IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i13p6270-d1184566.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is It Correct to Consider Caustic Ingestion as a Nonviolent Method of Suicide? A Retrospective Analysis and Psychological Considerations

Author

Listed:
  • Rosa Gravagnuolo

    (Department of Psychology, University of Milan-Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Stefano Tambuzzi

    (Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Section of Legal Medicine and Insurance, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Guendalina Gentile

    (Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Section of Legal Medicine and Insurance, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy)

  • Michele Boracchi

    (Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Section of Legal Medicine and Insurance, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy)

  • Franca Crippa

    (Department of Psychology, University of Milan-Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy)

  • Fabio Madeddu

    (Department of Psychology, University of Milan-Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy)

  • Riccardo Zoja

    (Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Section of Legal Medicine and Insurance, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy)

  • Raffaella Calati

    (Department of Psychology, University of Milan-Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy
    Department of Adult Psychiatry, Nimes University Hospital, 30900 Nimes, France)

Abstract

Background: 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. Methods: 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. Conclusions: 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.

Suggested Citation

  • Rosa Gravagnuolo & Stefano Tambuzzi & Guendalina Gentile & Michele Boracchi & Franca Crippa & Fabio Madeddu & Riccardo Zoja & Raffaella Calati, 2023. "Is It Correct to Consider Caustic Ingestion as a Nonviolent Method of Suicide? A Retrospective Analysis and Psychological Considerations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(13), pages 1-18, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:13:p:6270-:d:1184566
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/13/6270/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/13/6270/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Seo-Eun Cho & Zong Woo Geem & Kyoung-Sae Na, 2021. "Development of a Suicide Prediction Model for the Elderly Using Health Screening Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-10, September.
    2. Quan-Hoang Vuong & Tam-Tri Le & Ruining Jin & Quy Van Khuc & Hong-Son Nguyen & Thu-Trang Vuong & Minh-Hoang Nguyen, 2023. "Near-Suicide Phenomenon: An Investigation into the Psychology of Patients with Serious Illnesses Withdrawing from Treatment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-17, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Minh-Phuong Thi Duong & Manh-Cuong Nguyen & Noah Mutai & Ruining Jin & Phuong-Tri Nguyen & Tam-Tri Le & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2023. "Promoting Stakeholders’ Support for Marine Protection Policies: Insights from a 42-Country Dataset," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-19, August.
    2. Quan-Hoang Vuong & Quang-Loc Nguyen & Ruining Jin & Minh-Hieu Thi Nguyen & Thi-Phuong Nguyen & Viet-Phuong La & Minh-Hoang Nguyen, 2023. "Increasing Supply for Woody-Biomass-Based Energy through Wasted Resources: Insights from US Private Landowners," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Nguyen, Minh-Hoang & Quang-Loc, Nguyen & Nguyen, Loan & Le, Tam-Tri & Phi, Xuan-Tuan & Vuong, Quan-Hoang, 2023. "How does the knowledge accumulation process affect Vietnamese entrepreneurs’ success likelihood?," OSF Preprints tgfr5, Center for Open Science.
    4. Nguyen, Minh-Hoang, 2023. "Tiền bạc, danh vọng và những giọt nước mắt đang rơi," OSF Preprints 4ujks, Center for Open Science.
    5. Nguyen, Minh-Hoang, 2023. "Mindsponge theory: a way of life," OSF Preprints 5cxfw, Center for Open Science.

    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:20:y:2023:i:13:p:6270-:d:1184566. 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.