Tavistock and Portman E-PRINTS Online: Book Chapter Original Citation
Tavistock and Portman E-PRINTS Online: Book Chapter Original Citation
BOOK CHAPTER
Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the
individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print
one copy of any article(s) in Tavistock and Portman E-Prints Online to facilitate
their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further
distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any
commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL
(http://repository.tavistockandportman.ac.uk/) of Tavistock and Portman E-Prints
Online.
Stephen Briggs
In this chapter I will show that psychoanalytic thinking and practice makes a
significant contribution to current practice and policy and I will propose that
some currently problematic areas of prevention strategy and clinical practice
would benefit from the application of psychoanalytic knowledge and practice.
For this discussion it is necessary to identify the strengths and limitations
within current practice and policy, and, secondly, the role of and potentiality
for psychoanalytic thinking and practice. Although psychoanalysis and
national suicide prevention strategies appear, at first inspection, to occupy
different domains, or, even, incommensurable paradigms, there is a potential
synergy between these, and I will suggest that psychoanalysis has the
conceptual and practice-technical capacity to bridge the social and
psychological dimensions of suicide to enrich understanding of both and
generate more effective policies and practice. This requires, in return, that
psychoanalysis engages with the aims, aspirations and methods that drive
suicide prevention policies.
For the purposes of this discussion I will identify two particular domains in
which I believe prevention practice and strategy need the contribution of
psychoanalytic thinking. These domains are, firstly, the quest to assess risks
for suicide and the application of the risk assessment model in clinical practice
and, secondly, the aim of preventive policies in reducing the impact of stigma
and taboo about suicide.
1
underpinned by evidence that inequalities affected health chances, and
anxieties about societal cohesion and exclusion.
The strategies that have been introduced and developed in many countries
are concerned with practical and immediate responses to suicidal behaviour
and risks. These responses aim to assist the better identification in
communities and in mental health services of high risk groups and individuals
and to protect people from suicidal acts through restricting access to means,
through targeting ‘hot spots’ used by people to jump to their deaths and
individually wrapping for medicines used for self-poisoning. A second and
related aim for prevention strategies is to engage communities to raise
awareness and improve recognition of suicidal states, and address
stigmatising interactions associated with suicidal behaviour and its impact on
others. Strategies thus aim to address the taboo that can exist of talking about
suicidal feelings, often linked with a fear of the emotionality of and around
suicide and a fear of contagion.
Currently suicide rates are reducing worldwide and this decline coincides – or
correlates - with the introduction of coordinated national strategies for suicide
prevention based on these principles. In England, the national strategy was
introduced in 2002, to implement a government target to reduce suicide rate
by 20% between 1997 and 2010 1 . The most recent reports show that the rate
is significantly reduced, and stands at the lowest rate for over 30 years
(NIMHE 2008). The national strategies appear to work, though – perhaps like
the economy – suicide rates sometimes appear to be under control, only to
then demonstrate that they are not. Changes in suicide rates follow social
change, as is evidenced by trends over significant periods of time. Suicide
rates increase in periods of economic depression 2 and decline in times of war,
or more optimistic periods of peace time. In the UK the ‘optimistic’ 1960’s
recorded the lowest suicide rates for the century as a whole outside the years
of the two world wars (Biddle et al 2008).
One of the most striking of statistics is that people that kill themselves are not
in contact with mental health services. For example, following the Bridgend
suicides, the Welsh Assembly heard evidence that three quarters of suicides
1
The baseline rate was 9.2 per 100000 of the population, for 1995/6/7 and the target is therefore 7.3
per 100,000 for 2009/10/11 (NIMHE 2008 page 3)
2
‘It is a known fact that economic crises have an aggravating influence on suicide’ (Durkheim
1897/1997). It is widely expected that rates will rise in the current global economic down turn
2
in Wales were not in contact with services, and had not been in the 12 months
before the suicide (Welsh Assembly 2008). Rob Hale (2008) cites the studies
in the USA by Luoma et. al. (2002); these show that only 33 per cent of
suicides have been in contact with secondary psychiatric services in the
previous year, but 75 per cent had been in contact with their GP. In the month
prior to death 20 per cent had been in contact with mental health services,
whereas 50 per cent had consulted their GP. Often the reason for contacting
the GP is not explicitly about suicidal thoughts or intentions, and the reason
for the consultation would not have introduced a thought about or a
connection with suicide in a suicidologist, never mind a busy GP. Since most
suicides occur in those not in contact with services, it is implicit that mental
health services either miss those most at risk, or, alternatively, they provide a
protection against suicide, since there are fewer suicides amongst those in
contact with services.
