How Many Suicidal Deaths In 2023

How Many Suicidal Deaths In 2023

Which country has most suicidal deaths?

Latest

Country All Female
Eswatini 40.5 6.4
Ethiopia 9.5 5.2
Fiji 9.5 6.0
Finland * 13.4 6.8

Which country is less suicidal?

Suicide in Sweden – In 2019, Sweden had 14.7 suicides per 100,000 people. Historically, Sweden has had a high suicide rate, with the most suicides in the developed world during the 1960s. That may have been due, at least in part, to cultural attitudes regarding suicide and long, dark winters, particularly in the northern regions.

  • The government responded to the crisis with social welfare and mental health services, and the numbers have dropped dramatically.
  • Today, Scandinavian countries – Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland – have very high happiness rates and relatively low suicide rates.
  • However, the dark winters – 20 hours of darkness or more in each day in some areas – causes seasonal affective disorder (SAD), a form of depression, which has been known to correlate with higher rates of suicide.

Euthanasia, or physician-assisted suicide, is still illegal in Sweden but is accepted in some instances. A physician may not administer lethal drugs to a terminally ill patient, but he or she may end life support of the patient requests doing so and demonstrates that they understand the consequences.

Which country in Europe has the highest suicidal rate 2017?

In 2019, there were 524 deaths from suicide in Ireland, 16 fewer than in 2018, but 14 more than in 2017 when there were 510 such deaths. Male suicides rose by 4.6% from 390 in 2015 to 408 in 2019, while female suicides were 8.4% higher in 2019 at 116 compared with 107 such deaths recorded in 2015. There were 116 female suicides in 2019, which represented an annual decrease of 17.7% since 2018. However, 2018 recorded the highest number of female deaths from self-harm since CSO records began in 1950, at 141. The standardised suicide rate in 2017 (latest available data) was 10.1 per 100,000 of population for the EU-28 Member States compared with 11.0 in Ireland. The rate was highest in Lithuania at 26.0 and lowest in Cyprus at 4.0. The comparable rate for the United Kingdom was 7.4. Among young males, aged under 25 years, suicide was the number one cause of death in 2019. For females in the same age bracket, suicide was the third highest cause of death for the same period. More than one-third of suicides in Ireland between 2015-2019 were by persons aged 45-64 years, while one in ten deaths from self-harm were by persons aged 65 years and older. For the period 2015-2019, the occurrence of suicides increased in three regions: Dublin (+46%), Mid-West (+14%), and South-West (+5%). Four of the regions reported a decrease: South-East (-18%), Border (-16%), West (-10%), and Mid-East (-8%), while the Midlands region was unchanged.

Visit www.yourmentalhealth.ie for information on how to mind your mental health, support others, or to find a support service in your area. You can also call the HSE Your Mental Health Information Line on 1800 111 888, anytime day or night, for information on mental health services in your area.

Deaths by suicide classified by year of occurrence and sex 2011-2019
Year Male Female Total
2011 1 472 99 571
2012 1 475 110 585
2013 1 437 107 544
2014 1 471 106 577
2015 1 390 107 497
2016 1 429 101 530
2017 1 399 111 510
2018 1 399 141 540
2019 1 408 116 524
1 Figures for years 2011 to 2019 inclusive have been revised from time of each Annual Report

ul> For females in Ireland in 2019, the standardised suicide rate was 4.7 per 100,000 of population, up from 4.1 per 100,000 of population in 2011.

The standardised suicide rate for males in Ireland in 2019, was 17.6, down from 21.1 per 100,000 of population in 2011.

For the period 2011-2019, the years with the highest standardised suicide rate recorded for each sex was in 2012 for males at 21.8, while for females it was the year 2018 with a rate of 5.9.

The years with the lowest standardised suicide rate recorded for each sex was 2018 for males at 17.4, while for females it was the year 2011 with a rate of 4.1.

Within age groups, male suicide rates were highest in the 50-54 age-group (19.5 per 100,000) while women were highest in the 55-59 age-group (6.3 per 100,000).

The number of deaths from self-harm decreases after the age of 49.

Standardised suicide rates Standardised male suicide death rate Standardised female suicide death rate Standardised total suicide death rate
2011 21.1 4.1 12.5
2012 21.8 4.8 13.1
2013 20 4.7 12.3
2014 21.2 4.6 12.8
2015 17.7 4.7 11.1
2016 18.9 4.2 11.5
2017 17.6 4.7 11
2018 17.4 5.9 10.8
2019 17.6 4.7 11

Table 1 Unadjusted and standardised suicide death rates by year of occurrence and sex, 2011 – 2019

The standardised suicide rate in 2017 (latest available data) was 10.1 per 100,000 of population for the EU-28 Member States compared with 11.0 in Ireland.

The rate was highest in Lithuania at 26.0 and lowest in Cyprus at 4.0. The comparable rate for the United Kingdom was 7.4.

In terms of ranking for the EU-28 Member States, Ireland had the 14 th lowest at 11.0 across the Member block.

Table 2 Standardised suicide death rate 2017 EU-28 Member States (Per 100,000 population)

EU-28 Standardised EU 28 suicide rate by rank
Cyprus 4
Greece 4.5
Malta 5.2
Italy 5.9
Slovakia 7.2
United Kingdom 7.4
Spain 7.5
Luxembourg 9.3
Portugal 9.6
Bulgaria 9.7
Romania 9.9
EU-28 Average 10.1
Denmark 10.4
Germany 10.5
Ireland 11
Netherlands 11.2
Poland 11.7
Sweden 12
France 12.7
Czech Republic 13
Austria 13.8
Croatia 14.8
Finland 15
Belgium 15.4
Hungary 16.6
Estonia 17.2
Latvia 17.9
Slovenia 19.5
Lithuania 26

ul> Among young males, aged under 25 years, suicide was the number one cause of death in 2019, accounting for 22% of total deaths in that age category.

Suicide, accounted for 15% of all female deaths aged under 25 years, and was the third highest cause of death in 2019.

Where suicide wasn’t the number one cause of death for either males or females aged under 25 years in the years 2015-2019, suicide was predominantly the highest ranked cause behind deaths due to Congenital Malformations and Neonatal deaths.

More than one-third of suicides in Ireland between 2015-2019 were by persons aged 45-64 years, while one in ten deaths from self-harm were by persons aged 65 years and older.

Young males under the age of 25 accounted for 13% of total male suicides between 2015 and 2019, while females in the same age bracket accounted for 17% of total female suicides.

Table 3 Deaths by suicide classified by age-group and sex, 2015 – 2019 Table 3a Deaths by suicide for persons ages under 25 by sex, 2015-2019 Table 4 Deaths from Intentional Self-harm (suicide) by method classified by year and sex, 2015 – 2019

In 2019, more than one in four victims of suicide in Ireland was from Dublin. Females in the Dublin region however, accounted for a higher proportion of national female suicides at nearly one in three.

The South-West region recorded one in six of all deaths from self-harm in Ireland in 2019, while the area accounted for just one in ten of total female suicides.

For the period 2015-2019, the occurrence of suicides increased in three of the eight regions in Ireland: Dublin (+46%), Mid-West (+14%), and South-West (+5%).

Four of the regions in Ireland reported a decrease in the total number of suicides for the period 2015-2019: South-East (-18%), Border (-16%), West (-10%), and Mid-East (-8%).

The Midlands region was unchanged in the total number of suicides in 2019 compared to 2015.

Table 5 Deaths by suicide classified by region and sex, 2015 – 2019

Which country has the worst depression?

Introduction – Depression is a global mental health issue that affects individuals to varying degrees across different countries. Some of the most depressed countries include Greece, Spain, Portugal, Palestine, and Tunisia. These countries have depression rates ranging from 6.52% to 5.75%.

It is important to note that these rates represent the percentage of the population experiencing depression at a given time and may be influenced by various factors such as socioeconomic conditions, access to mental healthcare, and cultural attitudes towards mental health. Greece, for instance, has been grappling with economic challenges in recent years, including a severe debt crisis, which could contribute to increased levels of stress and depression.

Spain and Portugal have also faced economic difficulties, potentially impacting the mental well-being of their populations. Palestine and Tunisia have experienced political unrest and social instability, which can have profound psychological effects on individuals and communities.

Which nation is the most depressed?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The epidemiology of depression has been studied across the world. Depression is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, as the epidemiology has shown. Lifetime prevalence estimates vary widely, from 3% in Japan to 17% in India.

What country has the lowest depression rate in the world?

The Middle East and North Africa suffer the world’s highest depression rates, according to a new study by researchers at Australia’s University of Queensland – and it’s costing people in the region years off their lives. The study, published this week in the journal PLOS Medicine, used data on the prevalence, incidence and duration of depression to determine the social and public health burden of the disorder around the world.

  1. Globally, they found, depression is the second-leading cause of disability, with slightly more than 4 percent of the world’s population diagnosed with it.
  2. The map at the top of this page shows how much of the population in each country has received a diagnosis of clinical depression.
  3. Of course, researchers didn’t go out and test everyone for clinical depression; rather, they used preexisting data.

That means we’re not looking at rates of clinical depression, exactly, so much as the rate at which people are diagnosed with clinical depression. People who live in countries with greater awareness of and easier access to mental health services, then, are naturally going to be diagnosed at a higher rate.

That may help explain the unusually low rate in Iraq, for example, where public health services are poor. Taboos against mental health disorders may also drive down diagnosis rates, for example in East Asia, artificially lowering the study’s measure of clinical depression’s prevalence in that region.

The paper further cautions that reliable depression surveys don’t even exist for some low-income countries – a common issue with global studies – forcing the researchers to come up with their own estimates based on statistical regression models. Still, the researchers’ findings have real ramifications for the world – and are often surprising.

  • More than 5 percent of the population suffers from depression in the Middle East, North Africa, sub-Saharan Africa, Eastern Europe and the Caribbean.
  • Meanwhile, depression is reportedly lowest in East Asia, followed by Australia/New Zealand and Southeast Asia.
  • This chart shows how each region of the world is affected by depression; the orange line indicates the number of years spent living with clinical depression per every 100,000 people.

The most depressed country is Afghanistan, where more than one in five people suffer from the disorder. The least depressed is Japan, with a diagnosed rate of less than 2.5 percent. The researchers also quantified the national “burden” of depression using a metric called DALY – disability-adjusted life years, or the number of healthy years a person loses because of depression or a depression-related premature death.

Predictably, depression burdens for the most part follow depression rates. The burden is highest in Afghanistan and in Middle Eastern and North African countries, as well as in Eritrea, Rwanda, Botswana, Gabon, Croatia, the Netherlands (!) and Honduras. It’s lowest in Asia’s most prosperous economies, including Japan.

See some patterns here? The researchers did, too. While they can’t conclusively explain why depression is so much more prevalent and damaging in some countries than in others, they have a few theories. Those include conflict, which pushes depression rates up, and the presence of other serious epidemics, which makes depression less of a social burden relative to other public health issues.

  1. Notably, Afghanistan, Honduras and the Palestinian territories are the three most-depressed areas researchers looked at.
  2. In the case of North Africa/Middle East, conflict in the region increased the prevalence of, leading to a higher burden ranking,” they write.
  3. In sub-Saharan Africa, on the other hand, diseases such as malaria and AIDS have crowded out depression as a top public health risk.

It’s still a very big deal, in other words, but HIV is responsible for far more lost-healthy-years than depression. Social scientists and public health advocates have identified other “macro” or “environmental” causes for depression, as well. A 2010 paper by the Inter-American Development Bank found, for instance, that unemployment, low incomes and high income inequality correlate with high depression rates.

They also found a link between depression and age: People between 16 and 65 tend to suffer depression at much higher rates. That age factor, along with massive population growth, actually explains the fact that the burden of depression has grown by nearly a third since 1990, researchers say. And since both aging and population growth are likely to continue, that makes low-cost depression interventions even more of a priority for both global organizations and national governments.

Unfortunately, between the costs of such programs and taboos against admitting mental health disorders, that type of action seems many years away.

Where is the most suicidal places?

Asia – The Mapo Bridge in Seoul, South Korea has been nicknamed “Suicide Bridge” and “The Bridge of Death” due to its frequent usage as a suicide hotspot amidst South Korea’s ongoing suicide epidemic.

  • Aokigahara forest, Mount Fuji, Japan – up to 105 suicides a year
  • Delhi Metro, India – at least 83 suicides
  • Han River, South Korea
  • Hussain Sagar, India – 146 deaths and 510 attempts between 2013 and 2016
  • Mapo Bridge, Seoul, South Korea
  • Milad Tower, Tehran, Iran – Until 2012, three suicides occurred by persons jumping from Milad Tower.
  • Mount Mihara, Japan – an active volcano on the island of Izu Ōshima, After a suicide in 1933, media reports led to hundreds of copycats until 1936, when access was restricted.
  • Nanjing Yangtze River Bridge, China – over 2,000 suicides since 1968, ~50/year.
  • Shin-Koiwa Station, Japan
  • Tehran Metro, Tehran, Iran
  • Tojinbo, Japan
  • Wuhan Yangtze River Bridge, Wuhan, China – 24.7 suicides per year
  • Burj Khalifa, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
  • Rabindra Sarobar metro station, India

How many suicidal deaths in India?

Is economic distress causing a spike in suicide deaths in India? A lot has changed in India since the Covid-19 pandemic. Alongside more than half a million people who died after getting infected by the virus, data show that in 2020 and 2021 combined, 3.17 lakh people died by suicide. Is economic distress increasing the suicide rate in India? Is economic distress increasing the suicide rate in India? Since 2020, India has been witnessing a spike in suicide rates. In this episode, we explore the reasons behind it. Audio Credit: Host: Parvathi Benu Data about suicides in India are collected by the local police department when they file a first information report.

  1. The practice is continued, even after the passing of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, that decriminalised suicide attempts.
  2. This is then subsequently sent to the National Crime Records Bureau, which releases it as part of its yearly Accidental Deaths & Suicides in India (ADSI) reports.
  3. An analysis of ADSI reports from 2000 to 2021 shows that the number of suicide deaths in India has increased marginally in some years while there has been a decline in other years.

This has largely been in line with the rate of population growth in the country. This explains why the suicide rate in the country has ranged between 10 and 11.5 since 2000. How Many Suicidal Deaths In 2023 But there has been a jump in suicides during the pandemic. The NCRB recorded 1.5 lakh suicide deaths in 2020, against 1.39 lakh in 2019. Between 2020 and 2021, too, there was a 7.1 per cent increase. In 2021, 1.64 lakh people took their own lives, according to the NCRB.

The suicide rate jumped to 11.3 in 2020 and was at a record high at 12 in 2021. According to the WHO estimates, India has the 41 st highest suicide rate globally, as of 2019. Russia ranks 11 th, with a suicide rate of 21.6, while it is 14.5 in the US. The WHO estimates say that a few countries that fare well include Barbados (suicide rate of 0.3), Jordan (suicide rate of 2) and Syria, where it is 2.1.

China, too, has a comparatively lower suicide rate of six deaths per lakh people. How Many Suicidal Deaths In 2023 The jump in the number of suicides in 2020 and 2021, according to mental health experts, is clearly the after-effect of the pandemic and the financial stress that it brought along. “In 2020, during the lockdown, when you had a real financial crisis, the number of suicides, too, shot through the roof,” said Soumitra Pathare, consultant psychiatrist and director at the Centre for Mental Health Law and Policy, Indian Law Society, Pune.

Pathare added that in the event of an economic crisis, a spike in suicides happens after a lag of a few months, but then they persist to increase for the next few years. This is borne out by the increase of 5.9 per cent in the number of suicides in 2010, following the global financial crisis in 2008-2009.

The suicide rate was also elevated in the years following the GFC. “In India and globally, an economic crisis lasts for about six months. But then their after-effects are mostly suicide deaths,” he said. A study titled ‘What has happened to suicides during the Greek economic crisis?’ published in the US government’s National Library of Medicine also validates this.

The mean suicide rate overall rose by 35 per cent between 2010 and 2012, from 3.37 to 4.56/100,000 population,” it noted. Pathare also pointed out a similar spike in suicide cases in India at the beginning of the 1990s, owing to the economic crisis. Will the rise in suicide cases also mean that more cases are getting reported, especially after the decriminalising of suicides? Arun B Nair, Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, and Pathare do not think so.

A police source whom we spoke to also confirmed that even prior to 2018, cases were rarely filed under Section 309, which criminalised suicides and that suicide reporting hasn’t improved much in the country. How Many Suicidal Deaths In 2023 In 2016, when NCRB noted a suicide rate of 10.3 in India, the World Health Organization estimated that India’s suicide rate was somewhere around 16.5. “There is still a lot of stigma around suicides. In many parts of the country, suicides get reported as accidents.

  • This happens in most cases where people take their lives by consuming poison or by drowning,” said Pathare.
  • According to the NCRB data, in 2021, 57 per cent of the total suicides occurred by hanging, while 25.1 per cent happened by poison consumption.
  • However, at the beginning of the millennium, a majority of suicide deaths, according to the NCRB, occurred by poisoning.

Pathare said this is because it is difficult to count a death by hanging as an accident, but the same doesn’t apply to poison consumption. Nair said these days, we have been seeing a lot of copycat suicides due to increased digital media exposure. The police source also added that there have been cases where taking their own life by hanging were counted as sudden deaths. How Many Suicidal Deaths In 2023 Daily wage labourers and housewives combined, form close to 40 per cent of people who died by suicide in 2021. “The economic crisis hit the daily-wage earners the most. Also, the National Family Health Survey points out that domestic abuse is still a very common thing in India.

This could be the reason behind the rise in suicides in these categories,” said Nair. Pathare, however, said the categorisation here could be flawed. “Many times, a landless female farmer is mentioned as a housewife. The same happens with a female daily wager, too. How is ‘housewife’ a profession?” he asked.

The category of daily-wage earners among people who died by suicide was increased by the NCRB only in 2014. Prior to this, they were included in the category of self-employed people. The data also show that among people who died from suicides all these years, the proportion of people with a college degree has always been less than 5 per cent. How Many Suicidal Deaths In 2023 Pathare said better data is the only way out to save so many Indians from taking their lives. “Instead of the NCRB, suicide data collection must be allotted to the National Health Authority or the NFHS. Also, there must be data on suicide attempts. This way, health professionals can intervene and prevent people from taking their lives,” he said.

Why does Lithuania have a high death rate?

