▲ 367 ▼ Local hospital wants to make it really sure nobody is taking the shortcut to the morgue in the basement... (discuss.tchncs.de) submitted 7 months ago by Multiplexer@discuss.tchncs.de to c/mildlyinteresting@lemmy.world 50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 10 points 7 months ago (13 children) I'll never understand why so many people hate suicide prevention. How much does a net even cost? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] Multiplexer@discuss.tchncs.de [S] 8 points 7 months ago (1 child) I'll never understand why so many people hate suicide prevention. Well, perhaps because this is not suicide prevention, but just suicide relocation. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) It isn't, actually. Contrary to what people seem to assume, putting up minor obstacles to prevent suicide has been scientifically proven to be effective at reducing suicides not only at that specific location, but in the general area (meaning people don't just find another way to do it). Suicide is generally an irrational, often spontaneous act. Suicidal people are, in the vast majority of cases, not thinking clearly. Requiring someone to engage their brain enough to come up with another method of suicide often makes them also question whether they actually want to do it or not. Having a big open fall on the other hand, offers a quick, convenient escape that someone who is feeling overwhelmed or desperate might be tempted by, even if they wouldn't do it if they had to actually make a plan. Empirical evidence suggests that restricting access to certain suicide methods is highly effective at preventing suicide, prompting the construction of physical barriers in many high-risk jumping locations. However, some have argued that these measures are too costly and only lead to method or location substitution. Results clearly show that physical barriers are highly effective at preventing suicide by jumping with little to no method or location substitution occurring. Furthermore, their cost is far outweighed by the monetary benefits of averted suicides. A related concept, requiring guns to be kept in nested containers where you have to open multiple layers has been shown to reduce road rage incidents. Every additional barrier provides a chance for you to remember yourself. And having an easy means of suicide around the house (such as a gun) increases suicide rates. People are not computers. If you ask me (or the scientists who have studied this), any large drop like this ought to have nets, and people on the internet can whine all they want about it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] stoly@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (10 children) Where did you get in my statement that I dislike suicide prevention? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (9 children) From the assumption that nets would only be installed as the result of a lawsuit and that the nets would cost the hospital money it doesn't have, when in fact they probably save the hospital money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] ChadGPT2@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (2 children) This is just how it works, in my experience. Most safety precautions are installed in response to a disaster, not in anticipation of one. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago (1 child) You can't tell me the comment I replied to wasn't a negative reaction. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ChadGPT2@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago It’s funny that your name is objection and you’re objecting :) cheers permalink fedilink source parent [–] stoly@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (5 children) You're assuming that public hospitals are well enough funded to use discretionary funding in this way. Even the best health systems do not carry a surplus. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago (4 children) It literally saves the hospital money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (3 children) It's clearer as time goes on that you have no experience with public sector funding. You're just being contrary for its own sake. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (2 children) Literally costs negative money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 child) You know nothing. Just stop. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago Lol. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Multiplexer@discuss.tchncs.de [S] 8 points 7 months ago (1 child) I'll never understand why so many people hate suicide prevention. Well, perhaps because this is not suicide prevention, but just suicide relocation. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) It isn't, actually. Contrary to what people seem to assume, putting up minor obstacles to prevent suicide has been scientifically proven to be effective at reducing suicides not only at that specific location, but in the general area (meaning people don't just find another way to do it). Suicide is generally an irrational, often spontaneous act. Suicidal people are, in the vast majority of cases, not thinking clearly. Requiring someone to engage their brain enough to come up with another method of suicide often makes them also question whether they actually want to do it or not. Having a big open fall on the other hand, offers a quick, convenient escape that someone who is feeling overwhelmed or desperate might be tempted by, even if they wouldn't do it if they had to actually make a plan. Empirical evidence suggests that restricting access to certain suicide methods is highly effective at preventing suicide, prompting the construction of physical barriers in many high-risk jumping locations. However, some have argued that these measures are too costly and only lead to method or location substitution. Results clearly show that physical barriers are highly effective at preventing suicide by jumping with little to no method or location substitution occurring. Furthermore, their cost is far outweighed by the monetary benefits of averted suicides. A related concept, requiring guns to be kept in nested containers where you have to open multiple layers has been shown to reduce road rage incidents. Every additional barrier provides a chance for you to remember yourself. And having an easy means of suicide around the house (such as a gun) increases suicide rates. People are not computers. If you ask me (or the scientists who have studied this), any large drop like this ought to have nets, and people on the internet can whine all they want about it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) It isn't, actually. Contrary to what people seem to assume, putting up minor obstacles to prevent suicide has been scientifically proven to be effective at reducing suicides not only at that specific location, but in the general area (meaning people don't just find another way to do it). Suicide is generally an irrational, often spontaneous act. Suicidal people are, in the vast majority of cases, not thinking clearly. Requiring someone to engage their brain enough to come up with another method of suicide often makes them also question whether they actually want to do it or not. Having a big open fall on the other hand, offers a quick, convenient escape that someone who is feeling overwhelmed or desperate might be tempted by, even if they wouldn't do it if they had to actually make a plan. Empirical evidence suggests that restricting access to certain suicide methods is highly effective at preventing suicide, prompting the construction of physical barriers in many high-risk jumping locations. However, some have argued that these measures are too costly and only lead to method or location substitution. Results clearly show that physical barriers are highly effective at preventing suicide by jumping with little to no method or location substitution occurring. Furthermore, their cost is far outweighed by the monetary benefits of averted suicides. A related concept, requiring guns to be kept in nested containers where you have to open multiple layers has been shown to reduce road rage incidents. Every additional barrier provides a chance for you to remember yourself. And having an easy means of suicide around the house (such as a gun) increases suicide rates. People are not computers. If you ask me (or the scientists who have studied this), any large drop like this ought to have nets, and people on the internet can whine all they want about it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] stoly@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (10 children) Where did you get in my statement that I dislike suicide prevention? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (9 children) From the assumption that nets would only be installed as the result of a lawsuit and that the nets would cost the hospital money it doesn't have, when in fact they probably save the hospital money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] ChadGPT2@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (2 children) This is just how it works, in my experience. Most safety precautions are installed in response to a disaster, not in anticipation of one. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago (1 child) You can't tell me the comment I replied to wasn't a negative reaction. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ChadGPT2@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago It’s funny that your name is objection and you’re objecting :) cheers permalink fedilink source parent [–] stoly@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (5 children) You're assuming that public hospitals are well enough funded to use discretionary funding in this way. Even the best health systems do not carry a surplus. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago (4 children) It literally saves the hospital money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (3 children) It's clearer as time goes on that you have no experience with public sector funding. You're just being contrary for its own sake. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (2 children) Literally costs negative money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 child) You know nothing. Just stop. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago Lol. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (9 children) From the assumption that nets would only be installed as the result of a lawsuit and that the nets would cost the hospital money it doesn't have, when in fact they probably save the hospital money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] ChadGPT2@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (2 children) This is just how it works, in my experience. Most safety precautions are installed in response to a disaster, not in anticipation of one. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago (1 child) You can't tell me the comment I replied to wasn't a negative reaction. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ChadGPT2@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago It’s funny that your name is objection and you’re objecting :) cheers permalink fedilink source parent [–] stoly@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (5 children) You're assuming that public hospitals are well enough funded to use discretionary funding in this way. Even the best health systems do not carry a surplus. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago (4 children) It literally saves the hospital money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (3 children) It's clearer as time goes on that you have no experience with public sector funding. You're just being contrary for its own sake. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (2 children) Literally costs negative money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 child) You know nothing. Just stop. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago Lol. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ChadGPT2@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (2 children) This is just how it works, in my experience. Most safety precautions are installed in response to a disaster, not in anticipation of one. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago (1 child) You can't tell me the comment I replied to wasn't a negative reaction. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ChadGPT2@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago It’s funny that your name is objection and you’re objecting :) cheers permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago (1 child) You can't tell me the comment I replied to wasn't a negative reaction. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ChadGPT2@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago It’s funny that your name is objection and you’re objecting :) cheers permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ChadGPT2@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago It’s funny that your name is objection and you’re objecting :) cheers permalink fedilink source parent
[–] stoly@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (5 children) You're assuming that public hospitals are well enough funded to use discretionary funding in this way. Even the best health systems do not carry a surplus. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago (4 children) It literally saves the hospital money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (3 children) It's clearer as time goes on that you have no experience with public sector funding. You're just being contrary for its own sake. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (2 children) Literally costs negative money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 child) You know nothing. Just stop. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago Lol. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago (4 children) It literally saves the hospital money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (3 children) It's clearer as time goes on that you have no experience with public sector funding. You're just being contrary for its own sake. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (2 children) Literally costs negative money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 child) You know nothing. Just stop. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago Lol. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (3 children) It's clearer as time goes on that you have no experience with public sector funding. You're just being contrary for its own sake. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (2 children) Literally costs negative money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 child) You know nothing. Just stop. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago Lol. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 0 points 7 months ago (2 children) Literally costs negative money. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 child) You know nothing. Just stop. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago Lol. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 child) You know nothing. Just stop. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 point 7 months ago Lol. permalink fedilink source parent