Parental autoaggression: the link with suicidal activity of their posterity Текст научной статьи по специальности «Фундаментальная медицина»

ОРИГИНАЛЬНЫЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ

© Lukashuk A.V., Merinov A.V., 2017 УДК 616.89-008

DOI:10.23888/PAVLOVJ2017192-96

PARENTAL AUTOAGGRESSION: THE LINK WITH SUICIDAL ACTIVITY OF THEIR POSTERITY

A.V. Lukashuk, A.V. Merinov

Ryazan State Medical University named after academician I.P. Pavlov, Vysocovoltnaya str., 9, 390026, Ryazan, Russian Federation

The number of suicides worldwide is growing steadily and suicide in adolescents have a distinct tendency to increase. At the moment there are many approaches that attempt to explain the true causes of suicides in children and adolescents. The authors paid special attention to the consideration of family background as a causal factor in the consolidation of self-injurious patterns in children and adolescents. The results of their study show that in families where parents have a high level of self-aggression, adolescents are more likely to exhibit suicidal behavior. For example, the number of suicide attempts in the experimental and control groups - 20,96% and 4,16% respectively. In the experimental group authentically more often Neuilly autoaggressive patterns, for example, exposure to physical violence in groups of 25,81% vs. 3,33%, and the application of self-harm of 25,81% vs. 8,33%. The data obtained for a fresh look at the principles of preventive schemes teenage suicidology. Keywords: teen suicide, autoaggression, suicide.

Formany years, the attention of the world community is compelled by the problem of suicide. Suicide stands on the joint of dozens of fundamentals. In philosophy it is rated as a desire of an absolute independence, in medicine as a pathology, theologians see in suicide disappearance of hope in God s promises, sociologists conceive it as a deliberate action generated by an exogenous factor [1, 2]. To solve the question of reduction of suicidal activity social work is in progress but, nevertheless, the death-rate from suicide stay rather high. Reported by the WHO, 2300 people commit suicide every day (1000 are adolescents); about one million people annually die of suicide [3]. Every 40 seconds one person commit suicide [4, 5].

Suicide, as a phenomenon, has touched not only adult people but also the young, children and teenagers, notably young people

attempt to commit suicide [6]. Maximum of suicid al at temptsaccounts for an age 16-24.

There are two categories of risk factors of suicide. First, there are potential factors, which pave the way for suicide, second, relevant factors. Potential factors involve the breakdown of family relationships, personal disharmony. Relevant factors involve real emotional experience: depression, state of despair and loneliness, offence, anger etc. These cate goriesare correlated and have ahighpriority [7].

Intrafamilial air is a very important part of a dolescent suicide but it is underinvesti-gated [8-12]. The majority of authors who examine the problem of suicide among young people note the importance of intra-familial air both in genesis and in prevention of suicide. However, all available information, generally, have a stating nature and do

not pretend to create a unifying vision. All the sefactsappeal but, generally, are just objective remarks without a claim to an understanding of special aspects of functioning of examined families.

Goal of research: bench marking study of suicidal, non-suicidal autoaggression and its predictors in families where children (girls of teenage years) have had a crack to commit suicide or not.

Materials and methods 31 families where teenage girls attempted to commit suicide and 60 families where children did not show any suicidal activity were examined in the furtherance of this goal. Only two-parent families took part in the research. Each of the parents gave informed consent for participation in the study.

Middle age of the experimental group was 41,3±5,6 years old, familial experience 18,87±3,03 years. Middle age of control banding was 39,7±2,5 years old, familial experience 17,7±1,9 years. Middle age of girls was

15,93±1,22 years old in experimental group and 15,91±1,24 years in control banding.

As far as only two-parent families took part in this search, we used the level of general familial autoaggression with outregardto gender.

As a diagnostic instrument, we use din-quirer to detect autoaggressive patterns and their predictors in the past and in the present [13].

Statistical analysis and manipulation of data were done by nonparametric method of mathematical statistics (using F-test). We considered as statistically significant results at p<0,05.

Results and discussion

Presence of classical suicidal patterns in the examined group is adduced in Table 1.

First of all, it should be noted that in experimental group the value of classical suicidal reaction types (attempt to commit suicide in anamnesis) are higher.

Pass on the analysis of representation of non-suicidal autoaggressive phenomena.

Table 1

Classical suicidal patterns n (%)

Characteristics Parents of adolescents, who attempted to commit suicide, n=62 Parents of adolescents, who did not attempt to commit suicide, n=120 Ф Significance point, p<

Attempt to commit suicide in anamnesis 13 (20,96%) 5 (4,16%) 3,465 0,01

Suicidal ideas 17 (27,41%) 5 (4,16%) 4,436 0,01

Table 2

Non-suicidal autoaggressive patterns n (%)

Parents of Parents of adoles- Significance point, p<

Characteristics adolescents, who attempted to commit suicide, n=62 cents, who did not attempt to commit suicide, n=120 Ф

Presence of somatic diseases 45 (72,58%) 21 (17,5%) 7,511 0,01

Bone fractures in anamnesis 16 ( 25,81%) 13 (10,83%) 2,531 0,01

Alcohol abuse 19 (30,64%) 5 (4,16%) 4,884 0,01

Dangerous hobbies, interests, propensities 13 (10,83%) 0 4,283 0,01

Physical or sexual violence in anamnesis 16 (25,81%) 4 (3,33%) 4,481 0,01

Self-harm in anamnesis 16 (25,81%) 10 (8,33%) 3,081 0,01

Tendency to undue risk 22 (35,48%) 12 (10%) 4,027 0,01

Theft in anamnesis 27 (43,54%) 10 (8,33%) 5,472 0,01

Home burns 23 (37,09%) 1 (0,83%) 7,192 0,01

Criminal convictions 11 (17,74%) 4 (3,33%) 3,215 0,01

As seen above non-suicidal autoaggressive patterns (traumatic pathology, tendency toun due risk, psychoactivatory agents use, anti-social behavior etc.) are wide spread. It makes the represented group of parents strongly pluripotent autoaggressive. Facts from two shown Table s

let us suppose that exceptionally adverses cenery and behavioral components of formation of their own suicidal reaction in children from these families is formed. That is the group-forming factor.

Comparison of groups concerning predictors of suicidal behavioris shown in Table 3.

Table 3

Predictors of autoaggressive behaviorn (%)

Characteristics Parents of adolescents, who attempted to commit suicide, n=62 Parents of adolescents, who did not attempt to commit suicide, n=120 Ф Significance point, p<

Suside of the nearest 28 (45,16%) 0 9,416 0,01

Pang of guilt for a long time 28 (45,16%) 16 (13,33%) 4,641 0,01

Obtrusive sense of shame 17 (27,41%) 5 (4,16%) 4,436 0,01

Groundless mood decline, bouts of depression 47(75,81%) 30 (25%) 6,814 0,01

Death anxiety 26 (41,93%) 66 (55%) 1,681 0,05

Sense of frustration and despair 27 (43,54%) 22 (18,33%) 3,554 0,01

Parents beat in childhood 18 (29,03%) 14 (11,66%) 2,825 0,01

Obtrusive sense of guilt and shame 10 (16,12%) 9 (7,5%) 1,732 0,01

Trusting in God 37 (59,67%) 89 (74,16%) 1,981 0,05

Assurance that they won't die soon 27 (43,54%) 84 (70%) 3,465 0,01

Absence of reason to live 5 (8,06%) 1 (0,83%) 2,499 0,01

Frequent remorse 19 (30,64%) 9 (7,5%) 3,944 0,01

Belief in afterlife 20 (32,25%) 70 (58,33%) 3,394 0,01

True predominance of important in sui-cidological practice predictors of self-destructing behavioras despair, obtrusive sense of shame, absence of reason to live, loneliness and depressive feelings attract attention. Respondents from the first group incurred corporal punishments from their parents more often.

All that let us define the present group as apart of population, which has many stigmas of autodestruction and has complete autoaggressive potential.

All this allows describing the considered group as a slice of the population that have a significant amount of the stigma of autodestructive and possess strong autoaggressive potential. Significantly more in the experimental group is dominated by the classical patterns of suicide (e.g., suicide attempt, suicidal thoughts), Neuilly forms of autodestructive (risky and sacrificial behavior, somatic, traumatic pathology, alcohol). In addition, the

study group has a broad representation of the predictors of self-injurious behavior.

Based on these data, it can be argued that the work aimed at the prevention of suicide needs to actively involve parents and, first and foremost, to influence their higher autoagressive. Working through self-injurious impulses only child, specialists are doomed to failure, as self-destructive family background will prevail over the psychotherapeutic efforts.

Conclusions Therefore, in families where a child attempted to commit suicide parents have specific suicidological patterns. They have their own suicidal activity in their minds and behavior; there is also a high level of non-suicidal autoaggressive patterns and predictors of self-destructing behavior.

So, we can surely suppose that low parents' autoaggression is a guarantee of low analogic indexes of their female children.

Taking cure from adolescents' intra familial background, it is possible to in divi-duate and raiseefficacy of psychotherapeutics

trategyf or prevention, treatment and rehabilitation of suicidal behavior.

In relation to this article reported no potential conflicts of interest.

References

1. Mocar' SV, Meshherjakova Jel. Se-mejnyj mif i formirovanie suicidal'nyh ten-dencij [Family myth and the formation of suicidal tendencies]. Sibirskij psihologi-cheskij zhurnal [Siberian psychological journal]. 2001; 14-15: 86-90. (in Russian)

2. Glaznjov DI, Kutbiddinova RA. Faktory suicidal'nogo riska v studencheskom vozraste. V kn.: Psihologija i pedagogika v sisteme gumanitarnogo znanija: materialy V Mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj kon-ferencii (Moskva, 27-28 dekabrja 2012 g.). v 2 t. [Suicidal risk factors in student age. In: Psychology and pedagogy in the system of humanitarian knowledge: materials of the international scientifically-practical Conference (Moscow, 27-28 December 2012): in 2 vol. Moscow: Speckniga; 2012. Vol. 1. P. 7985. (in Russian)

3. Starshenbaum GV. Suicidologija i krizisnaja psihoterapija [Suicide-studying and crisis psychotherapy]. Moscow: Kogito-Centr; 2005. 376 p. (in Russian)

4. Vsemirnaja organizacija zdravoo-hranenija (WHO). Doklad o sostojanii zdra-voohranenija v mire, 2001 g. [Report on world health, 2001]. Psihicheskoe zdorov'e: novoe ponimanie, novye nadezhdy [Mental health: new understanding, new hope]. Geneve: WHO; 2001. 215 p. (in Russian)

5. Murthy RS. The World health report 2001: Mental health: New understanding, new hope. Geneve: World Health Organization; 2001. 186 p.

6. Spicer R, Miller T. Suicide actsin 8 states: incidence and case fatality rates by demographics and method. Am. J. Public Health. 2000; 90: 85-91.

7. Bannikov GS, Pavlova TS, Koshkin KA, Letova AV. Potencial'nye i aktual'nye fak-tory riska razvitija suicidal'nogo povedenija po-drostkov (obzor literatury) [Potential and actual

risk factors for suicidal behavior in adolescents (literature review)]. Suicidologija [Suicidology]. 2015; 6: 4(21): 21-33. (in Russian)

8. Lukashuk AV, Filippova MD, Som-kina OJu. Harakteristika detskih i podrost-kovyh suicidov [Characteristics of the child and adolescent suicide]. Rossijskij mediko-biologicheskij vestnik imeni akademika I.P. Pavlova [I.P. Pavlov Russian Medical Biological Herald]. 2016; 2: 37-143. (in Russian)

9. Lukashuk AV, Merinov AV. Samo-povrezhdenija u podrostkov: podhody k tera-pii [Self-harm in adolescents: approaches to therapy]. Nauka molodykh (Eruditio Juve-nium) [Science of Young (Eruditio Juve-nium)]. 2014; 2: 67-71. (in Russian)

10. Lukashuk AV, Merinov AV. Kli-niko-suicidologicheskaja i jeksperimental'no-psihologicheskaja harakteristiki molodyh lju-dej, vospitannyh v «alkogol'nyh» sem'jah [Clinical and a suicide and experimentally-psychological characteristics of young people brought up in the «spirits» of young families]. Nauka molodykh (Eruditio Juvenium) [Science of Young (Eruditio Juvenium)]. 2014; 4: 82-87. (in Russian)

11. Merinov AV, Lukashuk AV. Oso-bennosti detej, vyrosshih v sem'jah, gde rodi-tel' stradal alkogol'noj zavisimost'ju [Jelek-tronnyj resurs] [Especially children, who grew up in families where a parent has suffered alcohol dependence [Electronic resource]. Lichnost' v menjajushhemsja mire: zdorov'e, adaptacija, razvitie: jelektron. nauch. Zhurn [Person in a changing world: health, adaptation, development: the electron. scientific. Zh.]. 2014; 4(7): 37-48. (in Russian) Mode of access: http: // humjournal. rzgmu. ru / art & id = 109.

12. Merinov AV, Shitov EA, Lukashuk AV, Somkina OJu. Autoagressivnaja harakteristika zhenshhin, sostojashhih v brake s muzhchinami, stradajushhimi alkogo-

lizmom [Autoagressive characteristic of women who are married to men who suffer from alcoholism]. Rossijskij mediko-biologicheskij vestnik imeni akademika I.P. Pavlova [I.P. Pavlov Russian Medical Biological Herald]. 2015; 4: 81-86. (in Russian) 13. Shustov DI, Merinov AV. Diag-nostika autoagressivnogo povedenija pri al-

kogolizme metodom terapevticheskogo in-terv'ju. Posobie dlja vrachej psihiatrov-narkologov i psihoterapevtov [Diagnosis of autoaggressive behavior in alcoholism method of therapeutic interviews. A Handbook for psychiatrists-narcologists and psychotherapists]. Moscow; 2000. 20 p. (in Russian)

Lukashuk A.V. - postgraduate, Psychiatry Department, Ryazan State Medical University named after academician I.P. Pavlov.

E-mail: [email protected]

Merinov A.V. - M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc., Professor, Psychiatry Department, Ryazan State Medical University named after academician I.P. Pavlov.

E-mail: [email protected]