10 Facts About Life Expectancy in Lithuania –

The current life expectancy in Lithuania is 74.6 years. Compared to other European Union nations, who average at 84 years, life expectancy in Lithuania is nearly a decade shorter. The nation also remains below the average of its immediate neighbors in Central Europe and the rest of the Baltics, who have a life expectancy of 77 years. Further, Lithuania lands just above the world average of 72 years. Life expectancy in Lithuania has had a chaotic trend over the last 70 years. In the 1990s, economic fallout and loss of life caused by riots and chaos during the independence movement led to a low life expectancy rate of 68.5 years in 1994. Since then, however, life expectancy growth rates have more or less stabilized. Lithuanian life expectancy currently shows little sign that the upward trend will change for the worse. The population of Lithuania has decreased since independence. Having peaked at 3.7 million citizens in 1991, the population has steadily declined, Today, the country is inhabited by 2.79 million people, due to the country’s high death rate of 15 deaths per 1000 people, which results in a negative population growth rate of 1 percent. Furthermore, the emigration of the general populace towards Western Europe has only aided Lithuanian population loss. Life expectancy in Lithuania has increased at a slower rate than the rest of the world. Lithuanian life expectancy has increased by 8.35 percent from 1986 to 2017. Comparatively, the rest of the world’s life expectancy average has increased by 25.1 percent. Despite the human development index ranking of 34th in the world for development, it is possible high suicide rates in Lithuania substantially influence life expectancy. Unfortunately, the nation has the highest suicide rate in the world at an average of 26 suicides per 100,000 people, High Lithuanian suicide rates have gained national attention. Having such high suicide rates is clearly a major contributor to the nation’s lowered life expectancies and high death rate. Certain areas of the country are reaching rates of 71.9 deaths per 100,000 people, Subsequently, this has been the focus of intense national efforts. The government has been pursuing support through organizations such as the National Suicide Prevention Strategy; additionally, N.G.O. ‘s like the World Health Organization has supported Lithuania in suicide reduction efforts. As a result, suicide rates have reduced by nearly 15 percent between 2010 to 2016. Gender disparity is still relevant to suicide rates in Lithuania. On average, men typically live to be 69.2 years while women live to be 79.7 years. Social conditions play a role in this, as men are more heavily affected by the patriarchal norms that drive them into more dangerous work environments. As a result of the intense stress, the suicide rate in men is at heights far above the rate for women, Lithuanian suicide rates are the result of a complex series of social conditions. As one of the external driving factors behind lowered life expectancy in Lithuania, suicide rates are key as it is affecting all strata of society in the nation. There are various factors besides gender disparity that influences the inclination to commit suicide. One factor is extremely high alcohol consumption, where one in three men report high alcohol intake. Additionally, Lithuania has poor mental health facilities, creating an environment where it is difficult to seek adequate help. Finally, the legacy of historical suicide ideation plays a part in this figure as well. Biological causes are also a key part of life expectancy in Lithuania. The most considerable influence on life expectancy from biological causes is cardiovascular disease. Thirty-four percent of all deaths in 2017 were due to cardiovascular disease, which is linked to the high rates of obesity in the country. Above 60 percent of the adult population of Lithuania is overweight; obesity is directly linked to poor cardiovascular health and a higher risk of stroke, which is the second-highest cause of death in Lithuania. Unhealthy diets and low physical activity levels are the primary causes of obesity in Lithuania. The obesity problem affecting life expectancy in Lithuania is the result of a number of factors, crucial amongst them being low rates of physical exercise and unhealthy diets. Only 10.1 percent of the population reported committing to minimal exercise in 2010. Adjunctly, Lithuania’s diet surveys reveal that upwards of 13.2 percent of caloric intake comes from saturated fats; Medline Plus states that saturated fat intake should be less than 10 percent for a healthy diet, However, the government continues efforts to tackle obesity by encouraging exercise among adults and implementing food and drug protocols to reduce unhealthy food consumption. Health spending in the country is amongst the lowest in the European Union. Public health spending is currently at 6.5 percent of the GDP and remains the sixth-lowest in the European Union. At double the E.U. average, 32 percent of all health spending is privately funded, mostly coming from pharmaceutical expenditures. This means that citizens are forced to spend personal funds on acquiring medication that is often quite expensive. Although, spending has increased from 5.6 percent of GDP in 2005 to 6.5 percent in 2015. Despite this gradual increase, greater strides are necessary for the health system to match the rest of the E.U. and begin increasing overall life expectancy in Lithuania.

These 10 facts about life expectancy in Lithuania outline that despite its tremendous human development index and growing economy, the general health and overall lifespan of the nation’s population are quite poor. Further, the issue is not being addressed as effectively as it could be.

  1. Life expectancy in Lithuania could be improved by improved government programming and initiatives.
  2. Specifically, the implementation of effective mental health systems would greatly impact public health.
  3. Another solution would be to execute physical preventative care, such as exercise infrastructure, to increase public health.

– Neil Singh Photo: Pixabay

What is the most depressed age?

Young and Midlife Adults – The average age of onset for major depressive disorder is between 35 and 40 years of age. Onset in early adulthood may be linked with more depressive episodes, a longer duration of illness, and therefore a more difficult clinical course. In middle adulthood, depression was related to life satisfaction and levels of functional disability,

Which countries have no depression?

The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered another health crisis: a 25% increase in the prevalence of anxiety and depression worldwide. According to the World Health Organization, the mental health of young people, women and health care workers has been hit notably hard.

  1. Depression affects about 280 million people worldwide, and has been cited as the “single largest contributor to global disability” by the WHO,
  2. The United States ranks 29th in the world in prevalence of depressive disorders, with a rate of about 5%, or about 15 million Americans, estimated to have some form of depression.

It is the largest country on the top 30 list of countries with the highest depression rates. Countries with the least depression include several smaller, lower-income countries in South Asia such as Brunei, Myanmar, Timor-Leste and Mali, where less than 2.5% of the population is reported to have a depressive disorder.

  1. Comparing mental health rates between countries comes with limitations, as cultural stigmas, availability and affordability of mental health care may all contribute to disparities.
  2. Low-income countries, for example, typically have lower rates of reported mental disorders when compared to high-income countries.

Here are the top 10 most depressed countries, according to the Global Burden of Disease study, as measured by percentage of the population affected. Those experiencing mental health concerns can visit the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration for more information about symptoms and treatment options. 10. Lithuania

What country has the best mental health?

Sweden – Sweden has the top positive mental health index which basically gives the mental health status of a given population. However, it wasn’t always like this. Mental health policies of Sweden had only focused on two things: people suffering from severe mental health issues and the youth or the children.

At what age does mental illness start?

Learn about the early warning signs of mental illness, symptoms, and how to take action at Psychiatry.org.50% of mental illness begins by age 14, and 3/4 begin by age 24.

What race has lowest rate of depression?

Introduction – Depression is a disease that straddles all genders, ethnicities, races, and walks of life. Studies have shown that of the roughly 18 million Americans who struggle with mood disorders, approximately ten million of these individuals suffer from major or clinical depression. Of these ten million individuals, roughly two-thirds go without treatment. The disease is multifactorial and can be attributed to genetic causes, various psychosocial and environmental stressors, and can be an unpleasant accompaniment to a variety of other diseases and disease processes. The pathogenesis of disease has previously been described as involving three general sets of risk factors: 1) internalizing factors such as genetics, 2) externalizing factors such as medication side effects/secondary to underlying illnesses and substance abuse, and 3) adversity due to trauma and psychosocial stressors such as low socioeconomic position. Those with first-degree relatives with the disorder are at a 1.5 to 3-time increase in risk than those among the general population. When exploring disparities in depression across racial and ethnic boundaries, it is important to consider 1) the differences in predisposing factors (ie, genetic factors and adverse childhood events), 2) the presentation of disease, and 3) boundaries to sustained and successful treatment. For the purposes of this article, we will explore discrepancies in the presentation of depression among minorities when compared to Caucasians as well as factors that serve as boundaries for ethnic minority patients in initiating treatment and sustaining a long-term, disease-free existence. Studies that have explored the prevalence and distribution of major depressive disorder in African Americans, non-Hispanic Caucasians Americans and Caribbean African Americans have found that overall lifetime prevalence of major depressive disorder among Caucasians was 17.9% as opposed to African Americans, whose prevalence estimate was only 10.4%.1 The difference between African Americans and Caucasians lies in the fact that the chronicity of disease was higher for African Americans (56%) than it was for Caucasian patients (38.6%).1 Among this percentage, fewer than half of these African Americans sought treatment for their depression, although when asked to qualify their disease, they would rate their condition as severe or disabling.1 Thus, this study concluded that the burden of depression was shouldered more heavily on African Americans than it was on Caucasians in the United States, leading to an overall greater degree of functional impairment. Some studies argue that African Americans may have lower rates of depression when compared to non-Hispanic Caucasians due to the resilient nature of the community and greater religious support, but even these studies agree that these patients often tend to be underdiagnosed or misdiagnosed.2 These studies also acknowledge that African Americans who are diagnosed with depression often tend to have more serious, chronic, and severely debilitating disease.2 When examining risk factors for depression in African Americans, studies have focused on the role of discrimination as a major potential risk factor for MDD in the African American community. Self-perceived racial discrimination, in particular, has been strongly associated with worsening mental and physical health, more so in African American women than in men.3 By contrast, a strong sense of ethnic identity among African Americans has been shown to be a protective factor against mental illness in these communities.4 Ethnic identity is defined as a sense of commitment and belonging to an ethnic group, positive feelings about the group, and behaviors that indicate involvement with the ethnic group.4 There are future studies aimed at examining cultural and ethnic identity among clinical samples in an attempt to gain a better sense of how positive ethnic identity can be fostered and strengthened among members of the community in an attempt to protect against mental illness.4 In addition to ethnicity and gender, risk factors such as lower yearly income, socioeconomic positioning, poverty status, and employment are recognized as key risk factors.3 This suggests that marriage and a higher level of income and education are protective factors in the African American community for depression. Job security, for example, was found to be associated with fewer depressive symptoms in African American men than in Caucasians or Hispanic communities.3 When discussing disparities in depression among ethnic minorities, one should consider the relationship between socioeconomic position and depression. Studies have examined the relationship between socioeconomic position and depression in the African American community. One study in particular found that household income and unemployment predicted greater odds of major depressive episodes among African Americans and an inverse relationship between education level and a 12-month major depressive episode. Additionally, an inverse relationship between income and 12-month major depressive episode (MDE) was noted in African American, particularly in women.5 In addition to socioeconomic factors, home environment was also assessed for risk of depression in African Americans. Thus far, no concrete data has shown that African Americans in single-parent households are more susceptible to depression later in life than those in two-parent families.3 However, evidence from these studies has shown that higher parental education correlated to greater adult achievement and self-esteem in African Americans, especially in African American men, and lower depression.3 Another study looked at how neighborhood ethnic composition related to mental health among African Americans. Results suggested that as same-ethnicity neighborhood composition increased, rates of depression decreased.3 The study used the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression instrument to show that neighborhood ethnic composition was a prominent risk factor among African Americans for depression (24%) when compared to Caucasians (14%).3 There is a known association between stressful life events (SLEs) and depression. SLE can be seen in racial minorities from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, whose lives are compounded by abject or perceived racism, a dearth of education, communal violence, single-family households, or substance abuse. One cross-sectional study examined how SLEs are determined by race and gender in a sample of 5,899 adults.6 Of these 5,899 adults, 5,008 were African American or Caribbean Blacks. Non-Hispanic Caucasians made up the remainder of the sample. SLE in the past 30 days was the independent variable. Twelve-month MDE was used as the dependent variable, with factors such as age, educational level, marital status, employment, and region as controls.6 The results of the study suggested a stronger association between SLE and MDE among Caucasian men compared to African American or Caribbean black men. However, there was no statistically significant difference between Caucasian and African American women.6 While this study demonstrated a possible stronger association between SLE and MDE in Caucasian men, the sample size of 891 Caucasians to 5008 African Americans or Caribbean individuals cannot be ignored. Although control factors such as educational level, marital status etc. were addressed, a larger sample size of Caucasian patients may have afforded researchers reliable results. Researchers have examined lower socioeconomic status as a risk factor for MDD among racial and ethnic minorities. One study examined the prevalence of MDD in 1,117 black adolescents, 810 African Americans, and 360 Caribbean blacks, with high household income as the main predictor and MDD as the main outcome.7 These results showed that higher household income was a protective factor against MDD for Caribbean blacks and for females than for African Americans males.7 African American males were at higher odds of developing lifetime, 12-month, and 30-day MDD.7 This study demonstrates how SES fails to protect African Americans when it comes to chronic, debilitating MDD. Further disparities between minority populations and Caucasians were found in studies examining the association between MDD symptoms and the presence of other comorbid chronic medical conditions.8 The researchers in this study found weaker associations between MDD and chronic medical conditions for African Americans when compared to Caucasians.8 The data for this study came from the Americans’ Changing Lives Study, which followed patients from 1986 to 2011. The results were based on selfreporting physician diagnoses at the start of the study and a follow-up 25 years later.8 Based on the respondents’ answers, chronic conditions such as hypertension, diabetes, chronic lung disease, chronic heart disease, etc. were tabulated. Researchers used a 10-item Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression (CES-D) scale followed by multi-group structural equation modeling to assess associations between subsequent MDD symptoms and chronic medical conditions among Caucasian and African American patients. Certain studies have examined the role of various socio-economic factors like education in the predictive role on depressive symptoms.9 This prospective study utilized a life-course approach to compare African American and Caucasian males and females to assess the impact of >12 years continued education on future depressive symptoms from baseline to up to 25 years.9 African American males were the only group not to exhibit a net protective effect of education on the development of chronic medical conditions, including depression.9 While education was protective to an extent, a threshold effect of continued education was found over follow-up to have an increase in depressive symptoms as well. The study paradoxically concluded that although education was beneficial for African American men, those graduating with a high school diploma were at additional risk for development of depressive symptoms over a 25-year follow-up.9 Another study utilized data from the National Survey of American Life – Adolescent Supplement (NSAL-A) from 2003–2004 to study the link between education and depression in African Americans and Caribbean Blacks.10 This study concluded that higher education was associated with a lower risk of depression in African Americans, both male and female.10 The study concluded that further research was needed to investigate how additional factors such as culture or life experiences influence the presence of future depressive symptoms. Additionally, Lankarani and Assari looked at positive and negative emotions as predictors of chronic medical conditions in African Americans and Caucasians.11 The study found that although adversity is more common in African American communities, based on the Black versus Caucasian health paradox, African Americans less frequently exhibit depressive symptoms as opposed to Caucasians.11 The study examines the “undoing hypothesis,” which asserts that positive emotions act as a buffer to undo the harmful effects of negative ones.11 The researchers assert that African Americans are found to have higher levels of hopefulness. This explains why African Americans are less likely to exhibit depressive symptoms than Caucasians. Depressive symptoms are better predictors of future MDD for Caucasians rather than for African Americans, despite overall higher levels of stress in African Americans.11 In another study, Assari and Lankarani compared African Americans with Caucasians, examining the correlation between feelings of hopelessness and depression.12 The researchers discuss how hopelessness and optimistic attitudes vary between ethnicities. They concluded that depressive symptoms are associated with hopelessness in Caucasians more than in African Americans.12 They offer treatment recommendations based on these conclusions, specifically the idea of burgeoning a positive attitude in therapy to counter depression among Caucasians. African Americans with depression have a tendency to maintain positive attitudes in the face of adversity and foster hope. Studies have sought to examine what has been described as the two contradictory assumptions underlying research on race differences in psychiatric diagnosis. The first assumption is the “clinician bias” hypothesis, which makes the assumption that each race exhibits depressive symptoms similarly and the fault in misdiagnosis lies with the clinician, who judges each race differently.13 The other hypothesis is described as “cultural relativity,” which assumes that depression manifests differently in various racial minorities when compared to Caucasians and the clinician is insensitive to the cultural differences between each ethnic group, leading to a misdiagnosis.13 These older studies support the idea of cultural relativity, that the clinician himself is unaware and hence unable to properly diagnose depression in a racial minority due to his own shortcomings and lack of understanding. Studies exploring the notion that the clinician himself is unaware of cultural differences have discussed a tool known as the Patient-Centered Culturally Sensitive Health Care model (PC-CSHC model).3 The PC-CSHC model was developed to help clinicians and providers in promoting culturally sensitive health care practices, leading to a higher level of care for minorities and reducing disparities in treatment between minorities and non-minorities. This model leads to a clinician’s greater understanding of disparities across race and ethnicity, leading to a more individually focused treatment that works within the limitations of the patient’s cultural framework to provide higher level of care and, as a result, higher level of patient satisfaction and adherence to treatment plans.3 Studies have also shown differences in presenting symptoms between African Americans and non-Hispanic Caucasians, with one study highlighting the presence of the symptom of negative affect and interpersonal problems domains as a harbinger of depressive disorder in African Americans. The presence of these strongly predicts depressive disorders in African Americans more than in Caucasians.14 In addition to discussing boundaries to proper diagnosis of depression, one must also explore boundaries to treatment of disease. When exploring boundaries to sustained and successful treatment of depression among African Americans, it is important to consider disparities in treatment of depression in different health care settings – predominantly in a primary care setting as opposed to a psychiatric setting. Over the years, a greater number of primary care physicians have been using pharmacological means by which to treat patients for psychiatric disorders such as depression. This shift from specialized care under a trained psychiatrist to a primary care setting may present a large disparity in not only recognizing the disease process in certain patients, but also in treatment modalities used to varying degrees of success. In a primary care setting, disparities in treatment may result from failure to properly detect depression or anxiety in minority patients.15 In addition to failing to recognize depression, primary care physicians may be amenable to prescribing medication to treat symptoms perceived to be indicative of depression, while patients may experience the benefits of one-on-one or group therapy in addition to pharmacological treatment for a sustained remission of disease. Furthermore, ethnic minorities are far less likely to be seen in psychiatry than in primary care settings.15 Studies examining disparities in mental health care for primary care and psychiatry showed continuing disparities in diagnoses, counseling/referrals for counseling, and antidepressant medication in primary care visits.15 After accounting for disparities in diagnosis and treatment modalities among the two preferred avenues of care provided by primary care physicians and by specialists, further disparities in treatment were complicated by educational, linguistic, and cultural barriers.15 Studies have examined what has been described as systemic racism in the medical community and have concluded that many Americans of color have restricted access to adequate care and resources due to racialized framing on the part of the provider. Pain is a subjective entity that varies from patient to patient and studies have concluded that it may be susceptible to social psychological influences like negative racial stereotypes that may guide the provider’s judgment.16 In a study published in 2016 conducted at the University of Virginia, researchers examined the role of racial bias in the assessment and treatment of racial minorities to Caucasians by examining false beliefs held by members of the health care