Critically examine the contribution of studies of suicide to a sociological understanding of deviance in society.

Durkheim’s theory, however, has been criticised by sociologists such as Douglas and Atkinson. According to Douglas one cannot look at suicide as the physical act of killing oneself, but the reasons as to why a person would commit suicide must be looked at. He claims that there are four main reasons as to why suicide is committed. He stated that these were, as a means of transforming the self, as a person may commit suicide as a means of leaving behind the worries of the world or as a means of transforming the self for others, so that a person can let other people know how they feel, or as a means of achieving fellow feeling, this is when someone is looking for help and sympathy and finally as a means of gaining revenge. He suggests that for suicide to really be understood these factors must be looked at so that it can be seen why. Thus Douglas claimed that there is no such thing as the single act of killing oneself as the meanings behind each case are different. He claims the only thing they have in common is death.

Atkinson developed the criticism of Durkheim as he believed that the official statistics that Durkheim used where based on one persons reasoning, a coroner. He argues that the categories Durkheim used where socially constructed and suggested that before a death can be classified as suicide a series of clues must be placed together. He claims that the most important clues are suicide notes as in 30% of cases a note is found, although more could have been lift, but destroyed. The mode of death as some types of death are seen as more typical than others, the place and circumstances as suicide is often committed in a place where they will not be found and where they will be successful and finally the life history and mental condition of the person as illnesses such as depression may lead to suicide. Thus Atkinson argues that suicide cannot be defined as the same thing as the reports and statistics Durkheim used may not be based on any ‘underlying reality’.

A final criticism was made by Taylor who criticised Durkheim, Douglas and Atkinson by saying that suicide could not be ct=categorised in these ways as the point of parasuicide was being missed. He stated that it must be remembered that in the majority of cases those who attempt suicide do not die. He believes that suicides can be classed in two ways, death, or no death. He claims that if a suicide is successful it can be categorised as an ‘ordeal’ suicide as these attempts are generally more purposeful, similar to Durkheim’s theory of fatalism. However, Taylor also agrees with Durkheim in the fact that those detached from society are more likely to commit suicide that those who are over-attached. Overall Taylor claims that it is possible to pull together the wider wider social factors that Durkheim suggests with the sense of meaning emphasised by Douglas and the two theories are not mutually exclusive.

From the various studies into suicide it can be seen that there is a link between deviance in society and suicide. In societies where deviance is seen more, suicide is more likely. This is where Durkheim’s theory is useful as it shows that the societies where people are more detached, or deviant, suicide is more likely. Douglas’ theory can also help a sociological understanding of deviance as it shows that there are four main reasons for killing oneself and with reasons such as, as a means of gaining revenge. It can be seen that this is not normal behaviour and therefore is a deviant act. Thus, it can be seen that suicide cannot easily be classed, there may be no agreement as to the meanings behind suicide, although Taylor’s argument allows all these theories to be brought together showing that suicide is not necessarily for any particular reason but is linked by death.