Importance of Durkheim Theory of Suicide for a Social Worker - Literature review Example

Suicide Institution Date Introduction Suicide is one of the social phenomenons that have been of interest to sociologists for centuries. Durkheim's work in this area has been hailed as ground breaking and gives an insight into suicide as a social fact. This essay studies how the theory of suicide has developed over time. It analyzes suicide research in the pre-Durkheim period, Durkheim and now. Many of the attempts to understand the theory of suicide have failed to offer as deep an insight into the causes of suicide as Durkheim’s work did. This essay traces the origin of the theory of suicide and analyzes several early studies into the phenomenon. Secondly, it discusses Durkheim's theory of suicide and how it tries to explain the phenomenon of suicide. Finally, it proposes a framework that can be applied by sociologists that deal with suicide in the field. Suicide Pre-Durkheim While Durkheim's book 'Le suicide' is the most comprehensive study of suicide of it time, some early scholars had studied the phenomenon of suicide (Pescosolido and Georgianna, 1989). In previous centuries, scholars and philosophers had tried to explain the human decision of suicide. Some had already dealt with the social factors that are the subject of Durkheim's celebrated book. However, Emile Durkheim's work is so influential that the study of suicide is divided into the pre-Durkheim and post Durkheim eras. As early as Plato, ancient scholars were already studying suicide. Plato delivered some of the most definitive discourses about the theory of suicide. In ancient Rome and Greek, self-killing was criminalized and considered shameful. In his first work on suicide, Plato argued that suicide was wrong as it enabled people to release their souls from their bodies without authorization from the gods. In the laws, Plato argued that, it was a disgrace to commit suicide and those who do so should be buried in unmarked graves. However, Plato asserted that suicide could be excusable under these four conditions. First, suicide is excusable when a person's mind is morally corrupted and cannot be salvaged (Pescosolido and Georgianna, 1989). Secondly, suicide is understandable if one is compelled by a judicial order. Thirdly, suicide arising from great and unavoidable personal misfortune is also excusable as per Plato's discourse. Finally, Plato argues that people who have shamed themselves by committing gross injustice could also commit suicide. Plato went on to condemn suicide as an act of laziness and cowardice committed by individuals unable to manage life's complexity. Aristotle's comments on suicide were not detailed and it was only a small part of his discourse on treating oneself unjustly. He argues that suicide is not unjust to oneself as long as it is voluntary. Aristotle asserts that suicide is a wrong to the state and the community although he does not explain why it is wrong. Plato's and Aristotle's discourses on suicide fail to take into consideration individual autonomy and well-being. They justify suicide as a result of one's social obligations and roles. In contrast, the later works named Stoic conceptualized suicide quite differently. Stoics argued that people had to live well to possess the will to live. For people whose lives are very miserable, they may be justified to commit suicide (Verhey, 1990). Stoics maintained that mere living was not enough but a person also had to live well. They noted that one’s private good and not just his obligation to others justified the need to continue living. The beliefs of ancient Greek and Roman scholars were supplanted by the Christian scriptures on suicide. Christianity condemned suicide and prohibited the deed as morally wrong. St Augustine justified the churches prohibition by noting that committing suicide violated the fifth commandment that forbids killing another person. He noted that suicide was an unforgivable sin that sets man at odds with God. St Augustine analyzed the Christian prohibition of suicide on three grounds. First, he argued that suicide was contrary to self-love that human needed for preservation (Verhey, 1990). Secondly, he argued that suicide was a violation of the God given duty to preserve the gift of life that is given to all creatures. Augustine maintained that it was God’s work to determine how long a person should live on earth. Thirdly, St Augustine argued that suicide was hurting to the victims’ family and the community. Suicide was unforgivable as it nullified the bond between man and his creator. According to (Verhey, 1990), Medieval Christian doctrine, life is a gift and we only posses our bodies but the creator retains control over the bodies. In fact, medieval Christian desecrated the corpses of individuals who had committed suicide, denied them a Christian burial and the state confiscated their property. Renaissance scholars brought a fresh way of looking at the world, but their perspective of suicide was a reaffirmation of the church’s position. Renaissance scholars believed that suicide was morally wrong and did not sympathize with the permissive stance of early pagan religions (Pope, 1976). However, two renaissance intellectuals Michels de Montaigne and Thomas More differed in their stance on suicide (Verhey, 1990). More in his work Utopia, argues that suicide is permissible for individuals suffering from painful and incurable diseases. However, More’s work was characterized by satire and a fantastical tone raising doubts if his stance on suicide was real. Montaigne on the other hand, quotes and praises phrases from Roman writing that approve of suicide. The protestant reformers led by Calvin, upheld the Christian prohibition of suicide but maintained that God can permit repentance and in fact forgive suicide. Moral question about the justification for suicide were to arise during the reformation mainly from puritans (Verhey, 1990). However, the Christian prohibition was the dominant ideology up to the late seventeenth century. Even the liberal thinkers of the century including John Locke upheld the Thomistic arguments. John Locke argued that personal liberty did not extend to the freedom to destroy oneself. In 1607, John Donne’s Biathanatos became the first text to defend suicide and analyze it quite differently. Using modern and classical theological and legal sources, Donne argued that the Christian prohibition of suicide was unjustified. He argued that the laws of nature mandate self-preservation but that does not mean failing to do so is sinful (Pope, 1976). Donne notes that if failure to self-preserve was a sin, then self-denial and privation would also be judged to be sins. Donne notes that there may be instances where it is reasonable to permit suicide. Donne argued that Christian scriptures lacked a clear condemnation of suicide and the prohibition is derived from the law asserting that Christians should not kill. In the 18th century, liberalized enlightenment took centre stage and the Thomistic natural law stance became increasingly condemned. 18th century scholars started to study suicide under scientific and psychological perspectives. Enlightenment scholars set out to show that suicide was not an affair between the devil and an individual. The scholars argued that suicide was a result of facts about an individual’s life, their social setting and natural psychologies (Pope, 1976). David Hume was one of the most vocal scholars who proposed the modern view of suicide. Hume’s work “Of suicide” published in 1783 forms part of the foundation of Durkheim’s work. Hume noted that the traditional conceptualization of suicide was muddled and superstitious (Joe and Niedermeier, 2008). He set out to dismantle Thomastic arguments that suicide is a violation of God’s plan for the world and usurps his power to determine how long humans should live. Hume argued that in some circumstances suicide is permissible if the most happiness can be gained from committing suicide. He argued that God sometimes permits us to break laws for the sake of our happiness (Kushner and Sterk, 2005). For example, when responding to disease and calamities it is permissible to break some of God’s laws. It follows then that since God can allow us to interfere with nature in some instances, he may also allow suicide (Verhey, 1990). Hume argues that humans should not adhere to God’s law when the most happiness can be achieved by committing suicide. Hume also discredits the justification that suicide is not permissible as we only posses our bodies and God controls them. Hume argues if God control our bodies, then all our actions are done with his consent (Verhey, 1990). It would be hard to discern which actions are permitted and not permitted by God. Hume argues that when a person commits suicide, it is perfectly permissible as it occurs within the scope of actions that he controls (Frey, 1999). Hume also rejected the popular argument that suicide was a violation of the duty towards other people. He argues that the law of reciprocity may demand that we provide society with some compensation for the benefits we receive from society (Frey, 1999). However, there is a limit to this reciprocity, if we are only able to provide compensation at significant harm to ourselves (Verhey, 1990). Hume argues that suicide is justifiable when we become significant burdens to others and thus our deaths are laudable. Hume also condemned the view that suicide was a violation of the duty to self. He argued that misfortunes, old age and sickness could make death more desirable than living. Hume also discredits the rebuttal that people may take their lives for granted (Frey, 1999). He argues that people are afraid of death and thus make careful assessment and deliberation before attempting to take their own lives. Hume concludes his discourse on suicide by noting that individuals can freely commit suicide without shame or blame. Hume’s stance on suicide is founded on utilitarian ideals that are heavily influenced by his strong presumption of personal liberty (Frey, 1999). However, not all enlightenment scholars held the permissible stance of David Hume. Immanuel Kant was a notable opponent of suicide in the enlightenment period (Cholbi 2000). Kant’s views are drawn from his view that a person’s moral worth is drawn from his moral duty; therefore it is not