Study Makes Suicide-Prevention Program Recommendations

HAMPTON, Va. — A new study com­mis­sioned by the Defense Depart­ment affirms many of the sui­cide-pre­ven­tion efforts being made with­in DOD and the mil­i­tary ser­vices and rec­om­mends ways to strength­en them.
In prepar­ing “The War With­in: Sui­cide Pre­ven­tion in the U.S. Mil­i­tary,” the Rand Nation­al Defense Research Insti­tute exam­ined data on mil­i­tary sui­cides, iden­ti­fied what sci­en­tif­ic lit­er­a­ture and lead­ers in the field con­sid­er the best pre­ven­tion strate­gies and rec­om­mend­ed ways to ensure exist­ing pro­grams reflect the state of the art, offi­cials said.

“This is a very thor­ough effort,” Dr. Mark Barnes, direc­tor of the resilience and pre­ven­tion direc­torate at the Defense Cen­ters of Excel­lence for Psy­cho­log­i­cal Health and Trau­mat­ic Brain Injury, said of the report. “Rand inter­viewed each of the ser­vices and went out­side the mil­i­tary to look at sui­cide-pre­ven­tion prac­tices and iden­ti­fied gaps for the way ahead [and] rec­om­men­da­tions for the mil­i­tary sui­cide-pre­ven­tion programs.” 

The study’s find­ings track close­ly with those in the Defense Department’s own DOD Sui­cide Task Force Report, Barnes told mil­i­tary health care pro­fes­sion­als attend­ing the first Armed Forces Pub­lic Health Con­fer­ence held here this week. 

“There is no dis­agree­ment. They are very com­pli­men­ta­ry in what they are rec­om­mend­ing,” he said. “So we have a nice resource here with qual­i­ty infor­ma­tion that our sui­cide-pre­ven­tion folks can refer to as we move for­ward with the task force recommendations.” 

Navy Capt. Paul Ham­mer, direc­tor of the Defense Cen­ters of Excel­lence for Psy­cho­log­i­cal Health and Trau­mat­ic Brain Injury, called the Rand report an impor­tant tool in help­ing the Defense Depart­ment bet­ter con­front an issue it takes “very seriously.” 

“The Rand study helps us to iden­ti­fy areas that need improve­ment so that we can con­tin­ue to pro­vide the most com­pre­hen­sive health care for our ser­vice mem­bers –- from the inside out,” he said. 

The study, writ­ten for health pol­i­cy offi­cials and sui­cide-pre­ven­tion pro­gram man­agers, rec­og­nized crit­i­cal fac­tors in a com­pre­hen­sive pre­ven­tion pro­gram. These include:
— Rais­ing aware­ness and pro­mot­ing self-care;
— Iden­ti­fy­ing peo­ple at high risk, includ­ing screen­ing for men­tal health prob­lems;
— Elim­i­nat­ing actu­al or per­ceived bar­ri­ers to qual­i­ty behav­ioral health care;
— Pro­vid­ing high-qual­i­ty men­tal health treat­ment and spe­cif­ic inter­ven­tions focused on sui­cide when need­ed;
— Restrict­ing access to firearms and oth­er lethal means, with atten­tion to how lethal med­ica­tions are pack­aged and how door hinges and show­er rods are con­struct­ed; and — Respond­ing appro­pri­ate­ly when sui­cides occur. 

Eval­u­at­ing the Defense Department’s sui­cide pre­ven­tion pro­grams, the study cit­ed the poten­tial ben­e­fit of a new DOD-wide sur­veil­lance pro­gram being used to track sui­cides and sui­cide attempts. The DOD Sui­cide Event Report replaced each service’s indi­vid­ual sui­cide-report­ing sys­tem, Barnes explained, help­ing to ensure “apples to apples” com­par­isons as infor­ma­tion is shared across the services. 

“This is a data issue,” he said. “We need good data. The data informs us in how to be effec­tive with pre­ven­tion and health pro­mo­tion. So we are con­tin­u­al­ly improv­ing our data systems.” 

Rand also called for an eval­u­a­tion of exist­ing sui­cide pre­ven­tion pro­grams, along with a require­ment that any new ini­tia­tives include an eval­u­a­tion plan. Barnes acknowl­edged the chal­lenge of assess­ing pro­grams’ effec­tive­ness, but called clos­er col­lab­o­ra­tion and infor­ma­tion shar­ing across the Defense Depart­ment and ser­vices a pos­i­tive step toward shar­ing best prac­tices and deter­min­ing what works. 

The Rand study rec­og­nizes most mil­i­tary sui­cide-pre­ven­tion pro­grams’ focus on rais­ing aware­ness, includ­ing telling peo­ple where to get help and help­ing them rec­og­nize peers in dis­tress. How­ev­er, it empha­sizes the impor­tance of also teach­ing mil­i­tary mem­bers how to rec­og­nize their own prob­lems and refer them­selves if need­ed to a behav­ioral health pro­fes­sion­al or chaplain. 

“Rais­ing aware­ness and pro­mot­ing self-care is some­thing we do and we can do bet­ter,” Barnes said, not­ing the val­ue of resilience cam­paigns. “The ideas is to give peo­ple skills,” and know how to rec­og­nize signs of risk in them­selves as well as oth­ers, and to know what to do. 

The report also iden­ti­fied the impor­tance of part­ner­ships between agen­cies and orga­ni­za­tions respon­si­ble for men­tal health and sub­stance use and oth­er known risk fac­tors for suicide. 

“We do fair­ly well in terms of part­ner­ships,” Barnes said. “One area we are look­ing at is, on an instal­la­tion, how well do all the dif­fer­ent part­ners work togeth­er in the sui­cide [pre­ven­tion] mis­sion? Because often times you have … one per­son who is the sui­cide pre­ven­tion per­son on an instal­la­tion. They are not going to be able to check in on every­body. It is real­ly the whole instal­la­tion that needs to be on board to be effec­tive with this.” 

The study also cit­ed the need to ensure there’s no gap in ser­vices pro­vid­ed dur­ing mil­i­tary mem­bers’ tran­si­tions — between mil­i­tary bases, between com­mands or between active and reserve status. 

“Ensur­ing a con­ti­nu­ity of ser­vices and care is real­ly impor­tant,” Barnes said. “One of the times of increased vul­ner­a­bil­i­ty is dur­ing tran­si­tions. … And we need to be cov­er­ing all the gaps like this proac­tive­ly for our ser­vice mem­bers and their families.” 

The study called for for­mal guid­ance for com­man­ders so they know how to respond to sui­cide and sui­cide attempts. It rec­og­nized the lack of any direct pol­i­cy with­in the ser­vices and the risks of han­dling these sit­u­a­tions improperly. 

“It is real­ly about our lead­er­ship,” Barnes said. “We need to empow­er our lead­er­ship, because they set the exam­ple. They set the tone. So we have to give them the tools. We need to give them the infor­ma­tion, the data, so they know what is going on, where we think is the right direc­tion to go, and then get behind them.” 

Source:
U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs) 

More news and arti­cles can be found on Face­book and Twitter.

Fol­low GlobalDefence.net on Face­book and/or on Twit­ter

Team GlobDef

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist GlobalDefence.net im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. GlobalDefenc.net war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →