Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
09 September 2022 | Story Angela Vorster | Photo Andrè Damons
Angie Vorster
Angela Vorster is a Clinical Psychologist at the School for Clinical Medicine, University of the Free State (UFS).

Opinion article by Angela Vorster, Clinical Psychologist at the School for Clinical Medicine, University of the Free State.
Twenty-three people will die from suicide today in South Africa. Another 460 South Africans will try to end their lives today. They are from different cultural groups, different income groups, attained different levels of education, speak different languages, range in age from childhood through to elderly, have different genders and sexual orientations. These people have very little in common except that their lives all ended due to the final symptom of an illness. People who experience thoughts of ending their lives describe this mental space as feeling grey. Their thoughts tend to keep returning to the futility of being alive, what a burden they are to those around them, how nothing will ever get better and that nobody can help them. They tend to experience feelings of worthlessness, self-hatred, guilt, hopelessness, immense sadness and despair. Their suffering and emotional pain are excruciating. Nothing is enjoyable anymore. There is nothing to look forward to. Everything is difficult, boring, scary or meaningless. Inwardly they are drowning. But very often they smile, do their job and pass their exams, go on dates and vacations, make plans for the weekend and check up on their loved ones. They look happy in their photos. And when someone asks them if they are okay they say yes. Because they don’t feel like they deserve to feel better. They don’t want to be a bother. They might not call a helpline or make an appointment to see a psychologist or go to their GP for anti-depressants. Because they just don’t have the energy. It’s exhausting pretending to be fine all day. The one thought that brings relief is that they can end this pain. And one day they do. And their colleagues, friends and family are left reeling with shock and disbelief. How could this have happened? How could they have missed the signs? What should they have done differently to prevent this? 

The causes are as complex and varied

This is the purpose of World Suicide Prevention Day which takes place internationally each year on 10 September and through which the International Association for Suicide Prevention endeavours to increase awareness of suicidality, as well as to fight the stigma associated with suicide. Wanting to die can occur along with many other symptoms and disorders including, but not limited to, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, psychotic disorders, personality disorders and substance dependence or abuse disorders. The causes are as complex and varied as the manner in which suicidality may present. It is dangerous to regard only certain signs and symptoms as indicative of suicide risk, because we know that suicide can be extremely unpredictable. There is no way to tell if someone is a suicide risk based purely on their behaviour. However there are certain factors which may indicate an increased risk for self-harm. These include, but are not limited to, having previously tried to end their life, having a psychiatric illness, being seriously ill or having chronic pain or the misuse of substances. Experiencing legal, relationship, financial or academic stressors may increase suicide risk, as well as having access to lethal means to end their life along with being unable to access mental health care. 

So what can you do if you think someone may be at risk of self-harm? Say something. Talk to them. Tell them what you are worried about and give them the space to express how they feel without judgment or condemnation. Reach out to their support system and share your concerns with them. Encourage the suicidal person to make contact with a health care professional – this can be a psychologist, GP, psychiatrist, social worker, psychiatric nurse, counsellor or a suicide prevention help line. Other important members of our community who provide a great deal of assistance to suicidal people and their families include religious and spiritual leaders, teachers, support groups and employee assistance programmes. There are actually so many ways and places to receive health care and support; however the most significant barrier to making use of these resources is sustained by the stigma associated with suicide and mental illness. In our culture of toxic positivity where our photos are touched up, our statuses updated and our successes plastered on various social media platforms, the authentic act of acknowledging when we feel defeated, unhappy or like a failure has become a rarity. The more real, honest and vulnerable we can be about our ‘undesirable’ emotions and experiences, the more space we create for those around us to do the same. When we normalise not being okay at all times, we give ourselves and others permission to speak up when we need help. And this is our greatest weapon against suicide – authentic connection.

What suicide is not

We’ve explored what it may feel like to be suicidal, now let’s focus on what suicide is not. Suicide is not a moral failing. It is not because the person was weak or selfish, it is not because their family was dysfunctional or their faith not strong enough. Suicide is the final symptom of mental illness – and every single person is vulnerable to experiencing suicidal thoughts. Each one of us will be affected by suicide during the duration of our lives, either directly or indirectly. This is irrespective of how successful you are, how supportive your family is or how strong your religious convictions are. Dying by suicide is not a shame. It is not a failure. It is no different to a patient dying from any other disease. And just like any other illness there are symptoms we can look out for and treatments and medications that can assist in recovery. 

Please think before you speak about someone who died due to suicide. I guarantee that at least one person in the conversation has suffered the pain of losing someone in this way. But you probably wouldn’t even know, because stigma silences. Stigma disconnects and alienates those who need support the most. Our words have the power to shame and silence, or to empower and encourage connection, which is lifesaving. Treat each conversation as though there may be someone present who is having suicidal thoughts or is working through the loss of someone they love due to suicide. Often we want to reach out and support families affected by suicide, but don’t because we are afraid of offending, or upsetting or because we ourselves are so uncomfortable with mental illness. But all these survivors of suicide need from you is your calm, empathetic, kind presence, a safe space to express difficult and messy emotions. Without being blamed or shunned or shamed. Support suicide survivors as though a terrible illness took the life of their loved-one. Because that is exactly what happened. 

