SUICIDE AND SOCIAL MEDIA

Social media and suicide is a relatively new phenomenon, which concerns social media’s influence on suicide-related behavior. Suicide is a leading cause of death worldwide: approximately 1.54 million people will die from suicide in the year 2020, according to the World Health Organization. Suicide has been identified not only as an individual phenomenon, but as being influenced by social and environmental factors, and there is increasing evidence that the Internet and social media can influence suicide-related behavior. As the internet becomes more ingrained in people’s everyday life, the mental and emotional damage it can potentially cause to an individual increases.

There is increasing evidence that the Internet and social media can influence suicide-related behavior. Important questions are whether this influence poses a significant risk to the public and how public health approaches might be used to address the issue. To address these questions, we provide an overview of ways that social media can influence suicidal behavior, both negatively and positively, and we evaluate the evidence of the risk. We also discuss the legal complexities of this important topic and propose future directions for research and prevention programs based on a public health perspective.

Public health is concerned with protecting and improving the health of entire populations,whether those populations are small commu-nities or large nations. Social media, as weunderstand it today, has created virtual com-munities without physical borders. We havepresented evidence showing that social mediamay pose a risk to vulnerable groups who arepart of these virtual communities. We have also provided some examples of extant social me-dia—based prevention applications and pro-grams that follow from a public health—basedapproach. Framing the topic of social media and suicide from a public health perspective toaddress the issue and guide prevention pro-grams makes sense.More research is needed on the degree andextent of social media’s negative and positiveinfluences, as are evaluations of the effective-ness of social media—based suicide preventionprograms. Further examination of subgroups that might be most vulnerable to suicide-pro-moting influences of social media is also war-ranted. A focus on adolescents and youngadults is intuitive given that suicide is the thirdleading cause of death among these groups andthat these groups have a high likelihood ofencountering suicide-associated content on theInternet. 24,33,69,70Moreover, people withmental illness and alcohol and substance abuseproblems, who may already be at high risk for suicide,71may be more likely than others touse the Internet to discuss and learn about suicide methods.6Preliminary data have also been gathered regarding gender-based risk.Clarke and van Amerom72examined blogscreated by depressed people and found thatdepressed men were more likely thandepressed women to discuss suicide or self-harm via blogs. Ultimately, additional researchin this area will help to inform public health—based approaches to suicide prevention.Several significant difficulties emerge, how-ever, when conducting research on this topic.First, conducting research with suicide rates asan outcome variable is difficult because ofsuicide’s low base rate. Moreover, the variabil-ity in social media format, use patterns, andother influences on suicidal behavior makesit very difficult to test social media as a variablethat predicts suicidal behavior. For example,an increased prevalence of other risk factors,such as alcohol use and availability of firearmsamong teens, might also explain the rise insuicide rates among this vulnerable group.73Moreover, the causal role of social media ina person’s decision to die by suicide or toacquire the means to do so may not be direct.That is, whether an at-risk person is morelikely to die by suicide because he or she canobtain information about it via the Internetcannot be easily demonstrated.Legal issues must also be considered whencontemplating public health approaches toaddressing some of the problems of socialmedia and suicide. In particular are the legalcomplexities associated with the monitoringand filtering of content on the Internet. Al-though some countries are able to controlInternet Web sites created within their borders,international jurisprudence makes it difficult toobtain jurisdiction over sites that originateoutside the United States.74,75Debate has alsoarisen as to whether the public sector or theprivate sector should be responsible forrestricting content on the Internet and howmuch restriction should be allowed.75In gen-eral, the Internet is less regulated than otherforms of media. Fiedorowicz and Chigurupati6pointed out that when radio, television, andnewspapers broadcast or publish material ofquestionable intent or accuracy, they may bescrutinized by regulators or possibly lose rat-ings as a consequence. The generation andtransmission of information via the Internetand social media, however, are decentralizedand constantly being changed and updated byend users. Thus, the Internet is an opengateway with few restrictions on content.Ultimately, the control of Internet content in-volves First Amendment rights of freedom ofspeech and expression. Restrictions on Internetcontent may possibly present a slippery-slopeproblem that can lead to additional restrictionsof these rights.The role of social media and its potentialinfluence on suicide-related behavior is a rela-tively new and evolving phenomenon thatsociety is only beginning to assess and un-derstand. The emerging data regarding theinfluence of the Internet and social media onsuicide behavior have suggested that theseforms of technology may introduce new threatsto the public as well as new opportunities forassistance and prevention. Because social me-dia are mostly created and controlled by endusers, the opportunity for surveillance andprevention can be extended to all users. Tohelp facilitate this user-driven approach tosurveillance and prevention, all social mediasites could adopt simple-to-use methods forusers to report malicious Web sites and activ-ities of other users. Moreover, the public pro-motion of direct and easy avenues for people toaccess help through social media sites shouldbe a priority. Public health campaigns thatleverage the Internet and social media to raiseawareness of the issue in schools, colleges,and other settings might also be beneficial.Those administrating suicide prevention andoutreach public health campaigns must alsostay current with social media trends and userpreferences, as well as pertinent legal issues.Ultimately, proactively using social media toincrease public awareness of and educationon mental health issues is a logical modernpublic health approach that can potentiallysave lives.