community about biological differences between African Americans and Caucasians.17 This series of studies looked in particular at false beliefs regarding pain as experienced by African Americans versus Caucasians held by Caucasian medical students and residents and found that half of their sample endorsed these false beliefs (ie, that African Americans have thicker skin than Caucasians), which in turn informed their medical judgment and treatment plans.17 Also, it is important to consider the perception among many that racial minorities are somehow more immune to pain, be it mental or physical, than Caucasians – the idea that simply by virtue of the challenges minorities face in American society on a daily basis that their threshold for psychological pain is greater. A provider working with this assumption may minimize the minority patient’s symptoms leading to misdiagnosis. Expanding on this notion of negative racial stereotypes, minority patients may not be taken seriously by the provider working under the assumption that the motivating goal for the patient is secondary gain. For example, a provider may be under the incorrect assumption that a minority patient may falsely exhibit signs and symptoms of anxiety in an effort to obtain medication with potential for abuse. Studies attempting to gauge the extent of health care provider bias toward racial minorities has also had its limitations.18 Studies have found that when attempting to ascertain provider bias through direct questionnaire-based methods, there is a strong social desirability bias that guides providers’ answers to question such as “When working with minority individuals, I am confident that my conceptualization of client problems do not consist of stereotypes and biases” 18 This “social desirability bias” threatens the validity of answers provided. Studies have opined that it may be possible to reduce such a bias through computer-based questionnaires that rely on the subject’s speed in answering questions posed by relying on “gut reaction” to a posed question.18 Review articles have suggested that stereotyping of a minority patient by a provider is not a cognitive process that can be quantified or suppressed, but should be taken into account when discussing general barriers in successfully treating minorities.18 These ingrained biases and stereotypes may be countered through further provider education as well as increased awareness that such prejudices exist and may play a role in clinical judgment and treatment plans. Further, perceived discrimination plays a significant role in depression among African American youth. Assari et al determined that racial discrimination plays a role in the overall mental health of African Americans. Increased anxiety due to an increased negative psychological stress response to perceived discrimination is prevalent among African American youth.19 This may lead to feelings of frustration among youth, leading to increased participation in unhealthy behaviors.19 Further, racial discrimination has been found to shorten telomere length, which has been found to be associated with premature aging.19 Assari et al concede that their study had limitations, including not accounting for gender or likelihood of seeking psychiatric treatment in these populations. Nevertheless, prior studies have found that African American males are particularly vulnerable to depression following perceived racial discrimination.19 Another factor to consider when discussing disparities in depression across racial and ethnic barriers is that of affordability of care and availability of resources. Despite overall growth in antidepressant treatment to alleviate more severe and hindering symptoms of depression, studies show persistent racial and ethnic disparities in medication use among Hispanics and African Americans when compared to Caucasians.20 Lack of health insurance and access to proper resources among these communities plays a culprit and acts as a barrier to treatment.20 Recently, the emergence of the Affordable Care Act sought to level the playing field and narrow the discrepancy gap between underprivileged communities and financially thriving ones. The Affordable Care Act made it possible, through the provision of federal subsidies to low-income families, for those in need to obtain health insurance coverage and it is estimated that roughly 26 million people will purchase insurance through these provisions by 2022.20 Under the ACA, the number of privately insured individuals who will have access to medications and specialists was planned to increase, especially for racial and ethnic minorities.20 Some studies looking at antidepressant usage between 2006 and 2010 among minorities found that disparities existed even despite adequate coverage, disparities that have been slowly reduced over time due to interventions such as one-on-one outreach, patient education, and translation services.20 While insurance expansion itself will not account for disparities in the quality of care provided by primary care physicians versus psychiatrists (ie, misdiagnoses and different treatment modalities in successfully treated depression will continue to exist), the number of patients diagnosed with depression should have an increased and easier access to antidepressant medication as a result of the ACA.20 Today, under the current administration, there is a potential for revision or repeal of the ACA which would have a devastating impact on health care gains for previously uninsured Americans. If this comes to fruition, many millions of Americans will lose their health insurance, including those populations heavily dependent on Medicaid who have benefitted from the Medicaid expansions provided by the passage of the ACA. Just one of countless examples of how this will affect mental health patients can be found in looking at incarcerated populations in the US, many of whom suffer from chronic physical and mental health issues, substance abuse disorders, etc.21 This already-marginalized patient population, of which many are from racial and ethnic minority groups, will essentially be left in the dark were the ACA to be repealed, finding themselves not only without existing gains afforded under the ACA, but also without coverage altogether.21 Repealing the ACA will further widen the already-daunting gap in mental health treatment between majority groups and minorities perhaps to such an extent that bridging the gap may seem futile. Already existing boundaries to treatment for mental health disorders, substance abuse disorders, etc. will be further burgeoned by repeal or revision of the ACA. Another important aspect when examining barriers to treatment for depression in minority communities is the willingness of patients suffering from depression to seek help from outside sources. Some studies that have examined the relationship among race/ethnicity and use of mental health services available have shown that African American men (30%) in particular with depression are more reticent to use outpatient mental health services to seek help than African American women (39%) and non-African American males (51%).3 Further studies have examined the role of the values and belief systems of African American men and their willingness to seek treatment from mental health services available to them. Results from these studies indicated that one potential barrier to seeking therapy was the perception among African Americans that psychotherapy was associated with weakness and diminished pride.3 The notion that seeking treatment for mental health disorders is perceived as a sign of weakness is further burgeoned by the idea that family concerns such as mental illness should be resolved within the family unit or religious organizations, as would be expected to further demonstrate strength within the community.3 For those within the community who do seek help, studies raise concern over self-concealment – withholding sensitive information that may foster feelings of shame in the individual, adding another barrier to successful treatment of depression. Other studies have attempted to ascertain common reasons for quitting services providing treatment for mental health issues, the most common reason being individuals wanting to handle the problem themselves.22 Non-Caucasian individuals at a younger age and lower income level, comorbid conditions, and lower educational attainment are at highest risk of quitting mental health services.22 African Americans and Hispanic patients are more likely to quit receiving treatment for mental health disorders at high rates than other races/ethnicities.22 The reasons for this are manifold and include a general sense of mistrust of service providers by patients, racial incongruity between providers and patients, past mistreatment of patients, and the aforementioned cultural perceptions and social stigmas surrounding mental health and treatment.22