On 10 September this year I encourage you to light a candle and place it in your windowsill around 8pm wherever you are. This is in remembrance of those lost to mental illness and to show your support to those they left behind. In the words of the International Association of Suicide Prevention: “By encouraging understanding, reaching in and sharing experiences, we want to give people the confidence to take action. To prevent suicide requires us to become a beacon of light to those in pain. You can be the light.”

• If you or someone you know is at risk of self-harm please take a look at these websites and call the SADAG suicide emergency helpline.


SADAG suicide emergency helpline 0800 567 567

News Archive

Inaugural lecture: Prof. Phillipe Burger
2007-11-26

 

Attending the lecture were, from the left: Prof. Tienie Crous (Dean of the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences at the UFS), Prof. Phillipe Burger (Departmental Chairperson of the Department of Economics at the UFS), and Prof. Frederick Fourie (Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS).
Photo: Stephen Collet

 
A summary of an inaugural lecture presented by Prof. Phillipe Burger on the topic: “The ups and downs of the South African Economy: Rough seas or smooth sailing?”

South African business cycle shows reduction in volatility

Better monetary policy and improvements in the financial sector that place less liquidity constraints on individuals is one of the main reasons for the reduction in the volatility of the South African economy. The improvement in access to the financial sector also enables individuals to manage their debt better.

These are some of the findings in an analysis on the volatility of the South African business cycle done by Prof. Philippe Burger, Departmental Chairperson of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Department of Economics.

Prof. Burger delivered his inaugural lecture last night (22 November 2007) on the Main Campus in Bloemfontein on the topic “The ups and downs of the South African Economy: Rough seas or smooth sailing?”

In his lecture, Prof. Burger emphasised a few key aspects of the South African business cycle and indicated how it changed during the periods 1960-1976, 1976-1994 en 1994-2006.

With the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as an indicator of the business cycle, the analysis identified the variables that showed the highest correlation with the GDP. During the periods 1976-1994 and 1994-2006, these included durable consumption, manufacturing investment, private sector investment, as well as investment in machinery and non-residential buildings. Other variables that also show a high correlation with the GDP are imports, non-durable consumption, investment in the financial services sector, investment by general government, as well as investment in residential buildings.

Prof. Burger’s analysis also shows that changes in durable consumption, investment in the manufacturing sector, investment in the private sector, as well as investment in non-residential buildings preceded changes in the GDP. If changes in a variable such as durable consumption precede changes in the GDP, it is an indication that durable consumption is one of the drivers of the business cycle. The up or down swing of durable consumption may, in other words, just as well contribute to an up or down swing in the business cycle.

A surprising finding of the analysis is the particularly strong role durable consumption has played in the business cycle since 1994. This finding is especially surprising due to the fact that durable consumption only constitutes about 12% of the total household consumption.

A further surprising finding is the particularly small role exports have been playing since 1960 as a driver of the business cycle. In South Africa it is still generally accepted that exports are one of the most important drivers of the business cycle. It is generally accepted that, should the business cycles of South Africa’s most important trade partners show an upward phase; these partners will purchase more from South Africa. This increase in exports will contribute to the South African economy moving upward. Prof. Burger’s analyses shows, however, that exports have generally never fulfil this role.

Over and above the identification of the drivers of the South African business cycle, Prof. Burger’s analysis also investigated the volatility of the business cycle.

When the periods 1976-1994 and 1994-2006 are compared, the analysis shows that the volatility of the business cycle has reduced since 1994 with more than half. The reduction in volatility can be traced to the reduction in the volatility of household consumption (especially durables and services), as well as a reduction in the volatility of investment in machinery, non-residential buildings and transport equipment. The last three coincide with the general reduction in the volatility of investment in the manufacturing sector. Investment in sectors such as electricity and transport (not to be confused with investment in transport equipment by various sectors) which are strongly dominated by the government, did not contribute to the decrease in volatility.

In his analysis, Prof. Burger supplies reasons for the reduction in volatility. One of the explanations is the reduction in the shocks affecting the economy – especially in the South African context. Another explanation is the application of an improved monetary policy by the South African Reserve Bank since the mid 1990’s. A third explanation is the better access to liquidity and credit since the mid 1990’s, which enables the better management of household finance and the absorption of financial shocks.

A further reason which contributed to the reduction in volatility in countries such as the United States of America’s business cycle is better inventory management. While the volatility of inventory in South Africa has also reduced there is, according to Prof. Burger, little proof that better inventory management contributed to the reduction in volatility of the GDP.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept