Using material from item C and elsewhere assess the strengths and limitations of using qualitative documents as a means for investigating suicide.

Those who commit suicide may often leave a suicide note. The suicide note is a type of qualitative document. On the qualitative document it may show or explain the reason why they are committing suicide or what has happened to them. This is the closest researchers will get to receiving information from the actor as they will no longer be with us by the time the suicide note is found.

However, the suicide note may be concealed by relatives or friends. In reference to item C, “The loss of someone through suicide often results in strong responses and emotions.” “Many of the friends and relatives will be in a state of shock and grief.” Due to the grief they are now experiencing once finding the suicide note they may destroy it to hide the meaning of their death, or hold onto it before higher authorities such as police of forensics get hold of it as they may find it too personal to expose the actor.

Qualitative data such as documents may be hard for a researcher to gain access to. Types of qualitative data such as their medical notes would be confidential, therefore not for a researcher to look at. The medical notes may play a key part in their research for suicide to see whether there were any mental health problems or illnesses which may have made the actor commit suicide. In reference to item C, “Not all people who die by suicide have mental health problems”. Knowing whether they did or did not would help the researcher to make conclusions on reasoning as to why they committed. Only doctors and then later the coroner will have access to these notes, so an independent researcher may not have this advantage to work around them.

When the coroner has made their report on the actor it should hold validity. Coroners are specialist in what they do, therefore have the ability to identify or predict the real reason why an individual committed suicide. The coroner will be more educated to how to classify a particular death as suicide and how they may have committed suicide. A researcher may not be able to get close to the actor to be able to attempt to classify, all they can work on is their own reasoning. Because a coroners court has to investigate such deaths, there is a documentary trail researchers can follow. This would help the researcher to see how coroners determine whether a death is a suicide than about the reasons behind a death. Researchers will be able to study this in itself.

The categories made of types of suicide may help a researcher when forming their research. Durkheim argues that suicide results from either too much or too little integration or regulation. This made Durkheim give a fourfold typology of suicide, egoistic, altruistic, anomic and fatalistic. Egoistic was where an individual held too little integration whereas altruistic held too much integration. Anomic was too little regulation and fatalistic was too much regulation.
However, Douglas criticised Durkheim for his use of suicide statistics and that he ignored the meaning by the actor. Durkheim assumed that suicide had a fixed or alternative meaning, which is not likely the case.

A researcher should not use the Medias interpretations of individual’s suicides at face value. The media tend to over exaggerate, which is a theme in crime of distortion. In reference to item C , “ the media interest can be very stressful for bereaved relatives and friends”. If the death is reported in an insensitive or inaccurate manner it can cause further distress to family, making them conceal to further questioned research. Suicide is too much of a sensitive topic to publicise without showing any respect for the actor or their family and friends. Researchers should avoid considering the media in their research as it will be invalid.