schliessen

Filtern

 

Bibliotheken

Revisiting impulsivity in suicide: Implications for civil liability of third parties

Previous research and popular conceptualizations of suicide have posited that many suicides are the result of impulsive, “on a whim” decisions. However, recent research demonstrates that most suicides are not attempted impulsively, and in fact involve a plan. Legally, suicide has historically been c... Full description

Journal Title: Behavioral Sciences & the Law November 2008, Vol.26(6), pp.779-797
Main Author: Smith, April R.
Other Authors: Witte, Tracy K. , Teale, Nadia E. , King, Sarah L. , Bender, Ted W. , Joiner, Thomas E.
Format: Electronic Article Electronic Article
Language: English
Subjects:
Law
ID: ISSN: 0735-3936 ; E-ISSN: 1099-0798 ; DOI: 10.1002/bsl.848
Zum Text:
SendSend as email Add to Book BagAdd to Book Bag
Staff View
recordid: wj10.1002/bsl.848
title: Revisiting impulsivity in suicide: Implications for civil liability of third parties
format: Article
creator:
  • Smith, April R.
  • Witte, Tracy K.
  • Teale, Nadia E.
  • King, Sarah L.
  • Bender, Ted W.
  • Joiner, Thomas E.
subjects:
  • Suicide
  • Impulsivity
  • Prisons
  • Third Parties
  • Liability
  • Law
  • Article
ispartof: Behavioral Sciences & the Law, November 2008, Vol.26(6), pp.779-797
description: Previous research and popular conceptualizations of suicide have posited that many suicides are the result of impulsive, “on a whim” decisions. However, recent research demonstrates that most suicides are not attempted impulsively, and in fact involve a plan. Legally, suicide has historically been considered to be a superseding intervening cause of death that exonerates other parties from liability, but currently there are two general exceptions to this view. Specifically, another party may be found responsible for a suicide if that party either caused the suicide or failed in its duty to prevent the suicide from occurring. Both of these exceptions assume that the resulting suicide was foreseeable. Given that recent research has indicated that most suicides are planned, and thereby foreseeable to a certain extent under many circumstances, this article discusses issues of foreseeability as they pertain to litigation involving third party liability for the suicide of university students, prison inmates, and mental health patients. The authors contend that the surest way for universities, prison staff, and mental health practitioners to avoid being held liable for a suicide is to appropriately assess for suicidal intent. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
language: eng
source:
identifier: ISSN: 0735-3936 ; E-ISSN: 1099-0798 ; DOI: 10.1002/bsl.848
fulltext: fulltext
issn:
  • 0735-3936
  • 07353936
  • 1099-0798
  • 10990798
url: Link