Linked with these trends is the aim of reducing the stigma or taboo associated
with suicidal behaviour in society, and training community based professionals
– including those in schools, for example – to be able to encourage talking
about suicide as something which helps prevent suicide rather than
constituting a dangerous intervention which might ‘put ideas in people’s
minds’ and make the problem worse.
The idea that talking about suicide makes things worse can be a powerful and
pervasive notion; when working with schools I have seen it affect teachers,
young people who cannot bear to talk to adults and peers and research ethics
committees, who can become very anxious that in sanctioning research about
suicide prevention, they may be sanctioning suicide (Briggs 2009, Briggs and
Buhagiar 2008). This is not rational; the fear of instilling suicidal behaviour by
talking about it indicates a particular process is taking place in which words
lead to action rather than to thought, a process which Bion described as the
reversal of Alpha function (Bion 1970). In these examples, suicide appeared
to stir up intense emotions in school staff, students, parents and members of
research ethics committees; fear of talking leading to destructive action and
fear of contagion pervaded. One 15 year-old student, for example, told us:
‘But it’s not that good to talk about it because it might influence other people
to have a go as well, because they’ll think that if so and so can get their anger
out by doing this behaviour, maybe it will work with me’.
3
This is a helpful image as it describes contagion taking place in a dyadic,
projective relationship (Moylan 1994), and opens up for discussion the
question about what it is exactly that we are exposed to when addressing the
issue of suicide, and what it is in each of us that can be so powerfully affected
by it. From this the possibility of a less anxious and more containing approach
to talking about suicide can be developed, a point to which I will return later in
this chapter.
These are innovative approaches to the problems of stigma and the inability
to talk about suicide. How effective they are – or will become- is not known.
How the emotional and relational can be connected to the social in this kind of
setting and around this issue needs further exploration and discussion.
4
(Bennewith et al 2004) and guidance for the management and delivery of
services for self-harm have been developed accordingly (NICE 2004).
However, the risk assessment approach can only offer an inaccurate guide to
what may happen in individual cases. The mainstream position, central to
national suicide prevention strategies is to identify risk factors and groups at
high risk for suicide. This is, of itself, a reasonable and on the whole helpful
epidemiological task. It has been informative to recognise the greater risks in
different age groups, for example, young men and older people, and within
some occupations – farmers, doctors, police. This evidence generates further
thinking and research about the characteristics of these groups, and leads to
the prioritisation of resources to meet these areas of identified need. On the
other hand, there are considerable limitations of the risk assessment
approach and these become evident when this model is applied to services in
which the aim is to identify risk levels in individual cases.
The problem of using the risk assessment approach in practice arises from a
mistaken notion of the status of ‘risks’ when they are treated as objective,
impartial and neutral (O’Byrne 2008). Cohen (2002) points out that this is
erroneous:
‘the construction of risk refers not just to the raw information about
dangerous or unpleasant things, but also to the ways of assessing,
classifying and reacting to them’ (Cohen 2002 page xxv).
5
conundrum’. Most depressed people do not commit suicide, many people that
commit suicide are depressed, but many suicides are not depressed.
“she took an impulsive overdose with low intent; however she left a suicide
note”,
and
“This was her second overdose, at the time of writing she has taken another,
her third, significant yet again in intent, overdose”
4
Suicides in inpatient care in the UK are reducing through the prevention strategy (NIMHE 2008), an
example of the appropriate targeting of a high risk area.
6
viable theoretical framework in order that the practice of identifying suicide
risks in people presenting to health services can be effective. Finding suitable
approached is the next step. To date, evidence has not been forthcoming
about what is the most reliable framework for these assessments:
It follows from this that assessing and relating to suicidality cannot be reduced
to a mechanistic process of risk assessment, and that the wish for a simplified
method of assessing risks arises from the anxious needs of the worker to
have certain knowledge rather than work within a field of possibilities, which
may be more or less understandable. The costs of attempting a risk aversive
approach are considerable, including, as is suggested above, the loss of the
patient as a ‘subject’ to the anatomy of risk.
