Child Suicides at Highest Rate Ever in Japan | Hacker News Reader

Child Suicides at Highest Rate Ever in Japan

nippon.com

24 pointssharjeelsayed15 comments

Kind of annoying that this text is in a graphic, but I'll type it out: "From 1998-2005 the survey only targeted public schools. Then from 2006 onwards, it included private schools, and from 2013 onwards, also high school correspondence courses".

If you look at the graph, between 1998 and 2005 there was a decrease in suicide rates. It jumps up in 2006 (right when private schools are added). It should be noted that private schools often include the most troubled teens at high school. If you do not pass your entrance exams, you must go to a private high school. If you are expelled from public school you must also go to a private school. The rate jumps again in 2013 when correspondence high schools are added. It should be noted that correspondence schools have the most troubled teens in them. The are for people who either originally did not attend high school (dropped out after mandatory junior high school), or who were expelled both from public school and private schools. These are people for whom their life is essentially wrecked from the age of 15 and who are trying very hard to get it back to some kind of order. It is also important to understand that correspondence high school includes students who are much older than typical high school students.

It is worrying that the junior high school rate has climbed over the last few years (though it's still inline with data from the late 80's and early nineties). However, the high school data appears to me to be a combination of not comparing apples to apples along with a possible statistical outlier in 2018. Given the poor treatment of this data, I would not be surprised if there is another reason for the spike in 2018.

Same as New Zealand. To be honest it isn't super surprising.

The youth of today are going to inherit a far more screwed up world, and people are surprised they "opt out" of that.

Or maybe this constant harping on how bad of a place it is, when they have had the greatest standard of living ever since humankind started, is tantamount to malevolent brainwashing.

They inherit far more than the standard of living.

I agree mostly, the world, or most of it, is infinitely better than 1914, 1929 or 1944.

For some specific countries on the brink of ecological disaster, this might not be true.

Living standard certainly has gone up but I don't think that has really benefit kids in meaningful way for the past few decades. In fact, quality of life for kids have gone, I feel. Even for adults, I do wonder if it actually has had much impact on overall happiness and well being.

Can't speak for other countries but numerous reports have come out over the years showing younger Australians are definitely on track to have a lower standard of living than the previous generation, for the first time in history.

Perhaps instead of highly loaded phrases such as brainwashing would you take a moment to review the evidence of this occurring?

It's an unprecedented time in history, real assets are worth more than ever, labor worth very little. Consider which generations have which.

https://grattan.edu.au/report/generation-gap/

It's not just Australia, this pretty much applies to any other first-world country.

Even if we currently have the greatest standard of living that does not mean that the rate of increase in quality of life hasn't slowed (or reversed) nor that our standards may soon see regression.

It's not where you are, but where you're going that gives you hope.

I very much suspect the dangerous idea of the "bliss point" is to blame, as is marketing unhealthy food. No way is a mind going to develop right when it is constantly bombarded with false hunger signals.

In my opinion, somewhat due to the breakdown of the nuclear family.

Is there anything to support such an opinion? From what I gather, Japan is a country with a strong "nuclear family" tradition, at least as compared to the West today - even then, the "nuclear family" is the ideal in the West still. There are two ways in which a family usually differs from a "nuclear family" - either single parenthood, or relatives being more in the picture, living with the child(ren).

People still view single parenthood as a certified bad thing. Perhaps you could say that Japanese families are less nuclear because there are more relatives in the picture (I don't know if that's true) but unless that had an uptick at the same time as child suicides, there seems no basis for your suspicion, or even any reason - why would having more relatives in the picture increase suicide?

This article says 1.5% of Japanese males are hermits [1] which shows the desolation that faces the Japanese young. This article [2] outlines the declining marriage rates.

[1] http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190129-the-plight-of-japan...

[2] https://www.meiji.ac.jp/cip/english/research/opinion/Akihiko...

That's not the decline of the nuclear family - it's the lack of a family at all, and it's hard to see that this would have effects on child suicide, when children aren't male hermits. It's not as if hermits become that way because women turn them down. The children haven't reached the age at which they'd worry about it being too late to have a family. Even then, 1.5% isn't a big enough number for people to worry that it's actually their fate. The rate of divorce is higher than 1.5%, as are a huge number of other risks. Becoming a hikkikomori isn't something I suspect most people, never mind children, are realistically worrying about. Even then, hikkis aren't suicidal, they find some contentment in being hermits.

These people aren't having children and therefore have nothing to do with child suicide?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com