Domestic Integration and Suicide in the Provinces of Canada
- 1 March 1999
- journal article
- Published by Hogrefe Publishing Group in Crisis
- Vol. 20 (2) , 59-63
- https://doi.org/10.1027//0227-5910.20.2.59
Abstract
Canada's rate of suicide varies from province to province. The classical theory of suicide, which attempts to explain the social suicide rate, stems from Durkheim, who argued that low levels of social integration and regulation are associated with high rates of suicide. The present study explored whether social factors (divorce, marriage, and birth rates) do in fact predict suicide rates over time for each province (period studied: 1950-1990). The results showed a positive association between divorce rates and suicide rates, and a negative association between birth rates and suicide rates. Marriage rates showed no consistent association, an anomaly as compared to research from other nations.This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- 2. The Epidemiology of Suicide in CanadaPublished by University of Toronto Press Inc. (UTPress) ,1998
- Consultations for research in suicidologyArchives of Suicide Research, 1997
- 12 Suicide in Canada with Special Reference to the Difference Between Canada and the United StatesSuicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 1997
- Testing the cohort size hypothesis of suicide and homicide rates in Canada and the United StatesArchives of Suicide Research, 1996
- Domestic Integration and Suicide in 21 Nations, 1950-1985International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 1994
- A Durkheimian Analysis of Youth Suicide: Canada, 1971 and 1981Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 1992
- Unemployment and male-female labor force participation as determinants of changing suicide rates of males and females in QuebecSocial psychiatry. Sozialpsychiatrie. Psychiatrie sociale, 1985
- Suicide: A decade review of the sociological literatureDeviant Behavior, 1982
- Durkheim's One Cause of SuicideAmerican Sociological Review, 1965
- Ecological Correlations and the Behavior of IndividualsAmerican Sociological Review, 1950