Jehovah's Witness / ex-JW Suicide Rate?
Unfortunately, this is not academically verified facts, but when I faded after several hart-attacks, and severe depression, many “brothers” came to comfort me (in fact 6 out of 10) and amongst them a CO ,,, and they told me, that we have experienced the same as you. Several of them offered my “pills” that could ease my life. I found that almost every one of my “brothers” used pharma to keep going on. Fortunately my own daughter (one of them) is an examined doctor within the specialties within psychiatrist, and geriatrics….She has told me that most of her patients, do have “religious broodings” and some of them are actually JW.S. Some of them “behave” quite naturally and are not disturbing other of her patients. But there are some who think that they must preach that the end is near and if the other patients don’t behave according to their whishes, it causes sometimes riots in her hospital.
We do know that Watchtower has a vey large broom that can whisk away even the nastiest of events.
It is hard to nail down statistics about suicide but ... all I know is that in my first 22 years of life I had never even heard of suicide.
After joining the WT, within 3 months a sweet young man who I knew personally, killed himself. He was being groomed to be more active in the congregation. Don't think they had a name for that then.
As the years rolled on there were more who buckled under the weight of the pressure, guilt and obligation of the watchtower cult.
So just in my former 'circles' of jw acquaintances, I still hear of it.
I'm not sure if it's fair, to on one hand, criticize him for not conducting a scientifically rigorous comparative study, while on the other hand criticizing him for not being qualified to conduct a scientifically rigorous comparative study.
We don't hold it against Carl Olaf Jonsson that he was neither an archaeologist nor an astronomer, nor expert in ANE history, could not (AFAIK) actually read Akkadian, etc. The problem with many (most?) things JW related is that JW's are simply too insignificant to merit a study directly about them or questions pertaining to them.
I have long been very critical of JB for several reasons. Fairness or unfairness is an unusual approach to criticism. It's almost the equivalent of "Go easy - what else do you expect?" Even a 101 Sociology student could poke holes in JB's research - yet he got a lot of mileage out of his claim to be a psychologist. The last time I checked, the curriculum for a basic degree whereby a graduate can call themselves a "psychologist" included core research papers,including not mistaking correlation for causation and keeping in mind hidden or unknown third variables that could explain one's findings. it also includes ethical considerations such as admitting the limitations of one's findings and future directions for research. To the best of my knowledge, JB's "research: reeks of naivety of the worst sort (i.e., ignorance of how to do basic research. Even Ray Franz's approach to writing reflected a man who was aware of his limitations and his comments were infused with humility and curiosity = as devoid of dogmatism as you can get.
Given my own background, including training in research and the ethics of conclusions drawn from research, I would be the first to lap up rigorously designed research findings AND/OR an upfront admission regarding the limitations of the findings. Anecdotal reporting has its place - but it should never retrospectively be palmed off with the language of scientific research.
clarity - "...Watchtower has a very large broom that can whisk away even the nastiest of events..."
...but these days, I don't think it's as large as it used to be.
There's so much stuff already under the carpet, they have a hard time sweeping much else under there.
Thank you Steve2. I was honestly unaware of the extent of JB's shenanigans; a lacunae that I'm correcting.
A few years ago, Rolf Furuli criticized both the scientific rigor and the application of studies bearing indirectly on the question of increased mortality associated with the refusal of blood. He pointed out (among other things) the need for double-blind control groups in such studies. Given your background, I doubt if I need to explain to you why this would be unethical in the extreme; why we are never going to have such a study (Not on this particular issue anyway...) and why Furuli's criticism was therefore unfair in the sense that there was a conflict in the criteria of his criticism.
JB does not appear qualified to conduct a credible study on the question at hand and if he's claimed to, that's pretty sad. In your opinion, is there any merit to the studies of others that he does cite or has he misapplied them? I would be interested in your opinion.
Damn, I wish I'd thought of that one.
I also want to add on a human note that I was working in downtown Phoenix the day the JW lady jumped off the AZ Center building. I saw the aftermath and wish to God I had not.....
So if I'm not being dispassionate on this thread, I hope everyone can understand why.