A Reflection on “Suicide Survivor”

Abstract

Philip Seager (2004) stated in his letter that contrary to common use, “suicide survivor” does not refer to those bereaved by suicide, but to a person who has made a nonlethal suicide attempt. He proposed to use the word “relict” as more appropriate to refer to the bereaved by suicide. While agreeing that we should strive to use appropriate language, I question whether “relict” is appropriate in this context. As mentioned by Clark (2001) and McIntosh (2003), the words “suicide survivors” or “survivors of suicide” have a double meaning. They can refer to the bereaved by suicide as well as to the persons who attempted suicide. This may cause confusion. However, certainly in suicidology, they have become so strongly associated with suicide bereavement, that at least among suicidologists, it generally isn’t a cause of confusion anymore (McIntosh, 2003). The words “survivors of suicide” probably were introduced by Cain’s (1972) seminal book with that name. In the foreword, Shneidman also used the expression “survivor-victims” (pp. ix, x), and he included a quote from Toynbee (1968) regarding “the survivors who are bereaved” (p. ix). During the decades that followed, suicide survivors and survivors of suicide became common expressions. In addition, a variety of other wordings emerged. For example, it was reported that the survivor support groups of Los Angeles preferred the name “Survivors after Suicide” to clearly distinguish themselves from those who attempted suicide (Farberow, 2001). Other names that are currently found in various parts of the world include: “Bereaved by Suicide,” “Loss by Suicide,” “Survivor Support,” “Suicide Bereavement Support,” etc. In addition, some survivor groups and services have chosen a name that doesn’t refer to suicide directly, for example: “Rainbow,” “Horizon,” “Refugium,” etc. If “relict” would be the better word, we may wonder why no one of the millions who have been bereaved by suicide started a support group, or a website, or whatever activity, appealing to the “Relicts of Suicide”? Seager (2004), and the editor in his reply (p. 94), referred to the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. Because I am not a native English speaker, I thought it would be helpful for me to consult additional dictionaries and I was lucky to find a dozen English language dictionaries in the public library of my hometown. Throughout the different dictionaries, most of the explanations given were similar or complementary to each other. I will only quote the most recent book available. The New Oxford Dictionary of English (Oxford, 1998) defined “relict” as: “A thing which has survived from an earlier period or in a primitive form (then the text referred to plants and animals). 2. Archaic: A widow (then the text referred to old French: [woman] left behind). Further, I found “survive”: “(No obj.) Continue to live or exist, especially in spite of danger or hardship. (With obj.) Remain alive after the death of a particular person” (Example given: “he was survived by his wife and six children”). What do we learn from this? Obviously, to survive can be used in both senses: to continue to live after the death of a loved one; and to continue to live after a certain event, for example being involved in a traffic accident. The first meaning is common in suicidology. The many archaic and passive ways in which the word relict is used strongly contrasts with the nature and the dynamics of suicide bereavement, which is often a struggle (to stay alive) and a long journey to find new meaning in life. In conclusion, would there be a benefit if we replace “survivor” with “relict,” or alternatively, if we just adopt “relict”? Frankly, I don’t see any benefit. Is “survivor” applicable to the bereaved by suicide? I guess it is.