Suicide threat, distressed poster

[picklemepopcorn]

In chat, just posted.

@UbiquityTree

*I think you possibly mean "tip others who are already struggling with thoughts of harming themselves towards acting on those thoughts".

Ubiquity, you're quite right - apologies.

I also don’t agree with all the “we aren’t experts, so shut it down and point them elsewhere” that’s being posted.

If I saw someone sitting on a bridge and about to jump, I would not say “sorry I’m no expert, here’s the number of the samaratins, good luck mate” and I’m fairly sure if it was someone you knew loved or cared about you wouldn’t want me to either, you’d want me to stay and try and stop them, at least till I knew others more qualified were involved.

And that’s where I struggle with what happened last night. That complete lack of human compassion. There was no goading, no troll hunting, and the poster was interacting and responding. When they were doing that they were alive.

There was no doubt that if real it wa a cry for help. And that help was squarely refused and a telephone number provided, a number that can be engaged for up to an hour or more. A number where you physically have to talk to someone even though that might not have been something the poster could have done or have been willing to do due to others in the home.

Bottom line for me is if you wouldn’t walk away from the person on the bridge, you shouldn’t walk away from them on here either.

The thing though is that we don't know that she reached out. Was she a regular? If not, presumably mn was just any in a number of places she (assuming it even is a she) could have happened to post. And that's assuming that it's even a real person and not a troll.

Added to which, MN is a chat forum not a MH support helpline. As crass as that sounds, there are a lot of people on here who want to post about their children/the weather/christmas, and who just want to get caught up in the posting rather than the content iyswim. What happens to those threads when someone posts that they're suicidal and then go off to sleep because they were trolling or perhaps their husband came home or maybe they called a helpline instead, and the posters who are chomping at the bit for updates want to know what's happened and get nothing in return to their "bump" posts? Or the posters who, as I said in an earlier post, are just after feeding their own rescuer complexes.

And the reality is that there is a better than average chance that these suicidal posts aren't even genuine. And even if some of them are, if you allow them to stand this will become a trolling ground for people to prey on the goodwill of others even more than they currently do. Is it not enough that we have posters who troll about failed relationships/dead babies/serious illness that we will be encouraging people to troll about suicide as well?

Ubiquity, for me, when the poster is responding, as she was last night, you don’t walk away. Yes there are risks, yes people could get it wrong, but they may not and no risk is as big as simply shutting the door in her face as she’s talking.

I don’t think it’s an “admirable” position, I think we would all do the same thing and that’s why there has been such an outcry over last nights thread. It’s made many of us deeply uncomfortable.

These threads are few and far between, but this is the first one I’ve seen where the quickly shutting it down has upset so many people.

And the reality is that there is a better than average chance that these suicidal posts aren't even genuine

The thing is, I don’t care if only one in a hundred is genuine, because if that one in a hundred person is just maybe helped, it’s worth it. Deleting it because hey it might not be real is also saying I’m deleting it even though it maybe real. Saying I won’t help the one because I can’t be arsed with the other 99 isn’t ok in my view.

It doesn’t matter if there are other options available to the poster , what matters is they made the effort to reach out and they picked this one. Like the person on the bridge, you don’t tell them to dial 999 and walk away. You stay and help.

But the experts haven’t said that ubiquity, and you’re putting words in mumsnet mouth. What they said the charities said was it was better to delete if there was a method mentioned. This is all that was said.

If you have more official info from the charities on their discussion with mumsnet then Post it officially on their behalf.

How will you feel if that poster whose "hand " you're "holding" jumps?
How will you feel if she posts she's going to jump because of something you say?
There's a damn good professional reason actual experts have told MN to shut down these threads.
And compassion has nothing to do with it.
What leaves me uncomfortable when reading them are the flag waving saviours who seem to look out for them. Deeply concerning.

I didn't see the thread but I support the MN stance on this difficult issue.

It strikes me though that it doesn't have to be all or nothing. The MN boards are full of all sorts of people going through all sorts of struggles, any suicidal poster is welcome to post there in a new thread about all their problems.

As someone else said, even in chat or silly cat threads, the poster is still very welcome. It's not the poster whose being turned away, it's one very specific thing they just can't post about, for very sound reasons. Nobody is turning anyone away.

I have lots of experience in this area. Although I don’t claim to be an expert. What I would hope happens (and maybe its somewehre on the thread - I haven’t read the whole thing) is that there is a message to the OP directing them to an email.
I hope that the email is as supportive and helpful as possible because the experience of having a thread deleted can be very traumatic and experienced as (another) rejection. It is essential that this is avoided, which is also why maybe it is a good idea that the thread is closed to prevent anyone posting stuff that is more upsetting.
I know that some replies to my posts have felt like being slapped, bit fortunately I wasn’t in a bad place when I posted them.

I don't know why we are even having this discussion again.

It took a long time before HQ made the decision a few years ago, after consulation with the relevant professional bodies and charities. They were completely transparent with the users of the site for their reasons for coming to that decision and it seems to me that the vast majority of respondents on this thread and previous threads agree that taking the thread down is the best they can do in difficult circumstances.

it seems to me that the vast majority of respondents on this thread and previous threads agree that taking the thread down is the best they can do in difficult circumstances

That’s not true, read the thread, it’s fairly evenly split, the issue now is people are being attacked and insulted for saying is should be left up, which always stifles discussion.

Bluntness100 I have re-read the thread and discussion is not being stifled.

The only attacking I can see is coming from posters like yourself who want/wanted the thread to stand against posters who agree with MNHQ policy that the thread had to go.

Posters who have said it was right the thread had to go and given their reasons and backing to the MNHQ policy have been sneered at and accused by you, and posters who take the same view as you have/do, that they know nothing, are lacking in compassion, empathy and not as good a person as you deem yourself to be. Your post of 19th November at 21.57 (which quotes at the start a piece of a post by another poster) is an early example:

"well meaning but not helpful at all

^And there we have it folks. The one person who has proved mumsnet right, the person who attacks instead of supports.

Slow hand clap running^."

You firmly believe you are right, can/could help and should be allowed to even though this is not the advice MNHQ received from the respective MH charities.

You shouldn't have deleted Claire's thread. She was talking to us and was taking on board what we were saying. She realised it was the medication making her feel this way, yet you still deleted it? Absolutely the wrong choice.

Bottom line for me is if you wouldn’t walk away from the person on the bridge, you shouldn’t walk away from them on here either

No but you and other random passers by wouldn't take it upon yourself to deal with it. You'd be straight on 999 to get the person help from the professionals who can actually help

Dear but some of the responses were insensitive and we have no idea what could push someone who is in such distress over the edge. She was given good advice as well to call 999. MNHQ are not mental health trained and cannot assess which threads to keep or delete, it needs to be a blanket rule. I was concerned it would turn into a thread with live updates which would not be appropriate for anyone involved.

How do you know she was listening? Do we even know if she was a real suicidal poster? And to the poster who said that if the one person is helped then the other 100 trolls are worth it, absolutely not. Where do you draw the line?

As for the person on the bridge, No you absolutely would not stay to talk them down if you had any sense, you would stay and call 999, and you may stay until the ambulance arrived, at which point the ambulance would take away the person and you would lose any right to know what happened to them.

Even the MH charities do not allow suicide posts to stand on their boards. So how on earth do mn'ers think they know better? Or perhaps we should accept that this is in fact more about them rather than the individual posting.

I am a Samaritan volunteer myself and while we are a worthy and very well meaning charity and I would always suggest trying us, I am the first to admit there are Samaritans and Samaritans and some aren't fantastic. The problem is, after probation volunteers are pretty much left to it - there is ongoing training, but no supervision or monitoring and I have heard 'unsuitable' shall we say things said to people.

I also think sometimes it can be quite intense talking one to one to someone. Plus, sometimes you can't get through!

I don't have answers here but I am sorry anyone has been let down by the Samaritans! I rang them myself (after checking it wasn't the branch I volunteered at!) and had someone horrible, so I do understand. It is not you!

I see there’s an indignance from some of the posters who inevitably portray themselves as helpers and whist they denigrate others who recommended delete the thread as uncaring, inept etc. And whilst one may consider oneself not be the sort of person that would do nothing, a let’s fix it attitude isn’t necessarily helpful or therapeutic.

Mental health is a human endeavour, understood by tone of voice,facial expression,content of speech, knowlege about triggers,collateral from friends,family and significant others. It isn’t an online exercise.

I understand that people want to help and the IMO best help is advise to see statutory services

I'm sorry to see that others have had the same experiences as me with the Samaritans and NHS mental health provisions. It is easy to signpost people to these services but they aren't as good as people think and if I'm honest the Samaritans (at best) just repeat what you say back to you and say they understand that it is upsetting. I didn't find that helpful at all and it is hard to even get through to them in the first place. They are just normal humans that also say the wrong things sometimes.

To the poster above saying that mental health help isn't an online exercise, you can email the Samaritans so that argument is redundant as they are one of the mental health services you suggest leaving it to...

You can, Nancy, but you will be lucky to get a reply within 2 hours.

And Samaritans are only as good or effective as the Samaritan.