If there is one realm which a sportswriter doesn’t anticipate embarking upon, it is that of human psychology – more specifically, the psychology of suicide.  After all, the conventional mental image of the misguided, oft-desolate and depressed teen as the stereotype of the very essence of suicidal hardly fits the outré, unduly popular sports superstar.  At the root of this lies the rationale behind the massive misconception, or lack-thereof, that has stemmed from the ever- dramatizing macrocosm that is Terrell Owens.

And I must preface this article by admitting that, prior to this incident, I had little formal knowledge of suicide, or the reasoning behind it.  But the exiguity of the sports-media is what led to this controversy—simply stated, the sports journalists who were being asked to write editorials concerning Owens’ alleged suicide (or, so the police contended, at the time being).  In this situation, we weren’t dealing with your, for the lack of a better term, quotidian suicide case.  Never, to the best of my knowledge, had a case of an athlete attempting suicide been so quickly and definitively reported within 24 hours of its occurrence.

To be frank, no one could have foreseen Terrell Owens to be suicidal.  A narcissist, maybe; a mentally troubled person, maybe; a self-centered individual, maybe—but certainly not suicidal.  I wrote an article a short time ago which centered on Owens and the excess pressure we place on athletes in today’s society, I categorically implied that Owens was simply a troubled young man; and as much as I’d like to make the claim-to-fame that I predicted this outcome, I can honestly say that I was flabbergasted.

Why would a multi-million-dollar athlete attempt suicide?  Why would a man who was the culmination of public interest suddenly have the urge to cease his own life?  Both good questions, but the answer has been seemingly imponderable—certainly there must have been someone, somewhere who studied these types of cases.  And while such an individual hasn’t surfaced to this point, one can still attempt to understand the philosophy behind human self-termination.

First, it is to be duly noted that the act of suicide has been denounced by society for hundreds, if not thousands, of years—it was widely criticized by the Jewish populace, and subsequently so by many other major religions.  This ideology was shared by the Enlightenment-era thought, in which suicide was declared to be disease of the mind, which was to be treated by the respective psychiatrists of the time.  Recently, the malcontent directed towards those who chose such means of death has sparked much controversy over the almost-unimaginable thought process of the suicide-attacks of September 11, 2001.

Shortly after the attacks, President Bush condemned the acts of the hijackers (as to be expected) by calling them “cowardly” as a precursor to his campaign for his ‘War on Terror’.  Washington Post opinion-writer, George Will, on the other hand, pointed out that, “Although Americans are denouncing the terrorists' ‘cowardice,' what is most telling and frightening is their lunatic fearlessness."

Politicians alike weighed in on the terrorists’ hatred towards the United States, and ultimately, what was amalgamated, in retrospect, consisted of a plethora of rather-regrettable quotes.  “This perversion of the world's great faiths, produces suicide bombers. How to build a defense against the theological brainwashing that creates these human missiles? That is the challenge to Muslim clerics everywhere,” said William Safire.

However, Dr. Thomas S. Szasz, who is noted for believing that suicide is a basic human right, in his essay, Straight Talk About Suicide, asks, “How wrong can our most respected pundits be before we begin to view their expertise as we regard the expertise of the Enron accountants? The Muslim suicide bombers are a challenge to their victims, not to their teachers and paymasters. Any other interpretation is our collective folly, serving to indulge our love affair with a misguided concept of multiculturalism. 

"Are brainwashing, cowardice, and lunacy our only choices? Surely, it is not difficult to see an Arab youngster training to become a suicide bomber and becoming a celebrated patriot and martyr as engaging in what he considers a rationally motivated series of actions. From the point of view of the future terrorist, his family, and his society, his actions are just as rationally motivated as are the actions of a young American engaged in going to college, studying medicine and becoming surgeon.”

"I maintain that, from the point of view of the suicidal actor, planning to kill himself and carrying out the act is also rationally motivated. However, we regard this interpretation as so flagitious -- so indecent -- that, for most Americans, it is as good as taboo. The only socially acceptable view is that suicide is a ‘cry for help,’ uttered by a person who has a mental illness (depression) and denies that he is ill.”

And while some will contend that mental illness is nonexistent, such as Dr. Szasz, the inherent social consensus seems to be that suicide attempts are derived from a severe case of depression.  Because this philosophy provides no pragmatic answer for why an individual who is clearly well-off, a la Terrell Owens, the successive denial that any suicide attempt occurred has been greeted with an increased amount of tolerance.  Whether or not the details add up, is a whole other story.

What is known is that, upon arrival, Dallas Police were convinced that this was a case of a failed-suicide attempt.  This sentiment, though, was promptly altered (or corrected) in the police reports after Owens and his publicist, Kim Etheredge, ardently refuted the remarks by police; specifically that Etheredge had to forcibly remove pills from Owens’ mouth.  “[I] did not take anything out of his mouth,” Etheredge said on Wednesday, with the complete-backing of Owens.

Nevertheless, Senior Cpl. Glenn White, President of the Dallas Police Association has demanded an apology from Owens and Etheredge, citing that, “Those officers out there did the job they were supposed to do and did a good job of it.  We police officers don’t go out to these calls and make [information on police reports] up.”

Regardless of what you might or might not believe, it must be recognized that the image of a professional athlete as carefree of public opinion has been unraveled in these past few days.  Something questionable happened on Tuesday, although the details may never be known; and what you chose to take out of it should, to some extent, change the way you view professional athletes.  Perhaps, in time, we might just come to comprehend the daily disquietude experienced by the players of the sports we devote ourselves to watching.  And someday, the hurricane of sports-related emotion will be mollified and our nonchalance towards the mental-state of the human race, regardless of profession, will be recognized—and, alas, the sun will cut through the cavities of the clouds, and the strong winds replaced by a calm breeze.  Then, and only then, will we really be at-ease in the era of sports controversy.