Dr Izzat Morshidi, Royal Holloway University of London
Suicide is a challenging subject to have in dialogue and in writing. Nonetheless, how we express and communicate suicide is important as it can impact our perspectives, attitudes, and beliefs. For example, exposure to the term ‘mentally ill’ resulted in overall lower levels of tolerance among a sample of undergraduate students, adults, and professional counsellors and counsellors in training (Granello & Gibbs, 2016). Similarly, people hold more negative bias when exposed to words such as ‘abuser’ or ‘addict’, which reinforces stigmatizing behaviour and attitudes towards individuals struggling with substance use (Ashford et al., 2018). The same can be applied to the language and words used in suicide narratives.
The media has historically garnered considerable attention with calls for respectful reporting of suicide. Guidelines for media professionals by the World Health Organization (2023) highlight how suicide reporting should, among others, avoid using sensational language or terminologies that further reinforce stigma on suicide or portray suicide as a criminal act (e.g., commit). Similarly, organizations such as Samaritans (2020) add that suicide reporting should include encouragement to seek professional help and resources for help. These guidelines ensure that reporting of suicide, in traditional and modern media, is treated with caution and provides resources for support – aligning with suicide prevention advocacy.
Despite the growing movement to change suicide narratives in media, the reporting and language of suicide in academia and research need to catch up. I occasionally come across publications in respectable journals that continue to use language that perpetuates and reinforces suicide stigma. Without citing any specific papers, some publications can be seen using the term ‘completed’ or ‘successful suicide’, suggesting that the loss of life by suicide is to strive towards, or the term ‘failed’ or ‘unsuccessful suicide’, which implies that the opposite outcome is preferred. Others continue to use ‘commit’ or ‘committed’ when describing a suicide attempt or death, reinforcing the stigma of suicide as a criminal offence. Clearly, none of these misuses was intentional on the part of the authors. However, it does highlight the lag in using responsible suicide language in scientific writing and the absence of a formalized suicide reporting guideline in academic and scientific literature. Authors such as Fraser et al. (2015) and Knipe et al. (2021) call on academics, researchers, peer reviewers, and editors across various disciplines to be aware of how suicide research is reported in publications and abide by guidelines designed for the media. They also emphasize that, given the rise of Open Access publications, the public has greater access to scientific papers, and as ‘experts’ and reference points for the public, we need to strike a balance between respectful language and scientifically rigorous reporting of suicide.
In addition to being cognizant of suicide language in scientific writing, we should also consider the language used in scales and questionnaires designed to examine suicide (i.e. ideation, plan, attempt, history, attitude). For example, the Suicide Opinion Questionnaire (Domino et al., 1980 in Anderson et al, 2008), which is a well-known psychometric measure of attitudes towards suicide, contains statements that use the term ‘commit’ (e.g., ‘If someone wants to commit suicide, it is their business, and we should not interfere’). The Suicide Behaviours Questionnaire-Revised (Osman et al., 2001), which is used to identify at-risk individuals, also contain a question that uses ‘commit’ (Have you ever told someone that you were going to commit suicide, or that you might do it?). These instruments are typically used with vulnerable individuals and are more immediately public facing compared to scientific publications. As such, the language used in suicide-related questionnaires and instruments should be revised, retested, and updated and adopt alternative terms similar to those suggested in media guidelines. For example, replacing the term ‘commit’ with ‘attempt’ or the term ‘successful’ and ‘completed’ with ‘fatal’. A person who remains alive after an attempt should be described as having ‘surviving a suicide attempt’ rather than the term ‘had an unsuccessful or failed attempt’. This effort should also extend beyond psychometric instruments to include questions in qualitative inquiries and experimental manipulations.
In sum, careful reporting of suicide is fundamental in suicide prevention efforts. Academic and scientific writing on suicide should mirror the efforts taken in media reporting on suicide towards the goal of suicide prevention through careful and respectful language in literature, public communication, and research practice.
References
Anderson, A. L., Lester, D., & Rogers, J. R. (2008). A psychometric investigation of the Suicide Opinion Questionnaire. Death studies, 32(10), 924–936. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481180802440258
Ashford, R. D., Brown, A. M., & Curtis, B. (2018). Substance use, recovery, and linguistics: The impact of word choice on explicit and implicit bias. Drug and alcohol dependence, 189, 131–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.05.005
Fraser, L., Morrissey, J., & Appleby, L. (2025). Reducing risk when publishing academic articles about suicide. The Lancet. Psychiatry, 12(4), 246–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(24)00397-3
Granello, D. H., & Gibbs, T. A. (2016). The power of language and labels: “The mentally ill” versus “people with mental illnesses”. Journal of Counseling & Development, 94(1), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12059
Knipe, D., Hawton, K., Siynor, M., & Niederkrotenthaler, T. (2021). Researchers must contribute to responsible reporting of suicide. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 372, n351. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n351
Osman, A., Bagge, C. L., Gutierrez, P. M., Konick, L. C., Kopper, B. A., & Barrios, F. X. (2001). The Suicidal Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised (SBQ-R): validation with clinical and nonclinical samples. Assessment, 8(4), 443–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/107319110100800409
Renberg, E. S., & Jacobsson, L. (2003). Development of a questionnaire on attitudes towards suicide (ATTS) and its application in a Swedish population. Suicide & Life-threatening Behavior, 33(1), 52–64. https://doi.org/10.1521/suli.33.1.52.22784
Samaritans. (2020). Media Guidelines for Reporting Suicide. Retrieved from https://media.samaritans.org/documents/Media_Guidelines_FINAL.pdf
World Health Organization (2023). Preventing suicide: A resource for media professionals, update 2023. Geneva: World Health Organization. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240076846