By Dr. Kevin Lau
News reports of youth suicide appear with disturbing regularity. Public grief follows, but often fades until the next tragedy occurs. This cycle must end. Youth suicide is not an isolated family matter or an unavoidable consequence of growing up; it is a public-health challenge requiring sustained attention, early intervention and accountable policy.
The global evidence is sobering. The World Health Organization estimates that approximately 727,000 people died by suicide in 2021, and suicide was the third leading cause of death among people aged 15 to 29. The WHO also stresses that suicide is preventable and recommends a comprehensive approach combining early identification, timely care, responsible media reporting, the development of adolescents' social and emotional skills, and restrictions on access to lethal means.
Hong Kong's experience demands equal urgency. The Hong Kong Jockey Club Centre for Suicide Research and Prevention at the University of Hong Kong estimated that the territory's overall suicide rate rose from 13.5 per 100,000 in 2023 to 14.1 in 2024. The Centre also reported that the suicide rate among people aged 15 to 24 reached 11.7 per 100,000 in 2024, a level described in the attached material as the second highest in the past decade. These figures are not merely statistics: they represent young people whose families, schools and communities have been left to bear an irreversible loss.
School data reinforce the seriousness of the situation. According to figures from the Education Bureau, suspected fatal student-suicide cases reported by primary and secondary schools numbered 25 in 2022, 32 in 2023 and 28 in 2024. The 2023 figure was the highest in at least a decade, while the number remained unacceptably high the following year. A Legislative Council research document further noted that the number of student deaths associated with suicide had almost tripled over the preceding decade.
The first task is therefore to reject the fatalistic belief that suicide cannot be prevented. Prevention does not mean that every crisis can be predicted with certainty. It means that risk can often be recognized, that access to help can be improved, and that a person in acute distress can be kept safe until the crisis passes. A young person considering suicide may communicate a wish to die, express hopelessness or a feeling of being trapped, withdraw from friends and family, experience major changes in sleep or mood, lose interest in school and everyday activities, give away valued possessions, or seek access to medication or other lethal means. Such signs do not prove that a person will attempt suicide, but they should never be dismissed as attention-seeking or ordinary adolescent moodiness.
At the same time, warning signs are not always obvious. Some young people conceal their distress because they fear blame, punishment or stigma. Others may not have the language to explain what they are experiencing. This is why prevention cannot depend solely on a student voluntarily approaching a counsellor or waiting for a crisis to become visible. Parents, teachers and friends are often the people best placed to notice a sudden change in behavior. Their responsibility is not to diagnose a mental illness, but to listen without judgement, ask directly whether the young person is thinking about self-harm or suicide, stay with the person when immediate danger is suspected, and connect them promptly with professional support.
This "gatekeeper" role should become a central part of prevention policy. Research has examined gatekeeper training as a way of equipping people in a young person's daily environment with the knowledge, confidence and practical skills to identify risk and provide an appropriate response. However, training must not be treated as a symbolic one-off seminar. It should be repeated, evaluated and supported by clear referral pathways. A teacher who identifies a student at risk must know whom to contact, what information can be shared lawfully and how urgent cases will be handled. A parent who asks for help should not be left to navigate an opaque system alone.
Hong Kong has taken an important step by implementing the Three-tier School-based Emergency Mechanism in all secondary schools since December 2023. The mechanism brings together school multidisciplinary teams, an off-campus support network coordinated by the Social Welfare Department and medical services, with the aim of identifying students at higher suicidal risk and arranging timely assistance. The Education Bureau states that students at high risk may be referred to psychiatric specialist outpatient services, where urgent cases can receive priority.
The next question is whether this emergency mechanism can become a durable safety net rather than a temporary response to a rise in cases. The Government should make the system permanent, strengthen its coverage and publish meaningful outcome indicators. Schools need adequate counselling and social-work manpower, not merely additional procedural responsibilities. Referral is only meaningful when the student can obtain timely assessment, follow-up and treatment. Families should also receive clear information about available services, including what to do outside school hours and how to respond when a young person refuses help but appears to be in immediate danger.
Prevention must extend beyond the school gate. The Government should incorporate suicide-prevention and gatekeeper skills into teachers' continuing professional development, while providing accessible programmes for parents and peer supporters. Schools should promote emotional literacy and help-seeking without labelling every struggling student as mentally ill. Youth services, primary healthcare, social workers and psychiatric services should share responsibility through coordinated case management, so that young people do not disappear between institutions.
Public communication matters as well. The WHO recommends responsible reporting because sensationalized coverage, excessive detail and speculation can increase the risk of imitation, while careful reporting can encourage help-seeking and explain where support is available. Media organizations should therefore avoid romanticizing suicide, publishing unnecessary method details or framing a death as the result of a single event. Responsible journalism does not conceal the problem; it reports it in a way that protects the vulnerable and serves the public interest.
A young person rarely moves from ordinary distress to suicidal crisis in a single moment. Equally, prevention may begin with something small: a parent noticing that a child has stopped sleeping, a teacher asking why a student has become unusually withdrawn, or a friend taking seriously the words "I do not want to go on." No single person can prevent every tragedy, but a society can reduce risk when its families, schools, health services and media organizations act as one connected system. The policy imperative is clear: recognize the warning signs, respond early and ensure that every young person who reaches for help finds a real path to safety.
The author is the Founding Convenor of the Hong Kong Global Youth Professional Advocacy Action, a specialist in radiology, Master of Public Administration, Master of Public Health of the University of Hong Kong, and an adviser of the Our Hong Kong Foundation.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Kevin Lau:
Opinion | China's green resolve is its strongest shield when the oil routes close
Opinion | Knowledge is hard currency: Academic strength will underwrite HK's long-term prosperity
Opinion | Medical Council reform: Balancing professional autonomy and public interest
Comment