Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Thursday March 30 2017, @02:03PM   Printer-friendly

Rural America is facing an existential crisis. As cities continue to grow and prosper, small towns are shrinking. That fundamental divide played itself out in the recent presidential election.

[...] The trend is clear: Rural America is literally fading away. It shouldn't come as a surprise, therefore, that the opioid overdose epidemic has hit rural states, like Kentucky and West Virginia, especially hard. And the latest research from the CDC also shouldn't come as a surprise: Suicides in rural America (labeled as non-core) have increased over 40% in 16 years.

From 1999 to 2015, suicide rates increased everywhere in America. On average, across the U.S., suicides increased from 12.2 per 100,000 to 15.7 per 100,0001, an increase of just under 30%. However, in rural America, the suicide rate surged over 40%2, from just over 15 per 100,000 to roughly 22 per 100,000. Similarly, the suicide rate in micropolitan areas (defined as having a population between 10,000-49,999) went from 14 per 100,000 to 19 per 100,000, an increase of around 35%.

On the flip side, major cities saw much smaller increases in suicide rates, on the order of 10%. The graph depicts a clear pattern: Suicide rates are highest in the most rural parts of the country, and they slowly decrease as urbanization increases. As of 2015, the suicide rate in rural areas (22 per 100,000) is about 40% higher than in the nation as a whole (15.7 per 100,000) and 83% higher than in large cities (12 per 100,000).

-- submitted from IRC


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 30 2017, @07:09PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 30 2017, @07:09PM (#486683)

    Correct, societal problems indeed!

    Welp, the answer is lessen wealth inequality and provide social programs so that taking your kid to the doctor doesn't become a "will I make rent this month" type of question. Make it so that even the poorest family can survive on a single FT job. Take away people's security and it has a ton of negative consequences. No time for kids and increased psychological stress, bad for the marriage and bad for the required patience and understanding when trying to raise children. Required mobility for decent jobs also means that people must leave their social circle so that they have no familial support available.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 30 2017, @07:53PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 30 2017, @07:53PM (#486700)

    Damn straight! Anybody who offers, or takes, ANY job of ANY type for ANY reason that doesn't pay a full living wage for the worker's whole family? GO TO JAIL!

    Need someone to sweep in front of your store for fifteen minutes every morning? Full wage and bennies or GO TO JAIL!

    Want someone to clear out a drainage ditch? Full wage and bennies or GO TO JAIL!

    That'll fix that there economy and get us to full employment right quick, yes sir...

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 30 2017, @10:21PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 30 2017, @10:21PM (#486781)

      Yup, the world is black and white, you've got it, that is exactly what I meant.

      Fix yer brain doodads, they seem to be broken.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by slinches on Thursday March 30 2017, @07:55PM

    by slinches (5049) on Thursday March 30 2017, @07:55PM (#486703)

    I'm glad we can agree on the type of problem we're facing, but I don't think your proposed solutions will be effective since they don't directly affect the core issues. Wealth inequality isn't a significant driver in whether parents care about their kids and improved health care cost/accessibility will be at best a secondary effect. I agree that a family should be able to be supported comfortably on a single income, but I'd rather approach that from the cost side rather than increasing the minimum wage, which makes it harder for young adults to transition into the workforce. Instead, if we stopped encouraging everyone to go into crippling debt and live within their means, more households would be financially healthy. But the biggest thing is that we need to promote strong core families and support structures directly. I think this is one area where we've lost in rejecting traditional gender roles. Now the expectation is that there are two breadwinners and no caretakers. Instead of splitting the caretaker responsibilities, we've eschewed them entirely and now we're seeing the consequences. Housewife (and househusband) should be a highly respected role in our society and we need to change our attitudes to make that happen. As an additional encouragement, there could be a shift in the tax incentives for families that rewards the full time caretaker role more and dual incomes less.