The Importance of Distinguishing Suicidal Behaviors

This is the subject of a recent discussion I had with a colleague regarding the differences between a suicide attempt and a suicide gesture. Though these terms are sometimes used interchangeably in casual conversation or even in clinical documentation, they carry fundamentally different meanings—both in terms of patient risk and in how we, as clinicians, should respond.

Our conversation emerged from a case involving a patient with borderline personality disorder who presented to the emergency department after ingesting a small quantity of over-the-counter medication. The intent was unclear. Was this a serious attempt to end her life? Or was it a gesture—an act of desperation without the intention to die, but rather to communicate emotional distress?

The question is not academic. Our interpretation of the event determines our risk formulation, our documentation, our treatment planning, and even how we communicate with the patient and their support system. Yet, it is precisely in these gray areas that clinicians often struggle, and where outdated or stigmatizing language can do real harm.

Defining the Terms: Clinical and Functional Differences

suicide attempt refers to an act of self-harm with at least some intent to die. The degree of lethality may vary, but what distinguishes an attempt is that the individual believed the act could result in death and engaged in it with that goal in mind—even if ambivalence was present. The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) define this with some specificity: any potentially self-injurious behavior with non-zerointent to die, regardless of outcome.

In contrast, a suicidal gesture is a behavior that mimics suicidal behavior or appears life-threatening but is typically not intended to be fatal. The function is often communicative or affect-regulating rather than aimed at death. Classic examples include superficial wrist-cutting, ingesting a sub-lethal dose of medication, or tying a noose but not tightening it. These acts often occur in interpersonal contexts and can be seen as efforts to signal pain, elicit help, or assert control in the face of perceived abandonment.

Why the Distinction Matters

It might be tempting to dismiss suicidal gestures as “attention-seeking” or “manipulative,” but this framing is both clinically dangerous and ethically fraught. Individuals who engage in gestures often experience intense psychological suffering, and repeated gestures are a well-established risk factor for future suicide attempts and completed suicide.

From a risk assessment standpoint, gestures should be taken seriously, especially when they become part of a pattern. While the intent to die may not be present in a given gesture, intent can shift quickly, particularly in individuals with mood disorders, personality pathology, or under the influence of substances.

From a treatment perspective, understanding the function of the behavior—whether it is to relieve affective tension, to communicate distress, or to punish oneself—is crucial to tailoring interventions. For instance, dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) explicitly targets self-harm and suicidal gestures as part of its hierarchy of treatment priorities, recognizing the urgency and potential danger of these behaviors even when lethality is low.

Conclusion: Clarify, Don’t Categorize

Ultimately, the conversation with my colleague reminded me that the real clinical challenge is not to label a behavior as a suicide attempt or a gesture, but to understand its meaning in the life of the patient. Both require empathy, structure, and a willingness to engage with complexity. Whether a patient wants to die or wants their suffering to be seen and acknowledged, both deserve serious clinical attention.

By sharpening our definitions and approaching these behaviors with nuance, we can better serve patients in crisis and avoid the pitfalls of assumptions—especially in emotionally charged clinical environments like emergency rooms, inpatient units, or high-acuity outpatient settings.

EMA Warns of Suicidal Ideation from Finasteride

In a significant update to its safety guidance, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has officially recognized suicidal ideation as a potential side effect of finasteride. The EMA is urging healthcare professionals to advise patients to stop treatment and seek medical help if they experience depressed mood, depression, or suicidal thoughts while taking the drug.

This decision follows a growing number of reports linking finasteride, particularly in younger men using it for androgenic alopecia (male pattern baldness), to neuropsychiatric side effects. While previous warnings have addressed sexual dysfunction, this marks a critical shift in regulatory focus to mental health.

💊 What Is Finasteride?

Finasteride is a 5α-reductase inhibitor used to treat:

  • Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in a 5 mg daily dose (Proscar)
  • Male pattern baldness (androgenic alopecia) in a 1 mg daily dose (Propecia)

It works by inhibiting the conversion of testosterone to dihydrotestosterone (DHT)—a potent androgen implicated in hair loss and prostate growth.

⚠️ The EMA’s Updated Warning

The EMA’s Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) reviewed post-marketing surveillance data and published literature and concluded that:

“There is sufficient evidence to support a causal relationship between finasteride and the risk of suicidal ideation.”

Key recommendations:

  • Suicidal ideation will be added to the drug’s product information as a potential adverse effect.
  • Healthcare professionals should proactively inform patients about this risk.
  • Patients should be advised to discontinue treatment immediately and seek medical advice if they experience changes in mood or mental health.

🧠 Possible Mechanisms Behind Finasteride’s Psychiatric Effects

The exact mechanisms linking finasteride to depression and suicidality remain unclear, but several biological hypotheseshave been proposed:

1. Neurosteroid Depletion

Finasteride inhibits 5α-reductase, which not only converts testosterone to DHT but also helps produce neurosteroids like allopregnanolone and tetrahydrodeoxycorticosterone (THDOC).

  • These neurosteroids have potent GABAergic activity, contributing to anxiolytic and antidepressant effects.
  • Inhibition leads to decreased GABA-A receptor modulation, potentially increasing anxiety, depression, and suicidal thoughts.

2. Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) Axis Dysregulation

Altered steroid metabolism may dysregulate the HPA axis, increasing cortisol levels, a well-known biomarker of depression and suicidal behavior.

3. Persistent Epigenetic Changes

Some animal and human data suggest that finasteride may induce long-lasting changes in gene expression related to stress response and mood regulation, even after discontinuation—supporting the idea of post-finasteride syndrome (PFS).

4. Neuroinflammation

Reduced neurosteroids may increase neuroinflammatory signaling, a growing area of interest in the neurobiology of depression and suicidality.

🧾 Final Thoughts

The EMA’s announcement is a sobering reminder that drugs affecting hormonal pathways can have wide-reaching systemic effects, including on the brain. With better awareness, screening, and patient education, we can minimize harm and support individuals who may be at risk.

Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