well enough.  Otoh, I want to believe people are fundamentally good and reasonable, so I assume positive reasons for behaviour in the majority of cases.  Someone generally has to have burned me pretty badly or someone I loved or a child for me to go first to negatives.  There are a few people who I have instinctively distrusted just by their appearance or the tones of their voice, but that is rare face to face.  The exception to that rule is politicians. Possibly also people who come across as arrogant plus humorless to me.  Big button pusher that.  I am as much of a mass of contradictions as anyone else, I suspect.

Edited January 18, 2019 by Calm

[california boy]

17 hours ago, Calm said:

Daniel, My degree is in psychology, though for health reasons academically or professionally it never got farther than that.  Just mentioning that to give the context I have studied mental health for years in the past and have always been fascinated by motivation and the contrast between what is said and what is done.

I mistrust the accounts of personal struggles of LGBTs to the same extent I mistrust the accounts of anyone about our personal struggles.  There are a lot of us out there who lack insight into our motivations for our choices and I have seen plenty of evidence that even those who devote their lives to becoming more mindful of their choices and behaviour can still be completely clueless in interpreting their own behaviour when it comes to behaviour arising from personal trauma   As an easy example, my mother sees herself as someone whose ideal life is being actively involved in family, surrounded by grandchildren, going to family gettogethers, etc.  Her mother made choices that my mother saw as taking her away from the family and left her to be mother to her younger siblings and even her parents (in high school, for example, she would have to come home to make lunch for her dad).  However, her choices through the decades show that what she experiences as being most nuturing is being off by herself, reading and studying whether in her bedroom behind a locked door or moving away from family so it was impossible for anyone to visit more than once a year if lucky and even after Dad died choosing to live on her own rather than moving in with me as we had talked about since I had pretty much married the perfect son in law in her view.  She even now appears to enjoy visits more when from nonfamily members than family, I am guessing because she feels bad about not being the contributor/caregiver she has always seen herself as (and has been in many wonderful ways).

I include myself in my distrust of "personal insight".  I recognize the necessity to depend on it given we have no other way to really determine internal states on a day to day basis and given the complexity of human behaviour, I also recognize the limitations of statistical research, but if decently done (which unfortunately is not a given), I am likely going to trust statistical measures of behaviour more than anecdotal explanations in terms of generalized behaviour.

You don't believe anyone's life experience as being authentic?  

[stemelbow]

18 hours ago, Calm said:

Daniel, My degree is in psychology, though for health reasons academically or professionally it never got farther than that.  Just mentioning that to give the context I have studied mental health for years in the past and have always been fascinated by motivation and the contrast between what is said and what is done.

I mistrust the accounts of personal struggles of LGBTs to the same extent I mistrust the accounts of anyone about our personal struggles.  There are a lot of us out there who lack insight into our motivations for our choices and I have seen plenty of evidence that even those who devote their lives to becoming more mindful of their choices and behaviour can still be completely clueless in interpreting their own behaviour when it comes to behaviour arising from personal trauma   As an easy example, my mother sees herself as someone whose ideal life is being actively involved in family, surrounded by grandchildren, going to family gettogethers, etc.  Her mother made choices that my mother saw as taking her away from the family and left her to be mother to her younger siblings and even her parents (in high school, for example, she would have to come home to make lunch for her dad).  However, her choices through the decades show that what she experiences as being most nuturing is being off by herself, reading and studying whether in her bedroom behind a locked door or moving away from family so it was impossible for anyone to visit more than once a year if lucky and even after Dad died choosing to live on her own rather than moving in with me as we had talked about since I had pretty much married the perfect son in law in her view.  She even now appears to enjoy visits more when from nonfamily members than family, I am guessing because she feels bad about not being the contributor/caregiver she has always seen herself as (and has been in many wonderful ways).

I include myself in my distrust of "personal insight".  I recognize the necessity to depend on it given we have no other way to really determine internal states on a day to day basis and given the complexity of human behaviour, I also recognize the limitations of statistical research, but if decently done (which unfortunately is not a given), I am likely going to trust statistical measures of behaviour more than anecdotal explanations in terms of generalized behaviour.

