Domestic violence suicides are already growing at such a rate that a woman in an abusive relationship is now more likely to take her own life than be killed by a partner.
But research into the number of women who take their own life in such circumstances has suggested official statistics could track as few as 6.5% of the true number of cases.
According to the Domestic Homicide Project, a programme led by the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), there were 98 suspected suicides following domestic abuse in 2024, compared with 80 intimate partner homicides.
But research by a suicide prevention programme in Kent found that about a third of all suspected suicides in the region between 2018 and 2024 were affected by domestic abuse.
If the numbers in Kent reflect the national picture, it could mean as many as 1,500 victims of domestic abuse are taking their own lives every year – up to 15 times as many as previously thought.
Tim Woodhouse, the programme manager and a University of Kent academic, who led the research, said: “We need some sort of national taskforce to get a grip on this.” He added that it was “bonkers that we are basing national estimates on one researcher’s evidence”...
I don’t want to engage in any whataboutery as this is tragic that these women feel there is no other option however stats for England and Wales for 2024 show over 4300 men killed themselves - one every two hours. In the mainstream it feels it’s somehow not important - I know two men in their 40s/50s who killed themselves last year, others over previous years.
Whilst this issue of abuse by men leading to suicide by women needs fixing so does the crazy level of suicide amongst middle aged men. Do they get a national task force set up?
It doesn't sound much like a task force has been set up; more that someone has had a look at the numbers and decided more research is necessary.
In any event, we're talking about two quite different things.
Regarding male suicide, the government did do something last year (also not a task force).
I think one tragedy here are the ideologies that are being presented as solutions, around ultra-traditionalist views, "masculinity", "manliness", "warrior ethos" and so on - a public example being Pete Hegseth. I've been having a look a bit this week at some of the ideas behind his Christian Nationalism, and some of the stuff about women is beyond frightening. That is a recipe for encouraging violence.
Before long we will be seeing a rhetoric that women have a duty to provide sex to men, building on the current "more babies" demands, and as a component of anti-feminism.
Here's one example (Youtuber Richard the Fourth" of someone linking in the new female Archbishop as proof of the continuing degradation of modern society, for "liberal modernist consensus". He reaches for "Traditionalism" and "Hierarchy as we saw in our martial traditions", based around ideas such as those of Robert Bly, and also various others from 1st half 20C and before. Ideologically, for me this is running away from the issue based on a tissue of nonsense, rather than addressing the question.
One problem with the Archbishop stuff: there is a female Apostle (the model for Bishops in RC, Anglican, Orthodox etc) in the New Testament in good standing, which means the whole idea of "NEVER women in authority in the church" is simply baloney.
Domestic violence suicides are already growing at such a rate that a woman in an abusive relationship is now more likely to take her own life than be killed by a partner.
But research into the number of women who take their own life in such circumstances has suggested official statistics could track as few as 6.5% of the true number of cases.
According to the Domestic Homicide Project, a programme led by the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), there were 98 suspected suicides following domestic abuse in 2024, compared with 80 intimate partner homicides.
But research by a suicide prevention programme in Kent found that about a third of all suspected suicides in the region between 2018 and 2024 were affected by domestic abuse.
If the numbers in Kent reflect the national picture, it could mean as many as 1,500 victims of domestic abuse are taking their own lives every year – up to 15 times as many as previously thought.
Tim Woodhouse, the programme manager and a University of Kent academic, who led the research, said: “We need some sort of national taskforce to get a grip on this.” He added that it was “bonkers that we are basing national estimates on one researcher’s evidence”...
Initial thoughts
What are the databases being interrogated? (check the sample and the sample frame)
Are there deaths taking place outside the UK that may be omitted from the total? (check for omissions)
Can a dedicated task force be set up to examine (a subset of) female non-DV suicides to check retrospectively if domestic abuse was a contributing factor? (ie check for false negatives)
Is there a set of female deaths initially classified as "open" but which, on re-examination, may be better/plausibly classified as "suicide" (check for underreporting)
This strikes me as the kind of thing where a small, dedicated team could make a disproportionately large difference
The only class war being waged right now is by billionaires on the rest of us.
In what sense? Billionaires create jobs, products and services. It is elected governments that set tax and spending rates and make laws not them
Oh. The incessant propaganda they fund to influence those governments and laws. It isn't kindness or altruism towards the less fortunate that motivates them.
Domestic violence suicides are already growing at such a rate that a woman in an abusive relationship is now more likely to take her own life than be killed by a partner.
But research into the number of women who take their own life in such circumstances has suggested official statistics could track as few as 6.5% of the true number of cases.
According to the Domestic Homicide Project, a programme led by the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), there were 98 suspected suicides following domestic abuse in 2024, compared with 80 intimate partner homicides.
But research by a suicide prevention programme in Kent found that about a third of all suspected suicides in the region between 2018 and 2024 were affected by domestic abuse.
If the numbers in Kent reflect the national picture, it could mean as many as 1,500 victims of domestic abuse are taking their own lives every year – up to 15 times as many as previously thought.
