Highest rates of suicide occur in lowest socioeconomic areas
From 2010 to 2021, age-standardised suicide rates were highest for those who lived in the lowest socioeconomic areas (most disadvantaged areas), and generally decreased as the level of disadvantage lessened.
In 2021, the overall suicide rate for people living in the lowest socioeconomic (most disadvantaged) areas (18.4 deaths per 100,000 population; Quintile 1) was more than twice that of those living in the highest socioeconomic (least disadvantaged) areas (8.1 deaths per 100,000 population; Quintile 5).
As for rates, the number of deaths by suicide for the 5 socioeconomic areas generally declined as socioeconomic disadvantage decreased.
Suicide rates increased over time in lowest socioeconomic areas
Age-standardised suicide rates increased for those living in the lowest socioeconomic areas (Quintile 1) from 13.0 deaths per 100,000 population in 2010 to a peak of 19.4 in 2017, before falling gradually to 18.4 deaths per 100,000 population in 2021. In contrast, little change was observed for those living in the the 2 highest socioeconomic areas (Quintiles 4 and 5).
Henley and Harrison (2019) found that over the period 2009–10 to 2015–16, suicide rates increased significantly for those living in the lowest socioeconomic areas (most disadvantaged) by an average 3.5% per year while little change was observed for those in the highest (least disadvantaged) socioeconomic areas (0.2% change per year).
Methods of suicide vary by socioeconomic area
Understanding the methods used for suicide can play an important role in suicide prevention. These data are provided to inform discussion around restriction of access to means as a policy intervention for the prevention of suicide.
Please consider your need to read the following information. If this material raises concerns for you or if you need immediate assistance, please contact a crisis support service, available free of charge, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Please consider the Mindframe guidelines if reporting on these statistics.
The classification system used to code causes of deaths data, ICD-10, uses the term ‘mechanism’ to refer to the external cause of death. Throughout Suicide & self-harm monitoring ‘mechanism’ has been used in data visualisations, while the term ‘method’ has been used in the accompanying text.
Throughout 2010 to 2021, age-standardised suicide rates generally decreased with decreasing socioeconomic disadvantage, for hanging (ICD-10 X70) and firearms (ICD-10 X72–X75). However, there was little difference in suicide rates between socioeconomic areas for poisoning excluding gas (ICD-10 X60–X66, X68–X69), poisoning by gas (ICD-10 X67) or other methods (ICD-10 X71, X76–X84, Y87.0).
In 2021, the rate of suicide by hanging for those living in the lowest socioeconomic areas (Quintile 1) was 2.7 times higher than that of those living in the highest socioeconomic areas (Quintile 5) (12.5 vs 4.7 deaths per 100,000 population). For firearms, poisoning by gas, exposure to poisonous substances excluding gas and other methods of suicide there was little variation between the highest and lowest socioeconomic areas in 2021.
The proportion of deaths by suicide by either exposure to poisonous substances excluding gas or other methods tended to increase with decreasing socioeconomic disadvantage while the proportion of deaths by hanging tended to decrease.
Reference
AIHW: Henley G & Harrison JE 2019. Injury mortality and socioeconomic influence in Australia, 2015–16. Injury research and statistics series no. 128. Cat. no. INJCAT 208. Canberra: AIHW.