How do sexual and gender minority people acquire the capability for suicide? Voices from survivors of near-fatal suicide attempts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite well-documented disparities by sexual and gender minority (SGM) status in suicide attempt and mortality rates, few studies have investigated the lived experiences that contribute to SGM people's disproportionate risk of suicide. Having a history of at least one near-fatal (or medically serious) suicide attempt serves as a proxy for suicide mortality, but no known study has involved SGM people who have made such an attempt. Ideation-to-action theories of suicide posit that individuals acquire the capability for suicide through repeated exposure to painful and provocative events - namely, traumatic, threatening, and risky experiences - that can diminish the pain and fear of death. Yet whether identity-specific features of acquired capability for suicide contribute to SGM people's disproportionate risk of suicide remains unknown. Drawing upon interviews with 22 SGM people who experienced a recent near-fatal suicide attempt, the current study sought to identify specific determinants of how SGM individuals acquire the capability to kill themselves, a potentially powerful, and modifiable, pathway to suicide. Results identified three SGM-specific contributors to the acquired capability for suicide: (1) identity invalidation during developmentally sensitive periods of childhood and adolescence that left participants feeling erased, invisible, and, in some cases, non-existent; (2) normalization of suicide within SGM social networks that increased acceptability and reduced the fear of suicide; and (3) structural stigma and SGM community trauma as habituating sources of pain that engendered feelings of exhaustion and positioned suicide as a reprieve from pervasive anti-SGM norms. This study demonstrates that dominant suicidology theories might need to be refined to account for the stigma-related determinants of SGM suicide. Further, this study reinforces the importance of qualitative methods for understanding the lived experience of suicide and calls for SGM-specific suicide prevention efforts to respond to stigma to support those SGM people who contemplate suicide.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".