A national review examining student suicides within higher education has sparked renewed calls for action from universities across the United Kingdom. The review went case-by-case into the details of 169 cases of suicide and serious self-harm. It only came to wider attention after the deeply tragic suicide of University of Bristol student Natasha Abrahart in 2018. Her parents, Bob and Maggie Abrahart, have described the review’s findings as “superficial.” They’re calling on educational institutions to take bolder steps to ensure that they are truly safeguarding student wellbeing.
Only seventy-three universities posted the review for the 2023-24 academic year. That’s a big deal. This is the first time any UK government has made formal recommendations to university leaders on how they can prevent suicide among students. This move is particularly timely, as close to a quarter of the documented occurrences took place in university-owned housing. The Abraharts are raising a huge and important issue about families being shut out of SI reviews. At the same time, they are demanding more transparency and accountability from colleges and universities.
And that is exactly what needs to happen, according to Prof Sir Steve West, vice-chancellor of the University of the West of England. Resilience against malign actors He encouraged universities to take all possible steps to fully implement the review’s recommendations. As for the recommendations themselves, he said, even though they’re a step in the right direction, their implementation is what’s really difficult to do.
“That’s easy to say [but] very difficult to do because there are all sorts of issues hitting universities at the moment which often compete, and we have to make choices.” – Prof Sir Steve West
Maggie Abrahart pointed out an important underlying accountability question about what universities owe their students. She recommended that institutions should be subject to a legal duty of care. This duty would put them under an obligation to act with ordinary prudence and care to safely guard students from foreseeable harms. This proposal comes amidst an increasing national outcry for improved mental health support and campus safety measures in our educational spaces.
In reaction to the president’s review, universities are jumping at the opportunity to act. They’ve put in place comprehensive safety inspections at university residences and sites of prior suicides. They call on federal authorities to do more to deter individuals from placing tributes at these sites of tragedy. This prevents them from getting publicity as possible suicide locations.
Bob Abrahart lambasted the government’s delivery expectations as unenforceable and vague. He added that the federal government continues to hold universities accountable. This expectation has little real teeth.
“For ministers to say ‘we expect them to do their duty, to do things properly’ is just pie in the sky.” – Bob Abrahart
The review underscored the central problem. It criticized the majority of those reports for placing the onus on students to pursue further assistance rather than providing follow-up, proactive outreach support. This leads to critical questions about whether universities are effectively addressing mental health concerns. Most importantly, are their current systems really serving students well?
Jacqui Smith, involved in overseeing the review’s implementation, stated that resources would continue to be allocated towards enhancing student support services. She emphasized that universities have a unique and urgent duty to protect their students. With that in mind, she put a point on the need to address these pressing issues as priorities.
“We do think that universities have a general duty of care to their students.” – Jacqui Smith
Despite some positive feedback from students who have utilized mental health services, such as Vika Zak and Sam Lloyd, concerns remain about accessibility and awareness of available resources. Orchestrating a new kind of outreach TCC’s support has helped higher education institutions transition to receiving in-person help by default when students arrive on campus.
“They emailed me, and I’m pretty sure they sent me a letter, to let me know there are services that I could take advantage of if I needed it. It’s really nice to know that.” – Vika Zak
“If you really need it, it’s very easy to reach out.” – Sam Lloyd
Amidst that criticism of the review was a strong call to center student well-being. Especially in today’s climate, where heightened pressures exacerbate risks for students, trauma-informed practices are more important than ever. Public Health England defines this as “a situation in which more suicides than expected occur in terms of time, place, or both,” underscoring the urgent need for action.