Tim Woodhouse, the programme manager and a University of Kent academic, who led the research, said: “We need some sort of national taskforce to get a grip on this.” He added that it was “bonkers that we are basing national estimates on one researcher’s evidence”...
I don’t want to engage in any whataboutery as this is tragic that these women feel there is no other option however stats for England and Wales for 2024 show over 4300 men killed themselves - one every two hours. In the mainstream it feels it’s somehow not important - I know two men in their 40s/50s who killed themselves last year, others over previous years.
Whilst this issue of abuse by men leading to suicide by women needs fixing so does the crazy level of suicide amongst middle aged men. Do they get a national task force set up?
It doesn't sound much like a task force has been set up; more that someone has had a look at the numbers and decided more research is necessary.
In any event, we're talking about two quite different things.
Regarding male suicide, the government did do something last year (also not a task force).
I think one tragedy here are the ideologies that are being presented as solutions, around ultra-traditionalist views, "masculinity", "manliness", "warrior ethos" and so on - a public example being Pete Hegseth. I've been having a look a bit this week at some of the ideas behind his Christian Nationalism, and some of the stuff about women is beyond frightening. That is a recipe for encouraging violence.
Before long we will be seeing a rhetoric that women have a duty to provide sex to men, building on the current "more babies" demands, and as a component of anti-feminism.
Here's one example (Youtuber Richard the Fourth" of someone linking in the new female Archbishop as proof of the continuing degradation of modern society, for "liberal modernist consensus". He reaches for "Traditionalism" and "Hierarchy as we saw in our martial traditions", based around ideas such as those of Robert Bly, and also various others from 1st half 20C and before. Ideologically, for me this is running away from the issue based on a tissue of nonsense, rather than addressing the question.
One problem with the Archbishop stuff: there is a female Apostle (the model for Bishops in RC, Anglican, Orthodox etc) in the New Testament in good standing, which means the whole idea of "NEVER women in authority in the church" is simply baloney.
Go on - who do you reckon was a female apostle? I thought conventional reckoning was there were a total of 13 - the 12 disciples less Judas, plus Judas's replacement, and Paul. I'm not aware of any others claiming to be Apostles in the NY?
The model for Elders/Overseers/Bishops is more like Timothy (who nowhere claims to be an apostle), and Paul's instructions in his letters to Timothy are very clear that women should not be church leaders. 1 Timothy 2:12 "I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet." (ESV translation).
There's a whole load of revisionist rubbish talked about this (my local CofE bishop spouts pompous nonsense about how "her hermeneutic is different to other people's") but it's quite hard to get away from the actual words written in the Bible. You can of course not belive it or disagree with it, or think that Paul was a raging misogynist and his letters shouldn't count - those are logically coherent positions. But trying to claim the Bible is OK with women in senior church leadership is a nonsense position as the text explicitly and clearly says the opposite in a number of places.
Comments
Before long we will be seeing a rhetoric that women have a duty to provide sex to men, building on the current "more babies" demands, and as a component of anti-feminism.
Here's one example (Youtuber Richard the Fourth" of someone linking in the new female Archbishop as proof of the continuing degradation of modern society, for "liberal modernist consensus". He reaches for "Traditionalism" and "Hierarchy as we saw in our martial traditions", based around ideas such as those of Robert Bly, and also various others from 1st half 20C and before. Ideologically, for me this is running away from the issue based on a tissue of nonsense, rather than addressing the question.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGTehcyk1qw
One problem with the Archbishop stuff: there is a female Apostle (the model for Bishops in RC, Anglican, Orthodox etc) in the New Testament in good standing, which means the whole idea of "NEVER women in authority in the church" is simply baloney.
- What are the databases being interrogated? (check the sample and the sample frame)
- Are there deaths taking place outside the UK that may be omitted from the total? (check for omissions)
- Can a dedicated task force be set up to examine (a subset of) female non-DV suicides to check retrospectively if domestic abuse was a contributing factor? (ie check for false negatives)
- Is there a set of female deaths initially classified as "open" but which, on re-examination, may be better/plausibly classified as "suicide" (check for underreporting)
This strikes me as the kind of thing where a small, dedicated team could make a disproportionately large differencehttps://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/10/30/kamala-harris-has-more-billionaires-prominently-backing-her-than-trump-bezos-and-griffin-weigh-in-updated/
The model for Elders/Overseers/Bishops is more like Timothy (who nowhere claims to be an apostle), and Paul's instructions in his letters to Timothy are very clear that women should not be church leaders. 1 Timothy 2:12 "I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet." (ESV translation).
There's a whole load of revisionist rubbish talked about this (my local CofE bishop spouts pompous nonsense about how "her hermeneutic is different to other people's") but it's quite hard to get away from the actual words written in the Bible. You can of course not belive it or disagree with it, or think that Paul was a raging misogynist and his letters shouldn't count - those are logically coherent positions. But trying to claim the Bible is OK with women in senior church leadership is a nonsense position as the text explicitly and clearly says the opposite in a number of places.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paU0k_u6NO8