There's also the mundane question of money. Unless you're already rich, raising a child alone is hard in many counts already; having your income halved does not help.
That is why many people have life insurance. It's probably not common in large parts of the world, and requires a certain income level to pay for, but it can make a situation where a parent dies a lot easier to cope with, at least the financial worries go away, or at least are delayed.
In my country (New Zealand) we have a government run, compulsory, insurance scheme for accidents and death. If you die by accident then your family gets a payout based on a percentage of your (former) income.
Why should it matter whether it was suicide or not?
"Heh, I'm going to kill myself so I don't have to work to support my family and they can have insurance money instead" is not a thought many people would have.
I think the better way to word this is likely "having your primary support halved does not help". It's likely to forestall the obvious insurance rebuttal by not specifically tying itself to financial concerns, as emotional and educational support are at least as important, if not more so, in my opinion.
That's assuming a two parent income. What if one parent stays home with the children instead of working? Yes, you can get insurance. No, it doesn't replace a lost parent.
In my country (New Zealand) we have a government run, compulsory, insurance scheme for accidents and death. If you die by accident then your family gets a payout based on a percentage of your (former) income.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_Compensation_Corporat...
We don't have the right to sue for accidents, relying on ACC for compensation.