tr.euronews.com
High Suicide Risk Among Musicians Prompts Call for Preventative Measures
New research reveals musicians, particularly women, face significantly higher suicide risks in the UK and US due to occupational stressors and societal romanticization of suffering artists; a "zero suicide" approach is proposed as a preventative strategy.
- How does the societal perception of musicians as inherently suffering contribute to the high suicide rates?
- The high suicide risk among musicians stems from occupational stressors including financial instability, public scrutiny, and the emotional toll of touring, combined with high rates of anxiety, depression, and substance abuse. This risk is amplified by a societal romanticization of suffering artists.
- What are the specific suicide risk statistics for musicians in the UK and US, and what are the leading contributing factors?
- In the UK, musicians are the fourth highest risk group for suicide, with women facing a shocking 69% higher risk than the general population. Studies in the US show similarly high suicide rates, particularly among women in the entertainment industry.
- What preventative strategies, such as the "zero suicide" approach, could effectively reduce suicide rates among musicians and what evidence supports their efficacy?
- A "zero suicide" approach, focusing on holistic care and preventative measures, is proposed to mitigate the risk. Evidence suggests such approaches can significantly reduce suicide rates, as seen in a 75% decrease in suicides in New York City after implementing this strategy.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the issue with a focus on the high suicide rates among musicians, using emotionally charged language and emphasizing the tragic stories of famous musicians who died by suicide. This framing emphasizes the negative aspects of the profession and could potentially create an overly alarming impression. The headline itself, while not explicitly stated, would likely focus on the alarming statistics. The use of '27 club' members also reinforces this negative framing.
Language Bias
The article uses emotionally charged language, such as 'tragedies', 'shocking', and 'alarming', to describe the high suicide rates. These terms are not necessarily inappropriate, but they contribute to a more emotional, less neutral tone. Replacing such terms with more neutral ones (e.g., 'high rates' instead of 'alarming rates') would improve neutrality. The repeated emphasis on suicide and death also leans towards a negative framing.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses primarily on UK and US data, neglecting to mention other countries with high suicide rates among musicians, such as South Korea. While the authors acknowledge the high suicide rate in Korea, they don't delve into specific data or contributing cultural factors beyond mentioning 'socially prescribed perfectionism'. This omission limits the article's scope and prevents a truly global understanding of the issue.
False Dichotomy
The article doesn't present a false dichotomy, but it does focus heavily on the correlation between musical careers and suicide risk without thoroughly exploring other contributing factors beyond the inherent stresses of the profession. This could unintentionally lead readers to a simplistic understanding of a complex issue.
Gender Bias
The article highlights the disparity in suicide rates between male and female musicians (69% higher for women in the UK), acknowledging the higher risk for women in the entertainment industry overall. While the article mentions this disparity, it doesn't deeply analyze the underlying causes or offer gender-specific solutions. More analysis on the gendered aspects of the music industry, including systemic inequalities and pressures, would strengthen this aspect.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights a significantly increased risk of suicide among musicians in the UK and US, indicating negative impacts on mental health and well-being within the music industry. The high rates, particularly among female musicians, directly contradict the SDG target of promoting mental health and well-being for all.