IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i6p2010-d333935.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Suicide in Rural Australia: Are Farming-Related Suicides Different?

Author

Listed:
  • Alison Kennedy

    (National Centre for Farmer Health, School of Medicine, Deakin University, Victoria 3300, Australia)

  • Jessie Adams

    (Western District Health Service, Foster Street, Hamilton, Victoria 3300, Australia)

  • Jeremy Dwyer

    (Coroners Court of Victoria, Department of Forensic Medicine, Monash University, Victoria 3006, Australia)

  • Muhammad Aziz Rahman

    (National Centre for Farmer Health, School of Medicine, Deakin University, Victoria 3300, Australia
    School of Nursing and Midwifery, LaTrobe University, Victoria 3086, Australia
    School of Nursing and Healthcare Professions, Federation University, Victoria 3806, Australia)

  • Susan Brumby

    (National Centre for Farmer Health, School of Medicine, Deakin University, Victoria 3300, Australia
    Western District Health Service, Foster Street, Hamilton, Victoria 3300, Australia)

Abstract

Rural Australians experience a range of health inequities—including higher rates of suicide—when compared to the general population. This retrospective cohort study compares demographic characteristics and suicide death circumstances of farming- and non-farming-related suicides in rural Victoria with the aim of: (a) exploring the contributing factors to farming-related suicide in Australia’s largest agricultural producing state; and (b) examining whether farming-related suicides differ from suicide in rural communities. Farming-related suicide deaths were more likely to: (a) be employed at the time of death (52.6% vs. 37.7%, OR = 1.84, 95% CIs 1.28–2.64); and, (b) have died through use of a firearm (30.1% vs. 8.7%, OR = 4.51, 95% CIs 2.97–6.92). However, farming-related suicides were less likely to (a) have a diagnosed mental illness (36.1% vs. 46.1%, OR=0.66, 95% CIs 0.46–0.96) and, (b) have received mental health support more than six weeks prior to death (39.8% vs. 50.0%, OR = 0.66, 95% CIs 0.46–0.95). A range of suicide prevention strategies need adopting across all segments of the rural population irrespective of farming status. However, data from farming-related suicides highlight the need for targeted firearm-related suicide prevention measures and appropriate, tailored and accessible support services to support health, well-being and safety for members of farming communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Alison Kennedy & Jessie Adams & Jeremy Dwyer & Muhammad Aziz Rahman & Susan Brumby, 2020. "Suicide in Rural Australia: Are Farming-Related Suicides Different?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-13, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:6:p:2010-:d:333935
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/6/2010/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/6/2010/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sciascia, Salvatore & Mazzola, Pietro & Kellermanns, Franz W., 2014. "Family management and profitability in private family-owned firms: Introducing generational stage and the socioemotional wealth perspective," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 131-137.
    2. Lisa Kunde & Kairi Kõlves & Brian Kelly & Prasuna Reddy & Diego De Leo, 2017. "Pathways to Suicide in Australian Farmers: A Life Chart Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Anthony King, 2017. "Technology: The Future of Agriculture," Nature, Nature, vol. 544(7651), pages 21-23, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emelynne Gabrielly de Oliveira Santos & Paulo Roberto Queiroz & Aryelly Dayane da Silva Nunes & Kelly Graziani Giacchero Vedana & Isabelle Ribeiro Barbosa, 2021. "Factors Associated with Suicidal Behavior in Farmers: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Ivan C. Hanigan & Timothy B. Chaston, 2022. "Climate Change, Drought and Rural Suicide in New South Wales, Australia: Future Impact Scenario Projections to 2099," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-12, June.
    3. Dale D. Woolford & Matthew F. Smout & Deborah Turnbull & Kate M. Gunn, 2022. "Male Farmers’ Perspectives on Psychological Wellbeing Self-Management Strategies That Work for Them and How Barriers to Seeking Professional Mental Health Assistance Could Be Overcome," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-13, September.
    4. Laura Grattidge & Ha Hoang & Jonathan Mond & David Lees & Denis Visentin & Stuart Auckland, 2023. "Exploring Community-Based Suicide Prevention in the Context of Rural Australia: A Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-18, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Santiago Lago-Peñas & Elena Rivo-López & Alberto Vaquero-García & Mónica Villanueva-Villar, 2018. "Do family firms contribute to job stability? Evidence from the great recession," Working Papers. Collection C: Family business 1801, Universidade de Vigo, GEN - Governance and Economics research Network.
