Research studies have shown that farmers in developed countries such as the United States face high levels of stress due to unattainable investments. However, their agriculture practices have been efficient and economically viable. Nonetheless, the declining prices of farm products, supermarkets’ dominance, climate changes, policies of the World Trade Organisation, corporate business practices, and excessive household debts have created unbearable stress for the farmers. For instance, between 2002 and 2016, the average income of U.S. farmers declined by 50 percent. This business environment has forced most farmers in the United States to commit suicide. According to Smith, prevalence in suicide rates and deadly work habits were consistent with twenty kinds of occupations such as farming (2). This paper on the farm crisis will provide insight on how to prevent farmers from suicide in the USA.
The historical antecedents inducing farmers to commit suicide have been shown to reduce the affordability of ownership of agricultural businesses. For instance, farmers in the United States expanded their farming each year during the early independence years until the beginning of the 20th century. Since then, farmers have been subdividing their agricultural lands each day. This business practice has reduced their daily earnings and profit margins. The unbalanced farmer/population ratio has induced these farmers to engage in excess farming activities. For instance, a large portion of a farmer's four-acre piece can have tea, sugar, and vegetables whereas a one-acre farm may have bananas, maize, and beans. Nevertheless, the government should offer attractive training packages to the farmers to improve the mechanisms and methods of agriculture. If low prices, inclement weather, and rising costs become part of familiar shortcomings such as mechanical breakages and poor-ranging strategies, the farmers will see the significances of availing all products required by the agriculture market. According to research studies conducted across the globe, 65 percent of the total population of which 53 percent are of working age against 37 percent in 2007 (Mishar and Neidell para. 4) lives in rural regions. Besides, the historical inequalities and underdevelopment emphasized the importance of agriculture in rural economic activities. Mishar and Neidell say that these farmers can compare their record of present and past performances, contracts, and yields to be able to identify the gigantic marketing systems taking away the poor people as their bonus (para. 7). Excessive household debts, adverse climatic conditions, use of unprofitable farming methods and practices, insufficient financial earnings, and excessive household debts and have instigated the farmers in the developed countries to take part in more simulations devoid of making profits or from imaginary activities. Combat simulations, and most farmers have continuous stress from their accumulated debts that may cause mental problems. Farmers in the United States should compete in the uncontrollable conditions (Ramsøy et al. para. 9) rather in conditions exposing them to outstanding overproduction. For instance, the government and the rural-based farmers can develop business plans aimed at conducting and improving their performance as reported or as a source of reference in an economic context. From such improvements, the developed countries can afford experts in machine operations and related enterprises. If farmers can take loans from financial institutions under securable and flexible guidelines, excess labour already in the farmer’s business contributed by the counterparts ready to be sold to city residents can be conducted within the agriculture markets. Producing under favorable production methods rather than overproduction under acceptable conditions are vital for ensuring the success of the enterprises. Furthermore, farmers experiencing minimal sales can engage in petty businesses such as selling agricultural implements and seeds in the market.
People are different in many ways because of the social, economic, medical, climatic or racial statuses. Accordingly, specific individuals are capable of handling situations differently, extricating themselves from chaotic situations, and working harder than others (Feng and Cheng para. 4). Many studies fail to recognize and conceptualise such differences among people. For instance, most research studies assume various stakeholders such as government, nongovernmental organizations, and psychiatrists have a duty of solving social problems affecting people's lives without acknowledging farmers who can easily extricate themselves from the chaotic business environment because they can better handle their issues from the developed implications. Society should not link farming with risky businesses such killing chicken, goats, and cow slaughtering. The government should avoid approaches related to unaffordable assistance supports because they have unattainable structures in the agricultural business context. Farmers avoiding consultations services due to toll fee charges despite the likelihood of them having problems and engaging in killing simulations, which may be close from the original simulation, when assistance support end while there is potential dropping market.
Farmers with experiences on past government structures’ intentions should consider buying planting, ploughing, and growing bulletins formulated during early spring that are concerned with operations rather than the outcome. From the advancing social and economic technologies, farmers must abandon farming bulletins due to its unwieldy and burdensome nature as contained in the current calendar. Mistoci et at. Reports that farmers waiting for social systems’ assistance supports avoid considerations of their abilities such as disposal income, family successes and self-sufficiency, and future engagements that may render the assistance support securable or attracatble (para. 14). Over the past century, agricultural activities became sensitive to practices influenced by governments’ intentions. For instance, farmers were using indigenous farming tools, equipment, and practices before colonial periods. Once the market prices increased and shopping were ready reserve with provisions, farmers would realize additional income due to stable prices until they decided to exterminate the marketing chain middlemen. Wholesalers, on the other hand do not want to forego advantages they used to enjoy from connecting to farmers. In the current search for farmers who can kill themselves first, the aristocratic vendors used selected marketing orders. Contracting manufacturers and monopolistic organizations inducing vendors either through misleading necessary information or through their hidden people who buy commodities from a vendor expect more from their farmers. This implies that when a commodity buyer purchases tomatoes at a shop, he expect seeds, manure, and production without the adoption of modern methodologies, practices and ploughing bulletins. Dowsin supports the idea by noting that he expects but does not claim (para. 20) their vendors are going to claim from the commodity buyer that his tomatoes needs to undergo grading and ripening during the transportation else seeds and planting of other commodities such onions, beans and others can be expected from similar agriculture markets. These misleading vendor related choices have ended up exposing farmers to different business conditions such as unattainability and making killing simulations in search of useful food for commodities markets expectations. They forced the American government to take part in defending and compensating the risks experienced by the farmers after engaging in contract transmissions and arrangements because the ordinary consumer cannot see all conditions if participate in a direct consumer-farm trade.
Currently, farmers are being provided with airtime not only intended for ensuring digital literacy empowerment is insured but also aimed at creating a network of information sources. In the same airtime plans, farmers may realize additional benefits such as renewable sources of energy sustainability, access to fertility and climatic changes or associated safety and empowerment during prejudice. Issuing booklets or information kits containing sorts of information such psychiatric analysts and may empower and inspire them that they are more valuable and important to the society can reduce deadly mental habits or routines that conclude farmers are less important in the society and the continued support by most tireless communities. Feng and Cheng says that another alternative the farmers can consider is growing heirloom seeds available in family could guarantee farmers marketing and house consumptions seeds source unlike impossible uncontrollable scenarios available in the agriculture market chain pools (para. 18). Under these information packets, the American rural populations may find it off because they do not apply to them but contrary they can be certified. During the previous years, the farmers and their fellow rural residents previously used seeds bought from the market just after transplanting in the greenhouse or early springs. They failed to understand why the non-expert farmers let the commercial seeds come into farming institutions while they were aware all types of foods they should select for the improvement of its maturity and productivity. These studies have shown that the loss of agricultural farming land, overproduction strategies, unpaid wages by agriculture workers, structural and attitudinal motivations in the family disputes, exposure to different types of risks, and isolation associated with irritable mental problems are common stock ideas for farmers to sign through and engage in unnecessary commitments such making heirloom consumer services characteristics choices.
References
Allareddy, V., Allareddy, V., & Nalliah, R. P. (2014). Factors that contribute to rural suicides in the United States. JAMA Internal Medicine, 174(2), 283-291. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.12889
Barger, S. D., & Messman-Moore, T. L. (2018). Family of origin maltreatment and suicide attempts among U.S. Farm-Residing Wives. Annals of Epidemiology, 28(10), 687-692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.07.005
Costanza, A. et al. (2021). Untangling the concept of farm safety: A review of current practices and future prospects. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 64(12), 1122-1156. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23260
Galli, A., Bianucci, C. R., & Polymeropoulos, M. H. (2021). Making farming health and safety research more accessible: The agriSafety platform. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 10(2), 335. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10020335
Hagerman, B. J. (2020). Till Death Do Us Part: A Comparative Analysis of Suicide and Homicide among Farmers. Agriculture, Human & Social Science, 1(3), 3-5.
Karlin, B. E. (2021). Suicide risk among agricultural workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Archives of Suicide Research, 25(1), 72. https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2020.1716635
McNiel, P., Rammohan, V., & Stallones, L. (1996). Suicide mortality rates in the United States by occupation and industry: an analysis of data from the National Occupational Mortality Surveillance System. Journal of agricultural safety and health, 2(6), 271-277.
Reeves, A., & Egan, M. (2013). Does population health management target rural farm conditions? A review of farm-level factors that influence health and safety. Journal of Rural Health, 29(S1), S21-S33. https://doi.org/10.1111/jrh.12141
Sanderson, J., Andrade, M. A., & Albert, S. M. (2021). New farmer distress in the United States: A systematic review of risk factors associated with mental health in farmers. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 677. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.635758
Shannon, G. et al. (2019). Suicide among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Research, 274, 15-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2018.12.134
Stevens, M. et al. (2020). Occupational disparities in suicide and impact of the Great Recession in the United States. Fussaro, 14(12), 12-26.
Tsai, A. C. (2020). Manchester Farm_worker suicide—a case of Katarina. The Lancet Psychiatry, 7(1), 17-19