With suicide and suicidal feelings comes tons of mental difficulties, no doubt.  But that hardly suggests that we can't trust people who tell us what is causing them to feel certain ways.  I am more likely to trust my wife's view of why she may feel sad, then trust what her dad thinks, particularly if they contradict. 

So, let's say a parent is interviewed after his/her child commits suicide.  That parent may not know that the child was gay, perhaps.  That parent may not know that the child felt extreme guilt, extreme levels of not belonging  because of Church teaching and culture conflicting with his/her orientation.  

Now, let's say instead of that child committing suicide for some reason, as luck would have it, that child decided not to go through with it.  That child, gets past it and grows up.  Let's say as that child gets to adulthood, he comes out to his family and rejects the church much tot he chagrin and disappointment to his family and parents.  Now as an adult that guy looks back and feels strongly that he was suicidal and a youth because of Church teaching and culture and it was but what seems to amount to luck that kept him from committing suicide.  If he did commit suicide no one would ever know what he felt was contributing to his sadness and hopelessness.  

What I would say, what seems clearly missing from this study is that guy who as a young person, as lucky circumstance may have it, did not commit suicide.  Without it, it is a very slanted and incomplete study. 

[provoman]

3 hours ago, stemelbow said:

 

What I would say, what seems clearly missing from this study is that guy who as a young person, as lucky circumstance may have it, did not commit suicide.  Without it, it is a very slanted and incomplete study. 

 

What study do you refer too? The person interviewed - a gay man - is working for the State of Utah and is currently in the process of gathering information about youth suicides in Utah...he is collecting data from the sources and those closest to the individual who died. Given that he is collecting the data from the source(s) how can what he says be “slanted and incomplete”? 

[Calm]

5 hours ago, california boy said:

You don't believe anyone's life experience as being authentic?  

If by authentic you mean they can perfectly describe their behaviour and the causes of it, no. I think we see ourselves through a glass darkly. 

I don’t believe people are being intentionally self deceptive or deceiving others, we just lack clear understanding because we can’t stand outside ourselves as dispassionate observers aware of all the environmental effects imposing on us  nor are we always aware of the internal processes going on. For a significant time I believed my husband was royally ticking me off with his behaviour because I would feel angry and he was the obvious cause. Turns out the anger was a blood sugar disorder due to sleep deprivation. Once that was controlled turns out his behaviour was at times frustrating, but mostly just his quirks. The same thing happens with my restless legs disorder whose physical sensations mimic anxiety. Feeling anxious or so I thought, I would look for reasons and then in trying to understand myself, I actually created anxiety rather than responding to it. 

Knowing how much physical state affects mental and emotional and the reverse makes me very aware that sometimes our environment is not what is the cause of our feelings  

Was I being authentic when I blamed my husband for upsetting me?  I certainly believed he was the cause and my reactions were then based on that belief.  I wasn’t pretending to be angry, I thought I really was...but I was wrong.  I don’t see that as making me inauthentic, just mistaken.  I don’t see others making the same sort of misattributions being inauthentic. 

[Calm]

Stem, depression is not always caused by environmental triggers, but often is a result of biochemical imbalances. But when a person feels depressed, they are going to be looking for reasons for it and some may misdiagnosed the cause as external rather than internal. Or they may inflate the impact of social interactions  

I am not saying ignore possible external causes of suicidal ideation, but it is extraordinarily dangerous imo to fixate on environmental causes because that can lead to incomplete treatment, leaving the sufferer still suffering and possibly may even destroy the supportive relationships they so desparately need. I have seen people walk away from their families in anger because their feelings of pain are being translated by them into they are being vilely mistreated, destroying family bonds and putting themselves in vulnerable positions where they were taken advantage of others, even abused and raped because of what ended up being a primarily physical disorder. If they had understood the actual causes of their out of control emotions and not placed the blame on others, they would have been safer and possibly even received help many years earlier than they did (for those that did). 

