I've written before about the Mail detailing suicide methods in a way that should leave anyone with a brain feeling uncomfortable about it.
It's not difficult to understand this concept: the more details you reveal about suicide methods, particularly in the media, the more people will use those methods to kill themselves - especially if they appear to be painless for the participant and/or easily accessible. It's an unfortunate fact that if newspapers and/or other media detail an unusual suicide method not widely publicised, copycat incidents do take place. It's a responsibility, then, for newspapers to think about that before they publish details. Do they really add to our understanding of a tragic story? Or are they unnecessary?
There's a story in the Mail (and to be fair to them, it could well be elsewhere as well) today about a businessman killing himself with poison from a plant, which I won't link to for fairly obvious reasons:
A businessman in despair after losing his wife and company killed himself by [how he did it].
Father-of-three Jonathan Hamilton, 42, left notes suggesting he had made a 'concoction' of [the stuff] - many times the lethal dose, an inquest heard yesterday.
So just in case you were thinking about doing it, you even get advice on how much of the poison you should use. Hey, there's even a handy info panel on what part of the plant's the poisonous bit! Great!
This from a newspaper that pretends to give a shit about suicide - when it's young kids doing it, and when it can blame it on emo music or teh interwebs.