POVERTY

POVERTY

“The unemployed, the soup kitchens, the grinding poverty, and the despair”—the worldwide consequences of the Great Depression.

Poverty is a state or condition in which a person is not having a enough material possession or income for complete your needs.

Poverty may include social, economic, political elements. It is effect the growth or development of the country. In world the India poverty percentage is 24 and most scheme in ground by the government to endar the poverty. It’s a stern social issues for a country growth even for a peoples.

Several types of poverty may be distinguished depending on such factors as time or duration (long- or short-term or cyclical) and distribution (widespread, concentrated, individual).

Cyclical Poverty

Cyclical poverty refers to poverty that may be widespread throughout a population, but the occurrence itself is of limited duration. In nonindustrial societies (present and past), this sort of inability to provide for one’s basic needs rests mainly upon temporary food shortages caused by natural phenomena or poor agricultural planning. Prices would rise because of scarcities of food, which brought widespread, albiet temporary, misery.

Collective Poverty

In contrast to cyclical poverty, which is temporary, widespread or “collective” poverty involves a relatively permanent insufficiency of means to secure basic needs—a condition that may be so general as to describe the average level of life in a society or that may be concentrated in relatively large groups in an otherwise prosperous society. Both generalized and concentrated collective poverty may be transmitted from generation to generation, parents passing their poverty on to their children.

Concentrated Collective Poverty

In many industrialized, relatively affluent countries, particular demographic groups are vulnerable to long-term poverty. In city ghettos, in regions bypassed or abandoned by industry, and in areas where agriculture or industry is inefficient and cannot compete profitably, there are found victims of concentrated collective poverty. These people, like those afflicted with generalized poverty, have higher mortality rates, poor health, low educational levels, and so forth when compared with the more affluent segments of society. Their chief economic traits are unemployment and underemployment, unskilled occupations, and job instability. Efforts at amelioration focus on ways to bring the deprived groups into the mainstream of economic life by attracting new industry, promoting small business, introducing improved agricultural methods, and raising the level of skills of the employable members of the society.

Case Poverty

Similar to collective poverty in relative permanence but different from it in terms of distribution, case poverty refers to the inability of an individual or family to secure basic needs even in social surroundings of general prosperity. This inability is generally related to the lack of some basic attribute that would permit the individual to maintain himself or herself. Such persons may, for example, be blind, physically or emotionally disabled, or chronically ill.

WORLD BANK REPORT

The World Bank Group is committed to fighting poverty in all its dimensions. We use the latest evidence and analysis to help governments develop sound policies that can help the poorest in every country, and focus our investments in areas that are critical to improving lives.

The World Bank Group’s goals are to end extreme poverty and promote shared prosperity. This mission underpins all of our analytical, operational, and convening work in more than 145 client countries. There has been marked progress on reducing poverty – the first of the world’s Sustainable Development Goals – over the past decades. According to the most recent estimates, in 2015, 10 percent of the world’s population or 734 million people lived on less than $1.90 a day. That’s down from nearly 36 percent or 1.9 billion people in 1990. 

However, due to the COVID-19 crisis as well as the oil price drop, this trend probably will reverse in 2020. The COVID-19 crisis will have a disproportionate impact on the poor, through job loss, loss of remittances, rising prices, and disruptions in services such as education and health care.

For the first time since 1998, poverty rates will go up as the global economy falls into recession and there is a sharp drop in GDP per capita. The ongoing crisis will erase almost all the progress made in the last five years. The World Bank estimates that 40 million to 60 million people will fall into extreme poverty (under $1.90/day) in 2020, compared to 2019, as a result of COVID-19, depending on assumptions on the magnitude of the economic shock. The global extreme poverty rate could rise by 0.3 to 0.7 percentage points, to around 9 percent in 2020.

Additionally, the percentage of people living on less than $3.20 a day could rise by 0.3 to 1.7 percentage points, to 23 percent or higher, an increase of some 40 million to 150 million people. Finally, the percentage of people living on less than $5.50 a day could rise by 0.4 to 1.9 percentage points, to 42 percent or higher, an increase of around 70 million to 180 million people. It is important to note that these poverty projections are highly volatile and could differ greatly across countries.

Due to global shocks such as COVID-19 and because it is becoming increasingly difficult to reach those remaining in extreme poverty, who often live in fragile countries and remote areas, poverty reduction may not be fast enough to reach the goal of ending extreme poverty by 2030. 

New research estimates that by 2030 up to two-thirds of the global extreme poor may be living in fragile and conflict-affected economies, making it evident that without intensified action, the global poverty goals will not be met. 

The majority of the global poor live in rural areas and are poorly educated, employed in the agricultural sector, and under 18 years of age. The work to end extreme poverty is far from over, and many challenges remain. In most parts of the world, growth rates are too slow, and investment is too subdued to increase median incomes. For many nations, poverty reduction has slowed or even reversed.

The 43 countries in the world with the highest poverty rates are fragile or conflict-affected situations (FCS) and/or in Sub-Saharan Africa.  Economies facing chronic fragility and conflict have had poverty rates stuck at over 40 percent in the past decade, while countries that have escaped FCS have cut their poverty rates by more than half.

Data deprivation makes it harder to accurately gauge the extent of the problem. 500 million people live in FCS economies with no or outdated poverty data. To overcome critical data shortages and generate timely international poverty estimates, the Bank’s recent research used statistical assumptions and imputations that result in 33 million additional people estimated to live in extreme poverty.

Access to good schools, health care, electricity, safe water, and other critical services remains elusive for many people, often determined by socioeconomic status, gender, ethnicity, and geography. The multidimensional view – wherein other aspects such as education, access to basic utilities, health care, and security are included – reveals a world in which poverty is a much broader, more entrenched problem. The share of poor according to a multidimensional definition that includes consumption, education, and access to basic utilities is approximately 50 percent higher than when relying solely on monetary poverty.

Moreover, for those who have been able to move out of poverty, progress is often temporary: Economic shocks, food insecurity and climate change threaten to rob them of their hard-won gains and force them back into poverty. It will be critical to find ways to tackle these issues as we make progress toward 2030.

5 COUNTRIES

Of the 736 million people living in extreme poverty worldwide, half live in just five countries: India, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, and Bangladesh.

DAY LABOURERS

DAY LABOURERS

Day labourers are those labour who is hired and get paid one day at time, with no promise that more work will be available in the future. it is a form of contingent work.

Day labourers find works through three common routes:

1. Some employment agencies, those companies they can hires a manual labor for very short-term duration.

2. A manager looking for additional labor to fill an unexpected change in plans is presented with a problem of finding the needed quantity of labor with the right skills.

3. It’s less formally, workers meet at well-known locations, usually public street corners or commercial parking lots, and wait for building contractors, landscapers, home owners and small business owners, and other potential employers to offer work.

ISSUES – Low wages and poor working conditions, employer abuse, and lack of insurance for work related accidents is common.

8 Major Problems Faced by Labour Market in India:

1. Surplus Labour Force

2. Unskilled Labour

3. Lack of Absorption of Skilled Labour

4. Imperfections

5. Work Culture

6. Militant Unionism

7. Unemployment

8. Lack of Labour Reforms

Current problem’s faced due to COVID-19 – According to THE HINDU report 42% of labourers don’t have even a day worth rations left and that 90% had lost their jobs or income source due to lockdown imposed by the centre to curb the spread of COVID-19.

“A staggering 94% of the workers” were not registered with the state Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Boards, which “rules out the possibility of availing any of the benefits that the State has declared from its ₹32,000 crore BOCW fund”, the report said. The survey found that 62% of the workers were not aware of the government’s emergency welfare measures and 37% said they did not know how to access existing schemes.

The report recommended that the PM CARES fund should be used to provide income assistance to labourers for the real loss in wages for the next three to six months to prevent debt bondages and forced labour. A total of 31% of the workers said they had loans that they would struggle to pay without employment, the report said, adding that banks should be directed to waive off their debts.

Daily wage earners, labourers and migrant workers are at the greatest risk of economic and social insecurity.