Obviously suicidal ideation is not always triggered by physical causes, there are individuals who are abused and rejected by their families and communities or who have other understandable reasons for feeling hopeless or placing a low value on their lives (anticipating a lifetime of extreme pain through disabilities or years of slowly dying in crippling ways, for example). 

Edited January 18, 2019 by Calm

[Gray]

45 minutes ago, Calm said:

I think we see ourselves through a glass darkly. 

 

I would think in most cases the glass view into your inner self is even more dark for a third party, like a medical examiner or a relative or a researcher. Maybe a therapist might sometimes have greater insight, but barring that...

[Meerkat]

On 1/17/2019 at 3:04 PM, Calm said:

I am likely going to trust statistical measures of behaviour more than anecdotal explanations in terms of generalized behaviour.

This makes sense to me.  Diet and body chemistry imbalances can cause behavior that may seem rational to the individual on Monday, and irrational on Tuesday.  Remorse over actions or misjudgments done in an altered state can be hard to live with, and difficult to attribute as a cause.  Then there are those who have compartalized various kinds of abuse who may have no idea why they rage.

6 hours ago, stemelbow said:

That parent may not know that the child felt extreme guilt, extreme levels of not belonging  because of Church teaching and culture conflicting with his/her orientation.  

Is the problem Church teaching or culture, or is there something else going on that is not as easy to identify?

1 hour ago, Calm said:

I am not saying ignore possible external causes of suicidal ideation, but it is extraordinarily dangerous imo to fixate on environmental causes because that can lead to incomplete treatment, leaving the sufferer still suffering and possibly may even destroy the supportive relationships they so desparately need. I have seen people walk away from their families in anger because their feelings of pain are being translated by them into they are being vilely mistreated, destroying family bonds and putting themselves in vulnerable positions where they were taken advantage of others, even abused and raped because of what ended up being a primarily physical disorder. If they had understood the actual causes of their out of control emotions and not placed the blame on others, they would have been safer and possibly even received help many years earlier than they did (for those that did)

A family member exhibited bizarre behavior, then felt deep guilt and remorse.  He couldn't seem to get on top of his emotions and attempted suicide. He has been diagnosed with Hashimotos Disorder and done a wonderful job controlling his diet and is doing remarkably better.  He still has periods of sadness, but is high functioning and sel reliant.  He wants to be happy.  He wishes he could go back and make a fresh start.  Rarely is Hashimotos checked.  I'm sure there are other causes like that.  

Edited January 19, 2019 by Meerkat

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

I would think in most cases the glass view into your inner self is even more dark for a third party, like a medical examiner or a relative or a researcher. Maybe a therapist might sometimes have greater insight, but barring that...

I wouldn't disagree if mental/emotional health is not extreme, but disturbed mental thoughts by their very nature can lead to false ideas and beliefs about oneself.  And suicidal ideation generally involves disordered emotions and thoughts, though there are some cases where I believe suicide is a result of rationale decisions...culture plays a lot into allowing suicide to be considered as a valid response.

Also research can focus on finding commonalities in ways that can eliminate more bias and hidden causes than anecdotal examination of a few people can if done properly.  It can never be perfect, of course and therefore are many things that anecdotes are more useful for than statistical research.

Research has shown that communities shape the narratives and therefore understandings of the individuals within them.  I tend to be very cautious if I hear similar wording and I know individuals have been exposed to others speaking in similar ways...and yes that goes for testimony meetings.  I prefer hearing specific examples of their lives so the more individual experiences can be better identified.  Those are more meaningful to me, but I also appreciate the need to feel one is sharing in a common experience and believing that using the same language likely means you had a similar experience and perception.  Communities are created in many cases by shared experience, I belong to a community of those who have my sleep disorder and another that enjoys researching and sharing info about religion and this one.  Of course, I would expect commonalities in experiences across the group....for example, many in my sleep disorder report being treated as hypochondriac when younger by their families or lazy.  Others talk about anxieties driving because of fear of falling asleep.  Those have been major experiences in my life and I will often mention them when describing my experiences as I have noticed others will too (family has mostly apologized once they started getting the same symptoms and figuring out is was a real thing I am not probably blowing out of proportion, but 40 years of being the butt of family jokes isn't going away anytime soon, especially given the first ten of them were in my teens).  Currently I get laughs from my family for using language I have picked up from studying shyness, for both myself and my daughter.  The concept that shyness may be a result of being highly aware of one's environment was something .I got teased about because I adopted an abbreviation.  If you go back five years or more, you can find TV shows, news articles, etc. claiming restless legs syndrome is a fake disorder created by pharmaceutical companies.  When doctors refuse to give you drugs or even kick you out of their practice as happened to me, the comedy routines and righteous indignation sound really hollow.