At this point we can step back and explore how psychoanalysis explains
suicidal acts in order to explore how this framework can be applied to the two
particular needs identified thus far, namely, of providing a framework for
understanding suicidality in individuals, and hence making sense of risk
assessments, and secondly, of linking the internal with the social in
understanding the taboo or fear of talking about suicidality in society and the
stigma surrounding suicide.
Over the years, there have been many approaches to understanding the
nature and meaning of suicide. Current thinking stand on the shoulders, so to
speak, of the work of Durkheim and Freud, who provided parallel theses
about the social and internal factors that lead to suicide. Durkheim
(1897/1997) identified different suicidal types –egotistic, altruistic and anomic
-and the social conditions in which these are more likely to have an impact,
principally the quality of the individual’s relationship with the community. In
Durkheim’s thesis, suicide occurs in states of imbalance between social
cohesion and moral regulation. Freud’s contribution was to identify suicide as
an activity that can be understood in relational terms. Psychoanalysis has
subsequently elaborated and deepened this understanding of the relational
and hence emotional qualities of suicidal states of mind and actions, through
theory generated by clinical experiences. The relational approach permits
connections between internal and social worlds.
From Freud’s (1917) formulation of the suicidal act arising from the reaction to
the loss of an ambivalently loved and hated object, with which the self has
identified, the nature of suicidality as a problem of relatedness became a
possible and necessary area for study. Unlike Durkheim, Freud did not devote
a discrete work to suicide. He was in fact often preoccupied with suicidality
and the range of his full contribution to understanding suicide has been
7
understated (Briggs 2006) but ‘Mourning and Melancholia’ has been the point
of departure for the development of psychoanalytic relational understanding of
suicide. This fruitful exploration of suicidal dynamics lies in understanding the
constellation of suicidal relatedness. Hale (2008) summarises this as:
‘Suicide is an act with meaning and has a purpose, both manifest and
unconscious. It takes place in the context of a dyadic relationship, or rather its
failure, and the suffering is experienced by the survivors, or rather, part
survivors of the suicide attempt’ (page 9)
8
alternatively, aggression which, in the delusional or psychotic moment, has
the motive of attempting to ensure –paradoxically – survival 5 . Contending
with these different aspects of aggression is critical to clinical practice; the
suicidal patient aims to involve the therapist/analyst in the suicidal struggle
through enlisting her/him to play a part in the dyadic conflict.
9
professional unwittingly takes on the role of ‘executioner’. A teenager turned
up at A and E after taking 5 paracetemol and reports having taken an
overdose. The doctor on duty explained that an overdose of at least 20 tablets
is needed to do serious harm, and the next evening the teenager was
readmitted after taking more than 20 tablets.
In many other ways there are accounts in which hostility and aggression
towards the suicidal or self-harming patient are elicited, with the effect that
suicidal patients are punished or blamed. The NICE self-harm guideline
includes the advice that front line professionals need supervision to process
the emotional impact of being in contact with suicidal people; the guideline
could explain – but does not – that this is because the work itself is
traumatising and because there is an ever present risk of distortion.
Processing of the toxic aspects of contact with suicidal dynamics, or, in other
words, containing the emotional impact of the work leads to a more balanced
approach to the suicidal person, and this in turn has the potential to reduce
the number of people with histories of suicide who have negative experiences
of accessing services and feel themselves stigmatised by these contacts.
Ophelia’s brother Laertes attempts to idealise his dead sister and to displace
his rage into the societal representative, the ‘churlish priest’ to blame the
priest for failing to understand (‘A minist’ring angel shall my sister be / When
thou liest howling’ (V, 1, 233-234). In the face of this onslaught, the priest
appears to be trying to hold a balance between maintaining the need to name
this reality – it was a suicide - and offering what solace can be given without
denying the reality, but he is taken to task nevertheless and has to withstand
Laertes’ attacks.
Hamlet attempts to ward off guilt about his contribution, through his rejection
of her, to Ophelia’s suicide, and to project into Laertes the hatred,
murderousness and rage, which he has previously recognized in himself (‘Yet
have I in me something dangerous’ V,1, 255). He makes an extraordinary,
inflammatory statement after grappling murderously with Laertes
10
Following Ophelia’s suicide, the relational field consists therefore, as
Shneidman stated, of attempts to deal with a ‘psychological skeleton’:
‘the person who commits suicide puts his psychological skeleton in the
survivor’s emotional closet; he sentences the survivor to deal with many
negative feelings and more, to become obsessed with thoughts regarding the
survivor’s own actual or possible role in having precipitated the suicidal act or
having failed to stop it.’ (2001: in Berman et al 2006, page 363)
For example, Annabel, a young woman of 18, took an overdose, with the
unconscious intention of showing her parents through their remorse after
the loss of their daughter, how much they had failed to love her enough.
