↓ Skip to main content

The politics of LGBT+ suicide and suicide prevention in the UK: risk, responsibility and rhetoric

Overview of attention for article published in Culture, Health & Sexuality, February 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
45 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The politics of LGBT+ suicide and suicide prevention in the UK: risk, responsibility and rhetoric
Published in
Culture, Health & Sexuality, February 2023
DOI 10.1080/13691058.2023.2172614
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hazel Marzetti, Amy Chandler, Ana Jordan, Alexander Oaten

Abstract

Suicide is a major public health concern, patterned by systematic inequalities, with lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT+) people being one example of a minoritised group that is more likely to think about and attempt suicide worldwide. To address this, UK national suicide prevention policies have suggested that LGBT+ people should be prioritised in prevention activities. However, there is little research seeking to understand how LGBT+ suicide is re/presented in political and policy spheres. In this article, we critically analyse all mentions of LGBT+ suicide in UK parliamentary debates between 2009 and 2019 and in the eight suicide prevention policies in use during this period. We argue that LGBT+ suicide is understood in two contrasting ways: firstly, as a pathological 'problem', positioning LGBT+ people either as risks or as at risk and in need of mental health support. Alternatively, suicide can be seen as externally attributable to perpetrators of homophobic, biphobic and transphobic hate, requiring anti-hate activities as part of suicide prevention. In response, we argue that although these explanations may appear oppositional; they both draw on reductive explanations of LGBT+ suicide, failing to consider the complexity of suicidal distress, thus constraining understandings of suicide and suicide prevention.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 5 29%
Lecturer 3 18%
Student > Master 2 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 12%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 5 29%
Social Sciences 4 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 12%
Psychology 1 6%
Sports and Recreations 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,080,819
of 25,768,270 outputs
Outputs from Culture, Health & Sexuality
#54
of 1,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,420
of 492,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Culture, Health & Sexuality
#1
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,768,270 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 492,308 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.