

Economics of suicide - dc2k08
http://www.slate.com/id/2090424

======
tigerthink
>Marcotte's study found that after people attempt suicide and fail, their
incomes increase by an average of 20.6 percent compared to peers who seriously
contemplate suicide but never make an attempt. In fact, the more serious the
attempt, the larger the boost—"hard-suicide" attempts, in which luck is the
only reason the attempts fail, are associated with a 36.3 percent increase in
income. (The presence of nonattempters as a control group suggests the suicide
effort is the root cause of the boost.)

Or maybe the people who are willing to do things about their problems are both
more likely to commit suicide in tough situations and more likely to thrive in
better ones.

------
neilk
Isn't the obvious conclusion that severely depressed people are working under
their capacity? I don't see where he considered that.

Some commenters wonder why high income rat-racers don't attempt suicide, then
learn to stop and smell the roses, and lose income. I doubt that this is
common. Suicidal feelings are brought on by a sense of futility, not stress or
overwork.

~~~
mmt
I wouldn't say that's the obvious conclusion, if only because it assumes that
income is highly enough correlated with work effort.

It doesn't strike me that such a correlation, which I do believe exists, is
obviously within 20%, for example.

Moreover, I would consider the situation of working at or very near capacity
and yet still not producing to be a plausible, if not likely, source of
feelings of futility.

------
lucumo
Non-blogjacked: <http://www.slate.com/id/2090424>

------
Estragon
I volunteer at a suicide hotline. To judge from what they say, the people who
call there aren't interested in economics, they're in pain.

~~~
astine
Not to belittle suicidal people's feelings, but pain is an economic factor
when economics is treated in the broad sense. People contemplating sucide feel
that any potential joys of living are not worth the pain that they are
experiencing. That is an economic decision, whether the decision maker is
aware of it or not.

edit: spelling

------
wyw
Marcotte's study says income increases by 20% after a suicide attempt but his
support for this figure is the following:

 _"Once you attempt suicide you suddenly have access to lots of resources:
medical care, psychiatric attention, familial love and concern that were
previously expensive or unavailable."_

Last time I checked, that's not how we define income unless he's saying that
this additional support is what's driving a concomitant rise in income.

This finding is the opposite of what I would have expected - namely that the
more serious the encounter with death, the less seriously the would-be
suicidist would subsequently treat the pursuit of material success.

Unfortunately the study seems to be behind a paywall so we can't figure out
whether methodological flaws have produced these results.

~~~
cperciva
The research paper is available via the author's website:
[http://userpages.umbc.edu/~marcotte/economics%20of%20suicide...](http://userpages.umbc.edu/~marcotte/economics%20of%20suicide.pdf)

~~~
bd
A good find. There is much more info in the paper:

1\. People who contemplated suicide actually started with 21% less income than
comparable peers.

2\. Income increase effect (23-44%) significantly decreases with time - it
goes to zero in 12-14 years.

3\. The effect is the strongest for young while males.

So it seems after suicide attempt, you just get to income level of non-
suicidal peers (or slightly above for more serious attempts), and this effects
disappears after some time.

Also, it seems to me like the reason for income increase effect could be not
so much "extra resources and care", but something more simple: people who got
farther in executing their suicide plans are more driven/goal
oriented/resolute, thus more likely to succeed financially. There is probably
a similar effect for "people who contemplated running marathon" vs. "people
who ran marathon".

~~~
jodrellblank
Or perhaps people who were building up to a suicide attempt for a while, then
made one, discovered "that wasn't so hard" and became more willing to tackle
things they previously dismissed as hard.

Or maybe they internalised the idea "may as well try this difficult thing,
I've tried suicide before so I can do it again" as a kind of backup/escape
option that feels more real and available.

~~~
depressed-anon
As someone who has come extremely close to ending my own life on several
occasions (and have since begun treatment), I am inclined to believe that the
mentioned "extra resources and care" are of significant impact.

Mental illness was and (albeit to a lesser degree) is a severe drain on my
energy and productivity; I believe that for many this may account for the
reduced income levels relative to "comparable peers".

Psychiatric care coming after an attempt may close this gap in productivity,
allowing for increased income.

Of course, I speak only of my own experience and cannot of others'.

It may be enlightening to compare changes in income based on the presumed
basis for the attempt or ideation (i.e. mental illness, economic
circumstances, or familial / social factors).

I believe it to be especially important to study those suffering from mental
illness separately, as illness can beget thought processes severely lacking in
logic and rationality; an economic model assumes a level of rationality in the
decision-making process that may not necessarily be present.

------
ars
"The suicide-prevention movement fears that if suicide is deemed the rational
product of someone's mind, we may feel justified in suspecting that mind
forever."

Why? If it was rational, then when the reason for it is no longer there, then
there is no reason to suspect that mind.

On top of that, if it's rational for one person it's rational for another
(assuming the same circumstances), so why suspect the mind in the first place?

Is he using a different meaning of rational? (Perhaps "thought out"?)

------
321abc
_"attempting suicide seems a rational choice, as long as the attempt isn't too
successful"_

What seems rational by economic standards may not be rational by other
standards.

~~~
jeffcoat
This is the kind of comment that is both cheap and, at first glance,
insightful ... and just annoying enough for me to defend the opposing point of
view:

"Behaving rationally by economic standards" is a fancy way of saying "trying
to get what you want". Arguing that someone isn't actually making all the
precise cost/benefit calculations before making an "economically rational"
action is roughly equivalent to arguing that it's impossible to catch a
baseball for anyone who can't solve differential equations in their head.