Her father visited her in hospital and told her he loved her. This was the
first time, Annabel later told her therapist, that he had said this to her
(Briggs et al 2006).
Suicide is always traumatic for other people connected with the suicidal
person, and, in attempted suicide, for the suicidal person. The effects of
trauma include loss of the capacity for symbolic functioning and increased
6
Freud (1923) described the ego’s helplessness in the face of the torrent of sadistic attacks from the
super ego.
7
This restates from a different perspective the important point made earlier that the distinction between
completed suicide and a suicide attempt is one of outcome, not motivation; ‘parasuicide’ is not a
helpful concept for understanding suicidal dynamics
11
concreteness of thinking. Identifications are as a consequence more
destructive and negative. Mourning is impaired through the aim of narcissistic
restoration rather than facing and working through loss (Levy and Lemma
2004). Ophelia’s passive, even ‘beautiful’ (pre-Raphaelite) death leaves the
others traumatized with the mess of it all, and their guilt.
12
the suicidal patient or client is threatened. When these boundaries become
blurred, or when the worker and organisation assume total responsibilities, the
potential for reasonably accurate assessment is not possible, partly because
in these circumstances the worker becomes anxious about herself
(persecutory anxiety) and cannot relate appropriately to the patient/client.
Coherent and accurate risk assessments are possible when they are placed
within a holistic approach provided by a theoretical and practice framework.
To provide a suitable holistic and containing framework, I argue that, Instead
of focussing on assessing risks, the task of assessment needs to be
reformulated to concentrate on two key dimensions of assessment; the
implications of suicidal behaviour and the provision of sufficient containment.
13
“The adolescent who has been thinking about suicide but is able to seek help
still has available the quality of being able to doubt his thoughts and actions
and to maintain and protect some feelings of concern for the parents whom
s/he carries around within himself” (page 79)
Can having suicidal thoughts be traumatic? They are if the threat to internal
parents is experienced as troubling. For example, a young man, I will call
John, I saw for psychotherapy, experienced suicidal thoughts as having
terrifying implications. He lived with his mentally ill single parent mother and
during his late teens was violent towards her. The violence usually occurred
when his mother’s health was in one of her periodic deteriorations. After one
of mother’s admissions John got into a terrible state, as he began to have
suicidal thoughts. He was overcome by a realisation he had damaged his
mother (external and internal) and thus in a state of internal recrimination, he
camped out in the kitchen until it was time for his weekly session. He talked to
me about his panic of realising he was suicidal – and feeling overcome by an
unbearable guilt. ‘I won’t do it though’ he told me – a communication I heard
with some scepticism, but I managed to see despite my anxiety that I could
trust what he said, that he was communicating a traumatised state which
threatened him with a catastrophic situation. He was telling me, I thought, that
he had encountered a suicidal solution, but had turned away from this and
would try to bear whatever might ensue.
14
Ladame assumes that suicidal behaviour will be repeated because, in the
traumatic state characterized by concreteness rather than symbolization,
there is, therefore, a propensity to reenactment. Through attention paid to
containment after the attempt, the aim is to allow re-functioning of the psyche
at the level of symbolization and prevent denial of fantasies that led to the
enactment and are ‘washed out’ by it. This fits with other observations –e.g.
by Rob Hale – about the role of denial after an attempt – the image of the
attempt ‘washing out’ the fantasies and painful emotional states that trigger
the attack is an apt and powerful one.
Gemma, an 18 year old, adolescent patient I saw came in the early part of
treatment to a session and, in a very matter of fact way, told me she had
overdosed after the previous session, had been taken to hospital and
discharged. It was a very serious attempt and she was saved by vomiting,
which her mother heard and responded to. She reported this account to me in
a way that made it seem quite unreal and I had to struggle within myself to
hold on to what I had heard, as if there was strong projective pull for me to
instantly forget. When I had managed to ‘hang on’ I began to think that this
was her state of mind – a wish to instantly forget, and thus to re-enact a
murder, this time to her mind, to her psychic experience, rather than her body.
