Valerie Sharkey provides an overview of research literature on self-harm and explains why a systematic evaluation of interventions is vital to achieve a consensus on how such patients should be treated

The act of deliberate self-wounding without suicidal intent was described as a ‘clinical paradox’ 20 years ago and little has changed (Pattison and Kahan 1983). Tantam and Whittaker (1992) suggested that ‘self-wounding differs from other self-injury in being aimed neither at mutilation nor at death’. Kinmond and Bent (2000) highlight the problem of differentiating between suicide, attempted suicide, self-injury by poisoning and self-injury by wounding, and stress the complexity of unravelling intention and motive. However, in order to offer appropriate, effective clinical intervention, it would seem necessary to attempt to do just that. Self-wounding, and self-injury are interchangeable terms used throughout this paper to describe ‘intentional behaviour that destroys or alters body tissue’ (Valente 1991).