The Impact of a Suicide Prevention Program for Adolescents on Suicidal Tendencies,Hopelessness, Ego Identity,and Coping

Three-hundred ninety-three adolescents from six schools participated in a study aimed at examining the effectiveness of an experiential suicide prevention program with regard to suicidal tendencies, hopelessness, ego identity, and coping ability. The subjects were randomly divided into experimental (n = 215) and control (n = 178) groups. The experimental groups took part in seven weekly 2-hour meetings. The program was based on the notion that a gradual, controlled confrontation and exploration of inner experiences and life difficulties related to suicidal behavior accompanied by an emphasis on coping strategies can immunize against self-destructive feelings. In this pretest-posttest design, the students completed questionnaires of suicidal tendencies, hopelessness, ego identity, and coping ability before and after the program. The statistical analyses showed that the experimental groups were superior to the controls, with at least some of the dependent measures pointing out the effectiveness of the program.     

Reasons Wrong and Right

The fact that someone is generous is a reason to admire them. The fact that someone will pay you to admire them is also a reason to admire them. But there is a difference in kind between these two reasons: the former seems to be the ‘right’ kind of reason to admire, whereas the latter seems to be the ‘wrong’ kind of reason to admire. The Wrong Kind of Reasons Problem is the problem of explaining the difference between the ‘right’ and the ‘wrong’ kind of reasons wherever it appears. In this article I argue that two recent proposals for solving the Wrong Kind of Reasons Problem do not work. I then offer an alternative solution that provides a unified, systematic explanation of the difference between the two kinds of reasons.