Two sides of the same coin? The association between suicide stigma and suicide normalisation.

AIMS: Evidence suggests that suicide stigma (i.e. negative attitudes towards persons affected by suicide/suicidality) and suicide normalisation (i.e. liberal attitudes towards suicide) are both associated with increased suicide risk. Despite conceptual similarities and potential interaction, suicide stigma and suicide normalisation have usually been investigated separately. We used cross-sectional data from a community sample to test the association between suicide stigma and suicide normalisation as well as to identify their respective determinants and consequences. METHODS: Participants were N = 3.269 adults recruited from an established online-panel using quotas to reflect the composition of the German general population with regard to age, gender, education and region. We collected information about suicide stigma, suicide normalisation, intentions to seek help for suicidality, current suicidality, suicide literacy, negative mood and socio-demographic variables. We used regression modelling to determine the association between suicide stigma and suicide normalisation as well as to identify their determinants and consequences. RESULTS: Suicide stigma and suicide normalisation were inversely associated so that higher suicide stigma scores were linked to lower suicide normalisation. More suicide stigma was associated with reduced intentions to seeking professional help, increased willingness to seek help from family and friends and lower odds to experience current suicidality, however the association between suicide stigma and intentions to seek professional help diminished after controlling for confounding variables. Increased suicide normalisation was linked to reduced intentions to seek help from professionals or family and friends, as well as higher odds to experience current suicidality, even after controlling for confounding variables. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that interventions to reduce public suicide stigma are at risk to unintentionally increase suicide normalisation, which appears to be a key barrier to seeking help for suicidality. Future research should therefore identify strategies to improve attitudes towards persons affected by suicidality that avoid normalisation, i.e. do not convey the message of suicide as an acceptable solution for difficult life situations. One strategy with great potential to safely reduce public suicide sigma could be interventions that stimulate interpersonal contact with affected persons sharing their recovery story.

[Suicide stigma and suicide prevention]. / Suizidstigma und Suizidprävention.

In many societies suicide was and is an extremely controversial topic. This review article outlines the historical background of social condemnation of suicidal thoughts and actions in the western world. It summarizes current research results about the consequences of suicide stigma for affected persons and its relevance for suicide prevention. Finally, the next steps in research and prevention are discussed. Over time and in different cultures, the societal judgement of suicide has greatly varied. During antiquity, some philosophers viewed suicide negatively and by the fifth century AD suicide was widely condemned by societies across the western world. Until today suicide remains a taboo topic in Germany and other countries. Current research showed that the social condemnation of suicidal thoughts and behavior (i.e. suicide stigma) is an additional stressor among persons who experience or have experienced suicidality and their relatives. Furthermore, suicide stigma is considered to be a central barrier to seeking help for and disclosure of suicidality. Despite its relevance for suicide prevention, only a few interventions to reduce suicide stigma among members of the general public and to support affected persons in dealing with suicide stigma exist.

Involuntary psychiatric hospitalisation, stigma stress and recovery: a 2-year study.

AIMS: Compulsory admission can be experienced as devaluing and stigmatising by people with mental illness. Emotional reactions to involuntary hospitalisation and stigma-related stress may affect recovery, but longitudinal data are lacking. We, therefore, examined the impact of stigma-related emotional reactions and stigma stress on recovery over a 2-year period. METHOD: Shame and self-contempt as emotional reactions to involuntary hospitalisation, stigma stress, self-stigma and empowerment, as well as recovery were assessed among 186 individuals with serious mental illness and a history of recent involuntary hospitalisation. RESULTS: More shame, self-contempt and stigma stress at baseline were correlated with increased self-stigma and reduced empowerment after 1 year. More stigma stress at baseline was associated with poor recovery after 2 years. In a longitudinal path analysis more stigma stress at baseline predicted poorer recovery after 2 years, mediated by decreased empowerment after 1 year, controlling for age, gender, symptoms and recovery at baseline. CONCLUSION: Stigma stress may have a lasting detrimental effect on recovery among people with mental illness and a history of involuntary hospitalisation. Anti-stigma interventions that reduce stigma stress and programs that enhance empowerment could improve recovery. Future research should test the effect of such interventions on recovery.

Mental illness stigma and suicidality: the role of public and individual stigma.

AIMS: Suicide rates are increased among unemployed individuals and mental illness stigma can contribute to both unemployment and suicidality. Persons with mental illness perceive negative attitudes among the general public and experience discrimination in their everyday life (=public stigma components) potentially leading to self-stigma and anticipated discrimination (=individual stigma components). Previous research found evidence for an association between aspects of mental illness stigma and suicidality, but has not yet clarified the underlying pathways explaining how different stigma components interact and contribute to suicidal ideation. METHOD: Public and individual stigma components and their association with suicidal ideation were examined among 227 unemployed persons with mental illness. A path model linking public stigma components (experienced discrimination, perceived stigma) with suicidal ideation, mediated by individual stigma components (anticipated discrimination, self-stigma), was examined using structural equation modelling within Mplus. RESULTS: Our sample was equally split in terms of gender, on average 43 years old and about half reported no suicidal ideation during the past 30 days. In bivariate analyses all stigma components were significantly associated with suicidal ideation. In the path model and controlling for symptoms, the association between experienced discrimination and suicidal ideation was fully mediated by anticipated discrimination and self-stigma. Perceived stigma's contribution to suicidal ideation was fully mediated by anticipated discrimination, but not by self-stigma. CONCLUSIONS: In general, programmes addressing multiple stigma components seem to be most effective in improving suicide prevention. Besides interventions targeting negative attitudes and discriminating behaviours of the general public, programmes to support persons with mental illness in coping with perceived and experienced stigma could improve suicide prevention. Future studies should test the short- and long-term effects of such interventions on suicidality and further investigate the role of stigma coping (e.g. secrecy) and emotional consequences (e.g. hopelessness and loneliness) for the association between stigma components and suicidality.

[Stigma - risk factor and consequence of suicidal behavior : Implications for suicide prevention]. / Stigma ­ Risikofaktor und Konsequenz suizidalen Verhaltens : Implikationen für die Suizidprävention.

Mental illness, previous suicidal behavior and loss of a relative by suicide are strong risk factors for suicidality. Both mental illness and suicide are stigmatized, which is a burden for those affected and potentially contributes to suicidality among stigmatized individuals. Many consequences of stigma, e. g. social isolation, low self-esteem and hopelessness, are well-known predictors of suicidality. Interventions to reduce stigmatization might therefore be an important component of successful suicide prevention. This paper discusses the currently available knowledge regarding this hypothesis. Many studies confirmed the association between the stigmatization of mental illness and suicidality and there is initial evidence for the influence of suicide stigma and suicidality. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of anti-stigma interventions to reduce suicidality and prevent suicide has not yet been tested. Reducing stigma among members of the general population and mental health care professionals as well as programs to support individuals in coping with stigmatization could be important components of successful suicide prevention.

Stigma-related stress, shame and avoidant coping reactions among members of the general population with elevated symptom levels.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether mental illness stigma affects individuals with subthreshold syndromes outside clinical settings. We therefore investigated the role of different stigma variables, including stigma-related stress and shame reactions, for avoidant stigma coping among members of the general population with elevated symptom levels. METHODS: Based on a representative population survey, general stress resilience, stigma variables, shame about having a mental illness as well as avoidant stigma coping (secrecy and social withdrawal) were assessed by self-report among 676 participants with elevated symptom levels. Stigma variables and resilience were examined as predictors of avoidant stigma coping in a path model. RESULTS: Increased stigma stress was predicted by lower general stress resilience as well as by higher levels of perceived stigma, group identification and perceived legitimacy of discrimination. More shame was associated with higher perceived legitimacy. Lower resilience as well as more perceived stigma, group identification and perceived legitimacy predicted avoidant coping. Stigma stress partly mediated effects of resilience, perceived stigma and group identification on avoidant coping; shame partly mediated effects of perceived legitimacy on coping. Stigma stress and shame were also directly and positively related to avoidant stigma coping. Analyses were adjusted for symptoms, neuroticism and sociodemographic variables. CONCLUSIONS: Stigma may affect a larger proportion of the population than previously thought because stigma variables predicted secrecy and withdrawal among members of the general population with elevated, but overall mild symptom levels. Avoidant stigma coping likely has harmful effects, potentially exacerbating pre-existing psychological distress and undermining social networks. This highlights the need to reduce public stigma as well as to support individuals with subthreshold syndromes in their coping with stigma stress and shame reactions.

Mental illness stigma, secrecy and suicidal ideation.

AIMS: Whether the public stigma associated with mental illness negatively affects an individual, largely depends on whether the person has been labelled 'mentally ill'. For labelled individuals concealing mental illness is a common strategy to cope with mental illness stigma, despite secrecy's potential negative consequences. In addition, initial evidence points to a link between stigma and suicidality, but quantitative data from community samples are lacking. METHODS: Based on previous literature about mental illness stigma and suicidality, as well as about the potential influence of labelling processes and secrecy, a theory-driven model linking perceived mental illness stigma and suicidal ideation by a mediation of secrecy and hopelessness was established. This model was tested separately among labelled and unlabelled persons using data derived from a Swiss cross-sectional population-based study. A large community sample of people with elevated psychiatric symptoms was examined by interviews and self-report, collecting information on perceived stigma, secrecy, hopelessness and suicidal ideation. Participants who had ever used mental health services were considered as labelled 'mentally ill'. A descriptive analysis, stratified logistic regression models and a path analysis testing a three-path mediation effect were conducted. RESULTS: While no significant differences between labelled and unlabelled participants were observed regarding perceived stigma and secrecy, labelled individuals reported significantly higher frequencies of suicidal ideation and feelings of hopelessness. More perceived stigma was associated with suicidal ideation among labelled, but not among unlabelled individuals. In the path analysis, this link was mediated by increased secrecy and hopelessness. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study indicate that among persons labelled 'mentally ill', mental illness stigma is a contributor to suicidal ideation. One explanation for this association is the relation perceived stigma has with secrecy, which introduces negative emotional consequences. If our findings are replicated, they would suggest that programmes empowering people in treatment for mental illness to cope with anticipated and experienced discrimination as well as interventions to reduce public stigma within society could improve suicide prevention.