Studies on Chinese suicide did not really begin until about 30 years ago, when the Chinese government opened its door to the West for economic development. Like almost all other disciplines, suicidology in the past three decades has basically followed a pattern developed in the West in terms of perspectives and methodology. Wu Fei in his Suicide and Justice has broken the traditional pattern in studying the risk factors of suicide in China. This new work has brought some fresh air to the study of suicide for both Chinese and Western researchers.
Western suicidology has been dominated by psychiatric camp that consists overwhelmingly of mental health and psychology researchers due to the fact that the majority (over 90%) of the Western suicides have been diagnosed with mental disorders including alcohol and substance abuse. On the other hand, Emile Durkheim's model of social facts is still popular among social scientists including sociologists. In China, the assessment that only about half of the suicides were mentally ill provides much room for possible social risk factors to be studied. However, Wu Fei, in his study of Chinese suicides, takes neither model. Instead, he believes, also supported by his qualitative data, that the family, in between the individual and society, is the place to study Chinese suicide.
By analysing 30 suicide cases, Wu Fei studies the dynamics of suicide in terms of family politics and local psychology and finds that suicide is committed when a power balance is broken in power games within the family. Unlike public injustice, domestic injustice is not only closely related to but also often strengthened by emotional interdependence. He argues that suicide and depression are different responses to the same situation of domestic injustice. Wu Fei seemingly supports the causal relations between depression and suicide. His etiological assumption is one step up: family injustice happens before depression and mental illness and then suicide comes next. This anthropological analysis of the Chinese rural family life suicides and its effects on Chinese rural suicides not only fills a gap in our knowledge but also opens a new window to view the phenomenon of Chinese rural suicide.
However, depression or any other mental disease could be a consequence of certain negative life events or social facts. Although mental disorder and suicide are highly correlated, and the former sometimes precedes the latter in time, Emile Durkheim disqualifies its causal relationship. Mental disorder and suicide could be co-morbidity, like body fever and headache happening the same time. Something else like flu or inflammation causes both symptoms. Likewise, some negative social or familial events may have caused both depression and suicidal behaviour. In Wu Fei's model, the social fact is replaced by familial events such as the family injustice.
Generally speaking, the author's argument is convincing. Family injustice can be social, and the response to the social fact can be psychological, and this analytical level is inclusive to both. To me, however, the strain theory of suicide could be an excellent explanation of what happens between the family injustice and suicidal behaviour. The strain theory of suicide, conceptualized and developed in previous studies with both US and Chinese data in the past few years, is a comprehensive theory explaining the socio-psychological mechanism prior to suicidal behaviour (see Zhang and Lester, 2008, “Psychological tensions found in suicide notes: A test for the strain theory of suicide.” Archives of Suicide Research 12:67–73). Strain, resulting from conflicting and competing pressures in an individual's life, is hypothesized to precede suicide. The strain theory of suicide proposes four sources of strain leading to suicide: value strain from differential values; aspiration strain from the discrepancy between aspiration and reality; deprivation strain from the relative deprivation including poverty; and coping strain from deficient coping skills in the face of a crisis. This diagram is built on previous notions of anomie and strain (Durkheim 1951 [1897]), although Merton's (1957) strain theory of deviance and crime and Agnew's (1992) General Strain Theory have not included suicide as a target for explanation. The psychological frustration, sadness, and even anger inflicted from the unjust treatment in the family may cause any type of strain as above listed.
In summary, Suicide and Injustice: A Chinese Perspective is one of the few works that depicts the picture of Chinese rural suicides with a focus on the function of the Chinese family. This is a unique work on the Chinese rural family. Readers will learn about the Chinese family structure and Chinese rural life through the stories of the 30 suicide cases. I also admire Wu Fei's enthusiasm and workmanship in his field research in the countryside of China. His anthropological methodology illustrated in the volume is an excellent example for all researchers (not only those who study suicide) who plan to do any fieldwork in rural China. This book is an academic contribution that should be read by social scientists including anthropologists, psychologists, and sociologists, as well as students of China studies.