permissible to destroy the very body that holds our moral choices and volitions. Kant argued that killing oneself was equal to debasing the humanity in an individual. In the nineteenth and early twentieth fresh developments into the theory and philosophy of suicide emerged. According Lieberman (2003), the novels of Goethe, Flaubert and Rouisseau idealized suicide as a romantic idea, which was the natural result for an anguished and misunderstood individuals shunned by society and jilted by love. Thirdly, the discipline of psychiatry emerged and diseases like hysteria, melancholy and other ailments could be diagnosed and healed easily. However, the most notable development of this period was the emergence of the sociology of suicide thanks to the work of Durkheim and Laplace (Durkheim, 1959). The sociologists saw suicide as result of social ills such as alienation, and attitudinal product of a stressing world. Increases in suicide in many European countries were associated with increasing rates of suicide in the countries. The French sociologist’s 1897 book “suicide” was a groundbreaking study into the causes and prevalence of suicide. Durkheim (2005) carried out a case study of suicide in European countries and published his systematic results in the 1897 book. The unique book was to redefine the conceptualization of suicide for many centuries after it was written. Many of the findings of Durkheim suggest that suicide has social causes as much as psychological ones. Durkheim compared suicide rates among Catholics and Protestants and concluded stronger social controls among catholic population resulted in lower suicide rates. Durkheim’s study also compared suicide rates among male and female populations. He found out that suicide rates were significantly higher among women than it was among men. He also found that single people were also more likely to commit suicide than married people. Durkheim also studied suicide rates among people with children and compared them with suicide rates for people without children (Verhey, 1990). He found that suicide rates were higher among people without children. Soldiers were also found to be more likely to commit suicide than civilians. Suicide rates were also higher during peacetime than in times of war. Durkheim was the first scholar to propose the link between the social circumstances of an individuals and the likelihood to commit suicide. Durkheim argued that individual personalities were not responsible for suicide (Verhey, 1990). Durkheim supported his argument by presenting statistics that showed that suicide varied with place and time. Durkheim’s study sought to explore causes of suicide that were beyond emotional stress which was thought to be the biggest source of stress. Durkheim explores the link between the extent of an individual’s integration into society and social surroundings and his likelihood to commit suicide. He concluded that the social context of an individual was the most influential determinant of whether he would commit suicide. From his studies, Durkheim was able to categorize suicide into three types. He characterized Anomic suicide as a type of suicide that results from the disintegrating forces of society making an individual feel alone and lost. Teenage suicide is one example of suicide that can be categorized as Anomic (Douglas, 2015). Suicide by people who have been sexually abused is also characterized as anomic suicide. Suicide by children whose parents have social problems such as alcoholism or drug abuse is also a type of anomic suicide. The second type of suicide identified by Durkheim is referred to as Altruistic Suicide (Durkheim, 2005). This is a type of suicide that results when social forces excessively regulate individuals. For example, extremist who blow themselves up for religious or political causes can be said to have committed Altruistic suicide. Altruistic suicide incident occur when people subordinate their lives to the collective expectations of their society. The final type of suicide identified by Durkheim is referred to as egoistic suicide and occurs when individuals detach from society completely. Ordinarily, individuals are fully integrated into their societies through work, family, social bonds and community ties (Pope, 1976). If the social bonds to family, colleagues or society are weakened through death, retirement or being cast out from society, the likelihood of egoistic suicide increase greatly. Durkheim found that the elderly is the population group that is most susceptible to egoistic suicide. Application to social work in the field My role as a social worker in rural Australia requires that I work in the prevention of suicide and especially with individuals who have made a first suicide attempt. Durkheim’s theory of suicide is very relevant to my work as it enables me understand the causes of suicide and most importantly how to handle this serious health issue. Suicide is a serious health issue as shown by studies in the United States. According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2007), that there were two suicide deaths to ever homicide death in the United States in 1998. Statistics show that 2.9 per cent of the adult