News from: headline
May 8, 2009
Coroner fears suicide statistics may be inaccurate
Coroner fears suicide statistics may be inaccurate
THE DUBLIN City Coroner has expressed concern about the accuracy of suicide statistics, raising fears that the incidence of suicide may be greater than official figures indicate.
Dr Brian Farrell has called on the Central Statistics Office (CSO) to carry out a national survey of coroners’ records to ensure that suicide mortality is properly recorded.
“Our statistics on suicide are probably inaccurate,” said Dr Farrell. “Official statistics show Dublin to have a lower suicide rate than the rest of the country,” he said, referring to a 2007 report. “There must be serious doubt that this is the case.
“A national survey, based primarily on coroners’ records, which contain extensive information in relation to all unnatural deaths, including suicide, is required for comprehensive information and accurate statistics on suicide mortality,” he said.
“At the Dublin City Coroner’s Court we are endeavouring to bring in suicide verdicts at inquest and we are recording the verdict on the Coroner’s Certificate.”
The call follows a growing concern that many deaths in Dublin, which should be recorded as suicides by the CSO, are instead being classified as “undetermined” deaths on the basis of a form (Form 104) supplied to the statistics office by the Garda Síochána following an inquest.
A 2007 report by the National Suicide Research Foundation suggested that misclassification of suicides as deaths of undetermined intent was common in Dublin compared to the rest of the country and that such misclassification could explain most of the difference between Dublin’s low suicide rate and the rate elsewhere.
Dr Farrell, who expressed his concerns at a recent conference on suicide, said he believed gardaí attending inquests at the Dublin City Coroner’s Court may be unduly influenced by the higher standard of proof required to bring in a verdict of suicide at inquests.
“They are perhaps documenting deaths as undetermined on the Form 104 where they should, on the balance of probability, be recording the death as a suicide . . . At inquests at the Dublin City Coroner’s Court the legal test of beyond a reasonable doubt is strictly applied in accordance with case law. The evidence must prove that the deceased killed himself or herself, that there is intention and that it is proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
“When the evidence does not meet the required standard at inquest an open verdict must be returned by the coroner but this does not necessarily apply to the gardaí completing Form 104.”
The coroner said the introduction of a revised Form 104 was necessary to allow the Garda to give more comprehensive information to the CSO as to the means by which the death occurred.
“Effective suicide prevention programmes are dependent on the availability of quality information and statistics. We’re not getting quality information statistically on suicides because at present the CSO are relying mainly on the existing Form 104 and are not utilising coroners’ records.”
A spokeswoman for the CSO said in determining suicide as a cause of death, the CSO considered the information provided in three forms: a form supplied by the Registrar of Births and Deaths (Form 102); the Coroner’s Certificate; and Form 104 supplied by the Garda Síochána. One of the issues which contributed to the lower suicide rate for Dublin was the higher non-return of Form 104 for the Dublin area, she said.
A new Coroner’s Bill is currently before the Oireachtas.
According to CSO figures, in 2007 the number of suicides was 460, or 10.6 per 100,000 population. In 2006 there were 409 and in 2005 there were 431.
This article appears in the print edition of the Irish Times
Comments
Post a comment
Archive
- February 2012 (4 articles)
- January 2012 (7 articles)
- December 2011 (4 articles)
- November 2011 (8 articles)
- October 2011 (7 articles)
- September 2011 (2 articles)
- August 2011 (2 articles)
- July 2011 (3 articles)
- June 2011 (4 articles)
- May 2011 (4 articles)
- April 2011 (2 articles)
- March 2011 (1 articles)
- February 2011 (1 articles)
- January 2011 (2 articles)
- December 2010 (1 articles)
- November 2010 (1 articles)
- October 2010 (4 articles)
- September 2010 (3 articles)
- August 2010 (2 articles)
- July 2010 (1 articles)
- June 2010 (7 articles)
- May 2010 (2 articles)
- April 2010 (3 articles)
- March 2010 (2 articles)
- February 2010 (9 articles)
- January 2010 (6 articles)
- December 2009 (4 articles)
- November 2009 (1 articles)
- October 2009 (7 articles)
- September 2009 (6 articles)
- August 2009 (5 articles)
- July 2009 (10 articles)
- June 2009 (6 articles)
- May 2009 (13 articles)
- April 2009 (13 articles)
- March 2009 (8 articles)
- February 2009 (13 articles)
- January 2009 (11 articles)
- December 2008 (5 articles)
- November 2008 (8 articles)
- October 2008 (6 articles)
- September 2008 (5 articles)
- August 2008 (5 articles)
- July 2008 (5 articles)
- June 2008 (2 articles)
- May 2008 (5 articles)
- April 2008 (3 articles)
- March 2008 (6 articles)
- February 2008 (4 articles)
- January 2008 (4 articles)
- December 2007 (4 articles)
- November 2007 (7 articles)
- October 2007 (4 articles)
- September 2007 (2 articles)
- August 2007 (3 articles)
- July 2007 (6 articles)
- June 2007 (6 articles)
- May 2007 (8 articles)
- April 2007 (3 articles)


What is the need for a Coroner's Inquest at all if any Garda can decide on the basis of his or her individual opinion that a deceased person killed him or herself? What is the need for such stringent proof in an Inquest? Surely, the Coroner's Inquest should be the primary proof of how a person died? After all, the Coroner can call witnesses, relatives, medical professionals, legal advice, and the full services of An Garda Siochana to do the leg-work for him or her!- with the State to back him or her at unlimited resources! Why should a mere opinion on the balance of probabilities by one Garda outweigh all the stringency of the Coroner's Inquest? And the Form 104 says nothing about the basis on which the Garda should decide if the death was or was not a suicide.
I personally know of a case where it could not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in the Coroner's Inquest how a woman died; it was as likely to have been accidental as suicidal. Yet the Form 104 gave suicide as the Garda opinion! And this was based on perceptions rather than hard evidence! On the balance of probabilities, it could not be determined, yet it was statistically classed as suicide, just to meet the "expected" classification. Should every doubtful death that may or may not have been a suicide be classed as suicide just to meet an agenda?
My solution is to have the Coroner fill the Form 104 following the hearing of all the evidence available in his or her Inquest. And let him or her decide the classification of the death in accordance with the Record of Verdict of the Inquest Jury. After all, there is a Jury to give a verdict as to how a person died! If necessary, let the Coroner give his classification on Form 104 on the balance of probabilities. Not a lone Garda hazarding an opinion - based on his or her second-guessing of the Coroner's Inquest findings, and what appeared to him or her to be the case at the place of death. I'm sure the Garda has more to do than ferreting out statistics of a dubious nature!
Indeed, the Coroner is handsomely paid to carry out an Inquest; why not do the job fully when doing it at all? Coroners are normally medical or legal professionals; let them earn their fees.
Finally, what value have such shoddily acquired statistics which are based on a lay Garda opinion, maybe amounting to no more than a mere guess?
comment #1 by Nicholas Leonard , on January 19, 2010 at 10:10 p.m.: