Abstract
Suicide methods chosen by victims are particularly critical in suicide risk research. To differentiate suicide deaths, it is usual to categorize them as violent and nonviolent depending on the detrimental method chosen by the victims. Caustic ingestion, for example, is traditionally considered as a nonviolent suicide method. It results in severe consequences for the human body and it is associated with high levels of lethality. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed suicides that occurred between 1993 and 2021 in Milan (Italy) and that underwent autopsy. We compared a sample of 40 victims that ingested caustic substances with a sample of 460 victims of other chemical ingestion, and a sample of 3962 victims from violent suicide. Univariate analyses and univariate logistic regression models were performed. Suicides from caustic poisoning were significantly older, had a higher mean number of diseases and were more affected by psychiatric diseases compared to other chemical ingestion victims. By contrast, caustic suicides, compared to violent suicides, had a more balanced gender ratio, a higher mean number of diseases, were more affected by psychiatric diseases, had a higher rate of complex suicides (more than one modality), and had victims who died more frequently inside instead of outside. In logistic regression models, age was the only feature differentiating caustic from other chemical ingestion suicides while the features differentiating caustic from violent suicides were gender, mean number of diseases and suicide place. Suicides by caustic ingestion showed substantial differences compared to violent suicides, with a higher severe profile. However, some differences were reported comparing caustic ingestion to other chemical ingestion as well. Thus, we argue whether it is more appropriate to differentiate the suicidal ingestion of caustics from both violent and nonviolent suicide methods.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.