Human rights, gender issues and suicide

Posted on 05/10/2010 | 2 Comments

The tragic story of Tyler Clementi’s suicide is well known to many by now (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101001/ap_on_re_us/us_student_taped_sex).    It was an event, not improved by the media circus that has erupted after it. And it raises a number of fundamental issues. Here are three that come to mind, I am sure that there are more.
 
First: human rights. The secret video and its subsequent broadcast of Mr. Clementi’s intimate activities violated his human rights – period. That is clear, regardless of whom his intimate partner (or partners) was. The electronic age has made it easier to both address and infringe on human rights. The digital world is a global world. We as a global society will have to deal with this, and quickly. 
 
Second: gender issues. My family, my community, my country and my world are places in which diversity is celebrated, where gender inequalities are not tolerated and where gender differences are embraced. It seems that we still have a lot of work to do on these issues. We cannot stop until they have been long relegated to the dustbin of history.
 
Third: suicide. Mr. Clementi’s suicide was certainly a tragic event. Yet we do not know all the details of his story and it is too easy to jump to certainty about what emotional turmoil and what other factors lead him to choose the tack that he did. We do not need to argue that we must respect and support human rights and gender differences by raising the specter of suicide. We need to address suicide on its own terms, in all its complexities and in all its layers. We need to do the right thing not just something.
 
 
I for one, look forward to a time when I do not ever read a media story such as the one about Mr. Clementi. Not because the media has not made a circus about it, but because there are no more similar stories to tell. But in order to do that, we must work hard to make sure our friends and our neighbors are on a similar page. And who is my neighbor? Everyone is my neighbor, and everyone is your neighbor.
 
--Stan

What people are saying?

Debra Stang said...

I do a lot of volunteer work with suicide survivors. From my own experience with losing a loved one to suicide, and from hearing their stories, I’m convinced that it’s usually unfair to blame one person or event for the suicide. Often the suicidal person has been battling his or her own demons for years, and while one incident may appear to have “sent them over the edge” the truth is that the risk for that person taking his or her own life was always high.

I’m not condoning the behavior of bullies, but I think we do a disservice to suicidal clients by pointing the finger at just one factor.

Debra Stang
Alliant Professional Networking Specialist

P.S. Alliant International University offers an online continuing education class co-taught by a therapist and by a man who survived a leap off the Golden Gate Bridge (http://www.ce-psychology.com/product158.html). It offers no easy answers, but a lot of good food for thought.

Comment made on November 27th, 2010

HenaryLee said...

Nice post.

Comment made on July 13th, 2011

What do you think?


Filter by category

Filter by date

Blog Tag Cloud

adhd anxiety disorders attention award awards behaviour bipolar blog brain & neurology bullying canada care carter center conference confidentiality control coping criminal justice system cruelty cutting depression discrimination doctor driving eating disorders

Recent Comment

This is a great set of comments and rings very true. 

I totally agree that scientists (just like everyone else) have their biases and foibles.  After all, scientists are human beings too!  But science is different than scientists. 

The scientific method is the most objective frame that we have by which to evaluate and predict.  Science is not about finding truth.  It is only about being less wrong most of the time.  The scientific method (experimental design and mathematics) gives us the ability to test what we believe.  The scientific method is not used to prove something is correct, on the contrary, the scientific method is designed to prove that something is not correct!  It is designed to test what is called the “null hypothesis”.  It takes ideas that come out of left field (or wherever else they come from) and puts those ideas to an independent test.

t does not drive our beliefs.  It does however challenge our beliefs.  In that way it is self-correcting. Of course scientific inquiry and understanding lives within a wider social context.  That is one of the great features of science. 

But gravity is gravity, social context notwithstanding.  And thus it is nasty, brutish and long.  As Brecht said, (something like this) - the purpose of science is to save us from everlasting error.

By Christina Carew on May 11th

You can find us here too!

  • image
  • image
  • image

We would like to say thanks...

Without their help this initiative would not be possible. Thanks for you help.

  • image
  • image
  • image

Helpful Links