Mackenzie Jay-Marie, Marsh Ian, Fields Bob, Kruger Ian, Katsampa Dafni, Crivatu Ioana, Marzano Lisa
University of Westminster, London, UK.
Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, UK.
BMC Public Health. 2025 May 2;25(1):1625. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-22744-x.
Despite increasing recognition of the crucial role of lived/ing experience in shaping suicide prevention policy and practice, the perspectives of people who have considered or attempted suicide by train are seldom captured in analyses of what could reduce suicides on the railways. The aim of this study was to explore lived/ing experience perceptions of what types of approaches are effective or ineffective in this context, and why.
We carried out 1) in-depth qualitative interviews with 34 individuals who had attempted or contemplated suicide on the railways; 2) an online survey investigating lived/ing experiences of suicidality at rail locations (N = 269); 3) an online ethnography of content relating to train/rail suicide from different online spaces including 'pro-choice' forums and reddit (254 posts and 1228 associated comments).
Several measures to prevent suicide on the railways were identified-and critiqued-in lived/ing experience accounts. These included strategies to challenge dominant cultural narratives around railway suicide (e.g. by shifting the focus from the lethality of this method to its impact on train drivers and others); environmental measures to restrict access to means and/or create a safer and more positive atmosphere; and increasing opportunities for help-seeking and 'helpful' third-party interventions. However, considering what works for whom, and when, emerged as crucial. The challenges of preventing rail suicides against a backdrop of severely stretched mental health services were also repeatedly highlighted.
The perspectives of people with lived/ing experiences, whilst far from homogenous, provide crucial insights into the potential value and unintended consequences of different measures to prevent suicides on the railways. Our findings reiterate the need for comprehensive suicide prevention strategies, targeting different stages of the suicidal process.
尽管人们越来越认识到生活经历在塑造自杀预防政策和实践中所起的关键作用，但在分析如何减少铁路自杀事件时，很少能捕捉到那些曾考虑过或试图通过铁路自杀的人的观点。本研究的目的是探讨在这种情况下，人们对于何种方法有效或无效的生活经历认知，以及原因。
我们开展了以下工作：1）对34名曾试图或考虑过通过铁路自杀的人进行深入定性访谈；2）进行一项在线调查，调查在铁路站点的自杀生活经历（N = 269）；3）对来自不同在线空间（包括“选择权利”论坛和Reddit）的与火车/铁路自杀相关的内容进行在线人种志研究（254个帖子和1228条相关评论）。
在生活经历描述中确定并批评了几种预防铁路自杀的措施。这些措施包括挑战围绕铁路自杀的主流文化叙事的策略（例如，将重点从这种方法的致命性转移到其对火车司机和其他人的影响）；限制获取自杀手段和/或营造更安全、更积极氛围的环境措施；以及增加寻求帮助和“有益的”第三方干预的机会。然而，考虑什么对谁有效、何时有效，成为了关键。在心理健康服务严重紧张的背景下预防铁路自杀的挑战也被反复强调。
有生活经历的人的观点虽然远非同质化，但为不同措施预防铁路自杀的潜在价值和意外后果提供了关键见解。我们的研究结果重申了针对自杀过程不同阶段制定全面自杀预防策略的必要性。
