Do I Hide the Blades?

Do I Hide the Blades?

It’s a question that many carers, loved ones, and professionals face when supporting someone who self-harms: Do I hide the blades?

It sounds simple enough - remove the tools, remove the risk. But as anyone who has lived with or supported someone through self-harm knows, the answer isn’t simple at all.

The Case for Hiding the Blades

For some, locking away sharp objects feels like the safest option.

When emotions are high and impulse takes over, easy access can mean instant harm. Removing blades and other sharp items can create a barrier, a pause long enough for the urge to pass or for the person to reach out for help.

It can also be a practical way to communicate care: “I want to keep you safe.”

For some people, this approach works. It creates structure, accountability, and a sense that their environment is safer. Many services recommend this as part of a safety plan, particularly when someone is in acute distress or at immediate risk.

The Case Against Hiding the Blades

But others argue that it’s not that simple, and sometimes, it can even make things worse.

When someone wants to self-harm, they often will find a way. If their usual tools are taken away, they might improvise - using glass, metal, or anything sharp enough to break the skin. These makeshift tools are often dirty or unsafe, leading to a higher risk of infection, deeper injuries, or permanent scarring.

There’s also an element of autonomy to consider. For some, being told they can’t access blades can feel controlling or infantilising. It might increase feelings of shame, secrecy, or mistrust, especially if the decision is made for them rather than with them.

Some harm-reduction approaches instead suggest allowing a person to keep sterile, familiar tools, while working together to reduce frequency and severity safely. It’s not an endorsement of self-harm, it’s an acknowledgment of reality and an attempt to minimise harm while longer-term healing takes place.

Finding the Balance

There’s no single “right” answer. What works for one person may feel completely wrong for another.

Some people find comfort and safety in not having access to blades. Others find that having control, knowing they have them but don’t have to use them, reduces anxiety and urges over time.

What’s most important is conversation, collaboration, and compassion.

Rather than deciding for someone, it can help to decide with them. Talk about what feels safe, what feels supportive, and what might help in the moment when urges arise.

A Harm-Reduction Perspective

The harm-reduction model doesn’t encourage self-harm, but it recognises that stopping isn’t always immediate or straightforward. It focuses on reducing physical risk and emotional shame,

things like keeping tools sterile, cleaning wounds properly, and finding safer coping strategies over time. This is where our Self-Harm Distraction Kits play and important role in harm reduction and management, as well as breaking the cycle.

In contrast, a zero-access approach prioritises immediate safety and may be necessary when someone’s life is at risk or when impulsivity is high. Both have a place, and both can be right, depending on the person, the situation, and the level of trust and support available.

In the End

“Do I hide the blades?” is not a yes-or-no question.

It’s a conversation, one about safety, trust, and the slow, non-linear process of recovery.

The best answer comes from understanding the person behind the question, not just the risk in front of them.

For me personally, I never removed items. Instead I ensured tools of choice were sterile and clean. She felt safer and less anxious knowing the tool was there. That’s what worked for us, but that’s not the case for everyone.

I would love to hear your views and experiences on this and hopefully it will help others navigate their self-harm journeys 🧡💚