The force urging forgetting might be thought of as what Caroline Garland
(2004) describes as a ‘projective imperative’. A sense of alarm within me was
heightened by her communication that she had declined treatment in hospital
and told staff that she was in therapy, and this was accepted by the staff, and
she was discharged. She continued to deny having had any suicidal thoughts
and only when I was insistent did she agree that her suicidal actions showed
she was suicidal.
There was insufficient containment available in this setting, at this time, for
this patient. Gemma was able to slide between parts of the system; and the
opportunity to undertake a sufficiently thorough assessment after the attempt
was difficult to attain because it was difficult to keep her in contact with me in
her therapy; most of the effort in therapy was spent in trying to make and
retain a containing space. Gemma represents one kind of suicidal
constellation; her main psychic priority is to avoid herself and others knowing
she has problems at all (Bell 2008), and her suicidality is governed by a
dismissing/avoidant attachment strategy (Wright et al. 2005) in which she
downplays, denies and negates her emotionality. For adolescents like
Gemma sufficient containment can only be provided initially in a residential
setting. The inpatient methods used by Ladame in Geneva have been
designed to include features that are key to the process of containing the
adolescent after a suicide attempt and thus offering an optimal approach to
preventing repetition.
15
In this model, in the first stage in-patient admission for a maximum stay of 1
month is offered as the only way of providing enough containment after a
suicide attempt. ‘Admission to the crisis Unit acknowledges the psychic
breakdown enacted through the suicide attempt. It offers a ‘controlled’ break
with the outer world, giving the adolescent a temporary haven from the
concrete burden of everyday life. Thus we routinely propose a complete break
with the outside for 48 hours, with no visits or phone calls.’ (Ladame 2008
page 76)
The second phase of treatment, after leaving the unit, “is based upon the
knowledge that unless real change occurs in the underlying mental and
dynamic structures, what happened once might well happen again. It is
therefore important to build in adequate and reliable protective strategies
against the risk of repetition.” (page 77)
I have covered this approach in some detail, because Ladame’s work is not
well known in the English speaking regions, and because this thinking poses
a considerable challenge to ways of working and organising services. The
implication of the traumatic dimension or implications of suicide is that the first
requirement is to provide a sufficient containment and for some adolescents
this requires a particular kind of focussed, time-limited in-patient (or
residential) treatment initially, following specific practices.
From assessment of the internal suicidal relationship constellation, another
group of suicidal people can be identified as being more suitable for outpatient
treatment. With these people, there are intense communications, both direct
and projectively, of anxieties about suicide, and people in this group stir up
tremendous anxiety in the therapist. In attachment terms they fit the pattern of
preoccupied insecure attachment (Wright et al 2005). Containment in an out-
patient setting is possible when the therapist has access to a containing
reflective supervision structure.
16
processes that are so vital to the mental life of young people. The question is
then raised whether the principles around which this discussion is based – the
implications of suicide and the need for sufficient containment – can apply to
other life stages, namely adulthood and later life.
The evidence that is emerging from Maytree provides some support for the
idea that a time-limited residential, non-stigmatising resource, to an extent
similar in aims and methods to Ladame’s unit in Geneva, is important, helpful
and possibly necessary for providing sufficient containment for adults in a
suicidal crisis. This evidence includes findings that show that this kind of
containment can have beneficial effects. With regard to suicidality in later life,
studies from the Centre for Therapy and Studies of Suicidality (TZS) in
Hamburg show that difficulties older people have in making contact with
professional organisations can be overcome by approaches that focus on
understanding the narratives suicidal people have and that these can be
understood as organised into different patterns of relatedness (Lindner et al
2006). Focusing on difficulties experienced in talking about suicidality leads to
the emergence of narratives that indicate acceptance and a lessening of the
fear of stigmatisation.
17
It is usual to conclude that ‘further research needs to be done’; of course this
is true, but it seems, above all, that what is really needed, at this point, is not a
discussion about ‘what works’ in the domain of positivistic outcome studies,
but a more active engagement in exploring the implications of the discussion
in this chapter, of the primacy of establishing different ways of relating to self
harm and suicide and, through focusing on the implications of suicide and the
need for sufficient containment to explore how the organisation of different
services impact on their client or patient population. There are a number of
innovative approaches to working with suicidal people, some of which have
been discussed in this chapter – Ladame’s work in Geneva, the Centre for
Therapy and the Study of Suicidality in Hamburg, Maytree and the Tavistock’s
Adolescent Department among these; it will be helpful to further study what is
being learned from these approaches and the implications for mainstream
services.
Conclusion
References
18
Bateman, A. & Fonagy, P. (in press) Eight-year follow-up of patients treated
for borderline personality disorder: Mentalization based treatment versus
treatment as usual. American Journal of Psychiatry.
Bell, D. (2008) ‘Who is Killing What or Whom? Some Notes on the Internal
Phenomenology of Suicide’, in Briggs, S. Lemma, A., Crouch, W. (eds.)
Relating to self-harm and suicide: psychoanalytic perspectives on theory,
practice and prevention. London, Routledge
Bennewith O., Gunnell, D., Peters, T., Hawton, K. and House, A. (2004)
Variations in the hospital management of self-harm in adults in England:
observational study British Medical Journal 328, 1108-1109.
Biddle L, Brock, A., Brookes, S. and Gunnell, D.(2008) Suicide rates in yioung
men in England and wales in the 21st Century: time trend study. British
Medical Journal 336, 539-542
Briggs, S., Webb, L. and Buhagiar J. (2007) Maytree, a Respite Centre for the
Suicidal: an Evaluation. Crisis; The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide
Prevention, 28, 3, 140-147
19
Briggs, S., Webb, L. and Buhagiar J. (2007) Maytree, a Respite Centre for the
Suicidal: an Evaluation. Crisis; The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide
Prevention, 28, 3, 140-147
Choose Life 2008 A national Strategy and Action Plan to Reduce Suicide in
Scotland http://www.chooselife.net/home/Home.asp
Cohen, S. (2002) Folk Devils and Moral Panics. 3rd Edition (London,
Routledge)
Freud, S. (1923) The Ego and the Id, in J. Strachey (ed.) The Standard
Edition of the works of Sigmund Freud, XIV ,(pp.1-66)
20
Glasser, M. (1979) ‘Some aspects of the role of aggression in the
perversions’, in I. Rosen. (ed.) The pathology and Treatment of Sexual
Deviations, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Gunnell D., Hawton K., Ho D., Evans J., O’Connor S., Potokar J., Donovan J.,
Kapur N., Hospital admissions for self harm after discharge from psychiatric
inpatient care: cohort study, British Medical Journal 2008;337:a2278
Guthrie, E., Kapur, N., Mackway-Jones, K., Chew-Graham, C., Moorey, J.,
Mendel, E., et al. (2001). Randomised controlled trial of brief psychological
intervention after deliberate self poisoning. British Medical Journal, 323(7305),
135-138.
Hawton K., Zahl D., Weatherall, R. (2003) Suicide following deliberate self-
harm: lomg term follow-up of patients who presenetd to aq general hospital.
British Journal of Psychiatry, 182, 537-542
Luoma, J.B., Martin, C.E. and Pearson, J.L. (2002) ‘Contact with mental
health and primary care providers before suicide: a review of the evidence’,
American Journal of Psychiatry, 159: 909-916.
21
Maltsberger JT 2008 Self break up and the descent into suicide in Briggs, S.
Lemma, A., Crouch, W. (eds.) Relating to self-harm and suicide:
psychoanalytic perspectives on theory, practice and prevention. London,
Routledge
Maltsberger, J.G. and Buie, D.H. (1980) ‘The devices of suicide’, International
Review of Psychooanalysis, 7: 61-72.
NICE (2004) The short term physical and psychological management and
secondary prevention of self harm in primary and secondary care. NICE
clinical guideline http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/
NIMHE 2008 National Suicide Prevention Strategy for England Annual Report
2007. Care Services Improvement Partnership
http://www.nimhe.csip.org.uk/silo/files/suicide-prevention-strategy-report-
2007.pdf
Owens D., Horrocks, J., House, A. (2002) Fatal and non-fatal repetition of
self-harm: systematic review. British Journal of Psychiatry, 181, 193-199
22
Welsh Assembly 2008 A National Action Plan to Reduce Suicide and Self
Harm in Wales 2008-2013
http://new.wales.gov.uk/consultation/dhss/talktome/actionplane.pdf?lang=en .
Wright J., Briggs, S. and Behringer J. (2005) Attachment and the body in
suicidal adolescents. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 10, 4, 477-491
23