What is the rate of depression in the EU?

Just over 7% of the European Union’s population reports having chronic depression, according to Eurostat figures from 2021.

What country has the least anxiety?

‘I stopped dreaming.’ – The increase in stress and anxiety among young people has many potential reasons. The COVID-19 pandemic, of course, was a major source of distress. “I literally stopped thinking about my future as our school and exams are not being held for a long time,” said a 15-year-old girl from Bangladesh.

  1. I stopped dreaming.” In Kenya, another teenage girl said that COVID-19 caused widespread job losses and shut down schools.
  2. She studies by the light of a paraffin lamp because she cannot afford electricity.
  3. At times I go without food to eat, yet my neighbor has everything,” she said.
  4. Nevertheless, she says her faith in God keeps her optimistic.

It might seem like climate change might also be a source of anxiety for young people, since they will likely live long enough to see its worst effects. However, the team at UNICEF indicated it was surprised to find that in many countries, especially poorer ones, the majority of people didn’t even know what the phrase “climate change” meant.

In Nigeria, for example, 88% of young people could not define or hadn’t heard of the term. Respondents in richer countries had more knowledge of and concern about climate change – but also some generational divides. In the U.S., the second-biggest emitter of carbon in the world, 62% of young people – but only 43% of older people – think the government should take significant action on climate change.

In the U.K, both generations are united in their belief that the government needs to act. Technology also has a major effect on mental health. Younger and older people around the world agreed that the internet is a major source of distress for young people, making them isolated and lonely.

  • Nobody goes out of their homes, people live closed in with their computers, with the internet.
  • Childhood was better in the old times,” a 40-year-old man from Argentina said.
  • Although she’s less than half his age and lives on the other side of the planet, the 15-year-old girl from Bangladesh had largely the same feelings.

“No one leaves the house as everyone is reachable through social media,” she said. “I don’t even go outside of our main gate. But at the time of my parents’ boyhood they played together. Our peers are so self-centered.” At the same time, young people say that technology can also be a source of immense joy and connection.

Which population is most depressed?

Overview – Depressive disorder (also known as depression) is a common mental disorder. It involves a depressed mood or loss of pleasure or interest in activities for long periods of time. Depression is different from regular mood changes and feelings about everyday life.

  • It can affect all aspects of life, including relationships with family, friends and community.
  • It can result from or lead to problems at school and at work.
  • Depression can happen to anyone.
  • People who have lived through abuse, severe losses or other stressful events are more likely to develop depression.

Women are more likely to have depression than men. An estimated 3.8% of the population experience depression, including 5% of adults (4% among men and 6% among women), and 5.7% of adults older than 60 years. Approximately 280 million people in the world have depression (1),

Depression is about 50% more common among women than among men. Worldwide, more than 10% of pregnant women and women who have just given birth experience depression (2), More than 700 000 people die due to suicide every year. Suicide is the fourth leading cause of death in 15–29-year-olds. Although there are known, effective treatments for mental disorders, more than 75% of people in low- and middle-income countries receive no treatment (3),

Barriers to effective care include a lack of investment in mental health care, lack of trained health-care providers and social stigma associated with mental disorders.

Which country has worst mental health?

World Health Organization global study – Prevalence by mental and substance use disorder. The World Health Organization is currently undertaking a global survey of 26 countries in all regions of the world, based on ICD and DSM criteria. The first published figures on the 14 country surveys completed to date, indicate that, of those disorders assessed, anxiety disorders are the most common in all but 1 country (prevalence in the prior 12-month period of 2.4% to 18.2%) and mood disorders next most common in all but 2 countries (12-month prevalence of 0.8% to 9.6%), while substance disorders (0.1–6.4%) and impulse-control disorders (0.0–6.8%) were consistently less prevalent.

The United States, Colombia, the Netherlands and Ukraine tended to have higher prevalence estimates across most classes of disorder, while Nigeria, Shanghai and Italy were consistently low, and prevalence was lower in Asian countries in general. Cases of disorder were rated as mild (prevalence of 1.8–9.7%), moderate (prevalence of 0.5–9.4%) and serious (prevalence of 0.4–7.7%).

The World Health Organization has published worldwide incidence and prevalence estimates of individual disorders. Obsessive-compulsive disorder is two to three times as common in Latin America, Africa, and Europe as in Asia and Oceania. Schizophrenia appears to be most common in Japan, Oceania, and Southeastern Europe and least common in Africa.

Who suffers the most depression?

Overview – Depressive disorder (also known as depression) is a common mental disorder. It involves a depressed mood or loss of pleasure or interest in activities for long periods of time. Depression is different from regular mood changes and feelings about everyday life.

  • It can affect all aspects of life, including relationships with family, friends and community.
  • It can result from or lead to problems at school and at work.
  • Depression can happen to anyone.
  • People who have lived through abuse, severe losses or other stressful events are more likely to develop depression.

Women are more likely to have depression than men. An estimated 3.8% of the population experience depression, including 5% of adults (4% among men and 6% among women), and 5.7% of adults older than 60 years. Approximately 280 million people in the world have depression (1),

  1. Depression is about 50% more common among women than among men.
  2. Worldwide, more than 10% of pregnant women and women who have just given birth experience depression (2),
  3. More than 700 000 people die due to suicide every year.
  4. Suicide is the fourth leading cause of death in 15–29-year-olds.
  5. Although there are known, effective treatments for mental disorders, more than 75% of people in low- and middle-income countries receive no treatment (3),

Barriers to effective care include a lack of investment in mental health care, lack of trained health-care providers and social stigma associated with mental disorders.

What country has the highest anxiety rate?

Characteristic Men Women
United States 30.7 45.2
China 15.9 28.6
Brazil 14.6 28
India 13.6 18.5