So yes, I believe very much in listening to people's personal experience.  I also believe in part of that listening should be checking it with the best available research out there if there are lifethreatening potentials involved.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

  Women are more prone to attempt suicide than men (though men die at higher rates because they use more effective/violent means usually).**** Is any woman here offended by suggesting that there may be biological vulnerabilities to experiencing suicidal feelings as well psychosocial causes that are female specific (most obvious postpartum).

If a girl starts having suicidal thoughts at the same time she hits puberty, but she attributes it to feeling rejected at school or home, is a doctor or parent being unempathetic or refusing to face reality if they insist along with psychotherapy and working to improve her environment, she take tests to determine if there is any hormonal or other biological imbalance involved?

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/016503279390029J

*****https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4539867/

If it turns out by regulating hormones (Seasonale anyone?....next on the list to try for my daughter as it so happens), her depression lifts, if years later she speaks of how kids at school made her feel depressed because that was how she experienced it, is the parent wrong for disagreeing?  Or the doctor for urging caution in going off her medication because she feels she has found her community and has a supportive network of friends and families?

 

Edited January 19, 2019 by Calm

[Tacenda]

On 1/17/2019 at 11:43 AM, california boy said:

It is hard to evaluate objectively anything that is in the article.  Virtually no data is included.  So it ends up mostly being an opinion piece.  

Touche!

[cinepro]

5 hours ago, provoman said:

 

What study do you refer too? The person interviewed - a gay man - is working for the State of Utah and is currently in the process of gathering information about youth suicides in Utah...he is collecting data from the sources and those closest to the individual who died. Given that he is collecting the data from the source(s) how can what he says be “slanted and incomplete”? 

The article points out that he is limiting his data collection to those who attempted suicide, or those who were in the best position to know the factors that led to someone committing suicide. 

It's not explicitly stated, but it is strongly implied, that he is purposefully neglecting the anecdotal evidence available on the exmormon subreddit, blogs, podcasts and other sources.  For example, on the exmormon subreddit there are dozens of people who know, for a fact, that the vast majority of teen suicides in Utah are directly caused by the Church's teachings about homosexuality.  If this data isn't taken into account, the study won't be complete.

[provoman]

1 hour ago, cinepro said:

The article points out that he is limiting his data collection to those who attempted suicide, or those who were in the best position to know the factors that led to someone committing suicide. 

It's not explicitly stated, but it is strongly implied, that he is purposefully neglecting the anecdotal evidence available on the exmormon subreddit, blogs, podcasts and other sources.  For example, on the exmormon subreddit there are dozens of people who know, for a fact, that the vast majority of teen suicides in Utah are directly caused by the Church's teachings about homosexuality.  If this data isn't taken into account, the study won't be complete.

considering that the Mr Staley is 

gathering data that “makes up a “psychological autopsy,” and involves, among other things, talking to the people suicide victims leave behind: family and friends. “We’re getting real-time data about suicide that we’ve never gotten before,” Staley says.

I hardly see a basis for claiming a study is incomplete because some anonymous sureddit user is not cited.

 

Edited January 19, 2019 by provoman

[Calm]

45 minutes ago, provoman said:

considering that the Mr Staley is 

gathering data that “makes up a “psychological autopsy,” and involves, among other things, talking to the people suicide victims leave behind: family and friends. “We’re getting real-time data about suicide that we’ve never gotten before,” Staley says.

I hardly see a basis for claiming a study is incomplete because some anonymous sureddit user is not cited.

 

I am pretty sure cinepro was being sarcastic.

[Thinking]

On 1/15/2019 at 2:20 PM, bluebell said:

may not be the case.

Well that's deep.

[Calm]

56 minutes ago, Thinking said:

Well that's deep.

Considering how Staley put it “There’s no data to show that, period,” I get the impression the writer is trying to ease into it with that wimpy transition.

For Staley to be willing to release something that affects a very divisive topic when he isn't through gathering or processing the data, I am thinking that what he has so far must be pretty definite, enough that even if unanticipated data shows up, there won't be much change...like being willing to call an election when only a fraction of the results are in.

Staley also appears to think the results are going to upsetting to some if they need to prepare for it and wants to help make the change of paradigm less painful, quicker, less contentious perhaps?

Otoh, he may be getting pressure from his bosses to early release preliminary analyses because it works well for them.

Edited January 19, 2019 by Calm

[Thinking]

12 hours ago, Calm said:

Considering how Staley put it “There’s no data to show that, period,” I get the impression the writer is trying to ease into it with that wimpy transition.

For Staley to be willing to release something that affects a very divisive topic when he isn't through gathering or processing the data, I am thinking that what he has so far must be pretty definite, enough that even if unanticipated data shows up, there won't be much change...like being willing to call an election when only a fraction of the results are in.

Staley also appears to think the results are going to upsetting to some if they need to prepare for it and wants to help make the change of paradigm less painful, quicker, less contentious perhaps?

Otoh, he may be getting pressure from his bosses to early release preliminary analyses because it works well for them.

There's little doubt that in any suicide there will be multiple contributing factors. The nature of suicide doesn't make it reasonable to conduct controlled experiments, so finding any correlation from a study doesn't establish causation. Of course we can use verified communication from the victims to help identify some of the factors, but one factor from one victim may not be a factor for another. It seems to me that some groups are trying to eliminate themselves as factors so they don't have to make changes. We should all examine ourselves to see if we can make the necessary adjustments that will reduce the number of suicides.

[Calm]

22 minutes ago, Thinking said:

It seems to me that some groups are trying to eliminate themselves as factors so they don't have to make changes

What groups would those be?

[Calm]

On 1/18/2019 at 6:25 PM, Calm said:

  Women are more prone to attempt suicide than men (though men die at higher rates because they use more effective/violent means usually).**** Is any woman here offended by suggesting that there may be biological vulnerabilities to experiencing suicidal feelings as well psychosocial causes that are female specific (most obvious postpartum).

If a girl starts having suicidal thoughts at the same time she hits puberty, but she attributes it to feeling rejected at school or home, is a doctor or parent being unempathetic or refusing to face reality if they insist along with psychotherapy and working to improve her environment, she take tests to determine if there is any hormonal or other biological imbalance involved?

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/016503279390029J

*****https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4539867/

If it turns out by regulating hormones (Seasonale anyone?....next on the list to try for my daughter as it so happens), her depression lifts, if years later she speaks of how kids at school made her feel depressed because that was how she experienced it, is the parent wrong for disagreeing?  Or the doctor for urging caution in going off her medication because she feels she has found her community and has a supportive network of friends and families?

 

Any responses to this alternate scenario?

[Calm]

I think the opinion piece does a good job of summarizing known facts:

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900069533/guest-opinion-the-church-and-lgbt-youth-suicide-inaccurate-claims-may-do-more-harm-than-good.html

Quote

Even more specific, the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention in conjunction with the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation and Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays state that, “when individuals and organizations talk about suicide safely and accurately, they can help reduce the likelihood of its occurrence; however, talking about suicide in inaccurate or exaggerated ways can elevate that risk in vulnerable individuals.”...

This comes at the end, but this and the above are the most important parts imo so posting it up top:

Quote

The Utah Suicide Prevention Coalition further notes that "together we can make a difference to prevent suicide, provide caring, evidenced based interventions, and foster environments that promote acceptance, healing and recovery. With a problem as complex as suicide, no one solution will be enough. Our health, behavioral health systems, schools and communities need to collectively work together implementing the best practices and data available to achieve our goals.”

All of us must acknowledge the difficulties of others and work to help them feel welcome and loved. Those refusing to acknowledge LGBTQ youths as a vulnerable group ignore the evidence and perpetuate inaction. At the same time, those who primarily attribute heightened Utah suicide rates to LGBTQ youths and the church are unintentionally making it harder to address this pressing problem that will require us all to come together.

 

Quote

While much has been said about Utah suicide rates, particularly in relation to LGBTQ adolescents and the church, many still wonder: What’s fact and what’s speculation?

Utah’s suicide rate is in fact higher than the national average.

However, this is rarely contextualized. Except Alaska, the nine states with the highest suicide rates (including Utah) are within the same geographic area. Interestingly, of the states in this area Utah has the lowest suicide rate for 12-19 year-olds. These states share many characteristics associated with higher suicide rates, including rurality. Between 2011 and 2016, Utah County’s suicide rate was 22% above the national rate. However, the suicide rate of the more rural Carbon County (adjacent to Utah County) was more than 200% above the national rate. In noting this however, as AFSP counsels, we should avoid over generalizations about any area that may normalize suicidal behavior within that area.

Utah’s increase in youth suicide between 2011 and 2015 is sometimes attributed to LGBTQ youth suicides. And while LGBTQ youth do have higher levels of suicidality (a fact all should acknowledge and work tirelessly to ameliorate) it’s not clear that Utah’s increase was related to LGBTQ youths.

The CDC, for instance, attempted to identify the sexual orientation of Utah youths who died by suicide between 2011 and 2015. Of those whose sexual orientation they could identify (which was the minority) 15% were LGBTQ. This percentage is based on partial data since sexual orientation is not consistently recorded with suicide. This finding is somewhat lower than a 40-state study, also based on CDC data, that up to 21% of 12-17 year old suicides were LGBTQ related.

Even assuming this higher percentage for Utah, LGBTQ youths would only account for a small portion of the tragic increase in youth suicide from 2011 to 2015.

It has been further speculated that The Church of Jesus Christ’s 2015 policy regarding LGBTQ families and baptism was responsible for a continuing increase in adolescent suicide in Utah. However, as has been noted, Utah youth suicides actually dropped by 20% the year after the policy was announced. In 2017, youth suicides in Utah once again began to increase. But the available data does not support the narrative that in Utah a dramatic increase in LGBTQ youth suicides followed the church’s 2015 policy.

Research regarding Utah youth suicidality and The Church of Jesus Christ is instructive. Though counterintuitive to some, research consistently finds that religion in general, and the church in particular, are typically protective against suicidality. Again, it would be an oversimplification to say religion is a protective factor in every case. Many have negative experiences with religion. But discussions about The Church of Jesus Christ and youth suicide should at least include what appears to be the most common research finding, that membership in the church is associated with lower suicide rates.

The CDC’s study of Utah found Latter-day Saint youths actually had a lower suicide risk. Regarding LGBTQ youths, the Family Foundations of Youth Development study found 44% of Latter-day Saint LGBTQ youths had seriously considered suicide compared to 47% of LGBTQ youths from other religions and 77% of Atheist/Agnostic LGBTQ youths (the national rate for LGB youth is 47.7%).

There are a few studies pointing to difficulties of some LGBTQ members of the church. These studies are typically not with youths, do not compare Latter-day Saints to others and use convenience rather than random samples. The studies raise areas of concern that deserve attention.

However, current data call into question the narrative that church policies or teachings are somehow a driving force behind the Utah suicide crisis. Combined with best practice guidelines, asserting such a connection is in fact potentially harmful. It is clear that many have felt deeply wounded by their church experience, and certainly some youths connect suicide or suicide attempts to this anguish. Some LGBTQ youths seriously struggle with their faith experiences. Others derive protection from their faith experiences and communities. Both are authentic lived realities. Both should be heard and understood.

Along with this, as the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention points out, “suicide deaths are almost always the result of multiple overlapping causes, including mental health issues that might not have been recognized or treated.” They underscore that linking suicide directly to external factors risks normalizing suicide by suggesting that it is a natural reaction to such experiences.

Edited May 9, 2019 by Calm