    2. Drago, Carlo & Ginesti, Gianluca & Pongelli, Claudia & Sciascia, Salvatore, 2018. "Reporting strategies: What makes family firms beat around the bush? Family-related antecedents of annual report readability," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 142-150.
    3. Debicki, Bart J. & Kellermanns, Franz W. & Chrisman, James J. & Pearson, Allison W. & Spencer, Barbara A., 2016. "Development of a socioemotional wealth importance (SEWi) scale for family firm research," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 47-57.
    4. Yaoyao Wang & Yuanpei Kuang, 2023. "Evaluation, Regional Disparities and Driving Mechanisms of High-Quality Agricultural Development in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-20, April.
    5. Diep Ngoc Nguyen & Long Hoang Nguyen & Cuong Tat Nguyen & Hai Quang Pham & Jongnam Hwang & Giang Thu Vu & Bach Xuan Tran & Carl A. Latkin & Cyrus S. H. Ho & Roger C. M. Ho, 2019. "Health Status and Health Service Utilization among Vietnamese Farmers in a Mountainous Province," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-12, November.
    6. Ascensión Barroso & Óscar R. González-López & Ramón Sanguino & María Buenadicha-Mateos, 2018. "Analysis and Evaluation of the Largest 500 Family Firms’ Websites through PLS-SEM Technique," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22, February.
    7. Maarten B.T. de Groot & Oli R. Mihalache & Tom Elfring, 2022. "Toward a Theory of Family Social Capital in Wealthy Transgenerational Enterprise Families," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 46(1), pages 159-192, January.
    8. Hauck, Jana & Suess-Reyes, Julia & Beck, Susanne & Prügl, Reinhard & Frank, Hermann, 2016. "Measuring socioemotional wealth in family-owned and -managed firms: A validation and short form of the FIBER Scale," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 133-148.
    9. Thorsøe, Martin Hvarregaard & Noe, Egon Bjørnshave & Lamandé, Mathieu & Frelih-Larsen, Ana & Kjeldsen, Chris & Zandersen, Marianne & Schjønning, Per, 2019. "Sustainable soil management - Farmers’ perspectives on subsoil compaction and the opportunities and barriers for intervention," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 427-437.
    10. Jonathan Bauweraerts & Julien Vandernoot, 2019. "An Exploratory Study on the Influence of Family CEOs on Tax Aggressiveness in Private Family Firms: The Moderating Role of CEO Gender and Survival Risk," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 39(1), pages 636-648.
    11. Rübcke von Veltheim, Friedrich & Claussen, Frans & Heise, Heinke, 2020. "Autonomous Field Robots in Agriculture: A Qualitative Analysis of User Acceptance According to Different Agricultural Machinery Companies," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305587, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    12. López-Delgado, P. & Diéguez-Soto, J., 2015. "Lone founders, types of private family businesses and firm performance," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 73-85.
    13. Kosmidou, Vasiliki & Holt, Daniel T., 2022. "The relationship between family management and performance: A configurational approach in exploring the role of socioemotional wealth and generational stage," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    14. Claudia Arena & Giovanna Michelon, 2018. "A matter of control or identity? Family firms' environmental reporting decisions along the corporate life cycle," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1596-1608, December.
    15. Alfredo De Massis & Josip Kotlar & Pietro Mazzola & Tommaso Minola & Salvatore Sciascia, 2018. "Conflicting Selves: Family Owners' Multiple Goals and Self-Control Agency Problems in Private Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 42(3), pages 362-389, May.
    16. Hafner, Cornelius & Pidun, Ulrich, 2022. "Getting family firm diversification right: A configurational perspective on product and international diversification strategies," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 13(1).
    17. Eirini Aivazidou & Naoum Tsolakis, 2023. "Transitioning towards human–robot synergy in agriculture: A systems thinking perspective," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(3), pages 536-551, May.
    18. Milyausha Lukyanova & Vitaliy Kovshov & Zariya Zalilova & Vasily Lukyanov & Irek Araslanbaev, 2021. "A systemic comparative economic approach efficiency of fodder production," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 1-17, December.
    19. Beatriz Forés & José María Fernández-Yáñez & Alba Puig-Denia & Montserrat Boronat-Navarro, 2022. "Unveiling the Direct Effects of Family Firm Heterogeneity on Environmental Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-20, August.
    20. Andrea Venturelli & Salvatore Principale & Lorenzo Ligorio & Simona Cosma, 2021. "Walking the talk in family firms. An empirical investigation of CSR communication and practices," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 497-510, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:6:p:2010-:d:333935. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.