@attributes
ID1495258330
RANK0.07
NO1
SEARCH_ENGINEprimo_central_multiple_fe
SEARCH_ENGINE_TYPEPrimo Central Search Engine
LOCALfalse
PrimoNMBib
record
control
sourcerecordid10.1002/bsl.848
sourceidwj
recordidTN_wj10.1002/bsl.848
sourcesystemOther
pqid57276826
galeid192933149
display
typearticle
titleRevisiting impulsivity in suicide: Implications for civil liability of third parties
creatorSmith, April R. ; Witte, Tracy K. ; Teale, Nadia E. ; King, Sarah L. ; Bender, Ted W. ; Joiner, Thomas E.
contributorStandford, Matthew S. ; Felthous, Alan R.
ispartofBehavioral Sciences & the Law, November 2008, Vol.26(6), pp.779-797
identifier
descriptionPrevious research and popular conceptualizations of suicide have posited that many suicides are the result of impulsive, “on a whim” decisions. However, recent research demonstrates that most suicides are not attempted impulsively, and in fact involve a plan. Legally, suicide has historically been considered to be a superseding intervening cause of death that exonerates other parties from liability, but currently there are two general exceptions to this view. Specifically, another party may be found responsible for a suicide if that party either caused the suicide or failed in its duty to prevent the suicide from occurring. Both of these exceptions assume that the resulting suicide was foreseeable. Given that recent research has indicated that most suicides are planned, and thereby foreseeable to a certain extent under many circumstances, this article discusses issues of foreseeability as they pertain to litigation involving third party liability for the suicide of university students, prison inmates, and mental health patients. The authors contend that the surest way for universities, prison staff, and mental health practitioners to avoid being held liable for a suicide is to appropriately assess for suicidal intent. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
languageeng
source
subjectSuicide ; Impulsivity ; Prisons ; Third Parties ; Liability ; Law ; Article;
version9
lds50peer_reviewed
links
openurl$$Topenurl_article
openurlfulltext$$Topenurlfull_article
search
creatorcontrib
0Smith, April R.
1Witte, Tracy K.
2Teale, Nadia E.
3King, Sarah L.
4Bender, Ted W.
5Joiner, Thomas E.
6Standford, Matthew S.
7Felthous, Alan R.
titleRevisiting impulsivity in suicide: Implications for civil liability of third parties
descriptionPrevious research and popular conceptualizations of suicide have posited that many suicides are the result of impulsive, “on a whim” decisions. However, recent research demonstrates that most suicides are not attempted impulsively, and in fact involve a plan. Legally, suicide has historically been considered to be a superseding intervening cause of death that exonerates other parties from liability, but currently there are two general exceptions to this view. Specifically, another party may be found responsible for a suicide if that party either caused the suicide or failed in its duty to prevent the suicide from occurring. Both of these exceptions assume that the resulting suicide was foreseeable. Given that recent research has indicated that most suicides are planned, and thereby foreseeable to a certain extent under many circumstances, this article discusses issues of foreseeability as they pertain to litigation involving third party liability for the suicide of university students, prison inmates, and mental health patients. The authors contend that the surest way for universities, prison staff, and mental health practitioners to avoid being held liable for a suicide is to appropriately assess for suicidal intent. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
general
0English
1John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
210.1002/bsl.848
3Wiley Online Library
sourceidwj
recordidwj10.1002/bsl.848
issn
00735-3936
107353936
21099-0798
310990798
rsrctypearticle
creationdate2008
addtitle
0Behavioral Sciences & the Law
1Behav. Sci. Law
2Impulsivity and the Law
searchscope
0wj
1wiley
scope
0wj
1wiley
lsr30VSR-Enriched:[subject, pages, pqid, galeid]
sort
titleRevisiting impulsivity in suicide: Implications for civil liability of third parties
authorSmith, April R. ; Witte, Tracy K. ; Teale, Nadia E. ; King, Sarah L. ; Bender, Ted W. ; Joiner, Thomas E.
creationdate20081100
facets
frbrgroupid8412252211276546003
frbrtype5
languageeng
creationdate2008
collectionWiley Online Library
prefilterarticles
rsrctypearticles
creatorcontrib
0Smith, April R.
1Witte, Tracy K.
2Teale, Nadia E.
3King, Sarah L.
4Bender, Ted W.
5Joiner, Thomas E.
6Standford, Matthew S.
7Felthous, Alan R.
jtitleBehavioral Sciences & the Law
toplevelpeer_reviewed
delivery
delcategoryRemote Search Resource
fulltextfulltext
addata
aulast
0Smith
1Witte
2Teale
3King
4Bender
5Joiner
aufirst
0April R.
1Tracy K.
2Nadia E.
3Sarah L.
4Ted W.
5Thomas E.
au
0Smith, April R.
1Witte, Tracy K.
2Teale, Nadia E.
3King, Sarah L.
4Bender, Ted W.
5Joiner, Thomas E.
addau
0Standford, Matthew S.
1Felthous, Alan R.
atitleRevisiting impulsivity in suicide: Implications for civil liability of third parties
jtitleBehavioral Sciences & the Law
risdate200811
volume26
issue6
spage779
epage797
issn0735-3936
eissn1099-0798
genrearticle
ristypeJOUR
abstractPrevious research and popular conceptualizations of suicide have posited that many suicides are the result of impulsive, “on a whim” decisions. However, recent research demonstrates that most suicides are not attempted impulsively, and in fact involve a plan. Legally, suicide has historically been considered to be a superseding intervening cause of death that exonerates other parties from liability, but currently there are two general exceptions to this view. Specifically, another party may be found responsible for a suicide if that party either caused the suicide or failed in its duty to prevent the suicide from occurring. Both of these exceptions assume that the resulting suicide was foreseeable. Given that recent research has indicated that most suicides are planned, and thereby foreseeable to a certain extent under many circumstances, this article discusses issues of foreseeability as they pertain to litigation involving third party liability for the suicide of university students, prison inmates, and mental health patients. The authors contend that the surest way for universities, prison staff, and mental health practitioners to avoid being held liable for a suicide is to appropriately assess for suicidal intent. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
copChichester, UK
pubJohn Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
doi10.1002/bsl.848
pages779-797
date2008-11