population will attempt suicide at some point in their lives. Suicide is the 8th leading cause of death globally. Attempts to prevent or control suicide rates are complicated by the fact that the causes of suicide remain largely unknown. It is now generally agreed that suicide occurs because of a combination of social and psychological factors. According to sociologist led by Durkheim, the social circumstances of the individuals are the main precipitators of suicide. In contrast, psychologists argue that feelings of helplessness, alienation, and hopelessness give a person an uncontrollable urge to shed the unwanted self. These views of psychologist do not depart much from Durkheim’s view who argues that social alienation is a leading cause of suicide. The work of Emile Durkheim argues that if the social circumstances of an individuals and his social ties with society are improved them the likelihood of suicide goes down greatly. The types of suicide identified by Emile Durkheim allow me as social worker to know how to help individuals have a sufficient level of regulation and integration into their society (Pritchard, 1995). For example, when I am working with the elderly, I know there are likely to commit egoistic suicide as they feel isolated and alienated from their society. Promoting social integration for elderly individuals is thus the most important role of social workers who work with elderly individuals (Feldman and Freedenthal, 2006). On the other hand when working with individuals exposed to extremist religious ideologies it is important to note that they may be involved in cases of altruistic suicide. With such individuals, a social worker should tactfully try to persuade them that their own lives are worth more than their political or religious causes. Altruistic suicide may also occur after the death of a loved one. For example a window may heroically drink poison to be laid to rest with her departed husband. On the other hand, understanding of anomic suicide enables social workers assist people whose social bonds with society have been shuttered (Verhey, 1990). A social worker is able to assist individuals who have had a social bond shuttered through death, divorce or retirement. For example, a person who has just been laid off is likely to commit anomic suicide. The social worker should be present to assist such a person whose bond with work and fellow workers has been suddenly severed. Framework for dealing with suicide For a social worker it is important to integrate Durkheim theory of suicide into their work by asking imperative question about the social status of the individual one is working with. The first question should be; what is the gender of the person? Remember that Durkheim posits that suicide rates are higher among males than females (Pritchard,1995). A second consideration for the framework should be the religion of the person. A social worker should consider that religious beliefs are strong conviction for individuals to commit suicide or to have the will to live. In Durkheim work it was found that stronger social controls among Catholics resulted in lower suicide rates. Consideration of the age of the subject is also important. Suicide is higher among teenagers, people going through midlife crisis and the elderly. Most importantly, Social workers should put into consideration that changing the social conditions of an individual is likely to reduce his urge to commit suicide. References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2007). Suicide trends among youths and young adults aged 10-24 years--United States, 1990-2004. MMWR: Morbidity and mortality weekly report, 56(35), 905-908. Cholbi, M. J. (2000). Kant and the Irrationality of Suicide. History of Philosophy Quarterly, 159-176. Douglas, J. D. (2015). Social meanings of suicide. Princeton University Press. Durkheim, E. (1959). The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life [1912]. na. Durkheim, E. (2005). Suicide: a study in sociology. Chicago Press Farber, M. L. (1977). Theory of suicide. Arno Pr. Feldman, B. N., & Freedenthal, S. (2006). Social work education in suicide intervention and prevention: An unmet need?. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 36(4), 467-480. Frey, R. G. (1999). Hume on suicide. The Journal of medicine and philosophy, 24(4), 336-351. Joe, S., & Niedermeier, D. (2008). Preventing suicide: A neglected social work research agenda. British Journal of Social Work, 38(3), 507-530. Kushner, H. I., & Sterk, C. E. (2005). The limits of social capital: Durkheim, suicide, and social cohesion. American Journal of Public Health, 95(7), 1139. Lieberman, L. (2003). Leaving you: The cultural meaning of suicide. Ivan R. Dee. Pescosolido, B. A., & Georgianna, S. (1989). Durkheim, suicide, and religion: Toward a network theory of suicide. American Sociological Review, 33-48. Pope, W. (1976). Durkheim's suicide: A classic analyzed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pritchard, C. (1995). Suicide: the ultimate rejection?: a psycho-social study. Open University Press. Verhey, A. D. (1990). Suicide and Euthanasia: Historical and Contemporary Themes. JAMA, 263(17), 2373-2373. Read More