Although there are direct and indirect signals that may indicate a person is under suicidal influence, there is a significant margin of error. The suicide spectrum between initial thoughts and lethal inclinations is vast, and there is no accurate indicator to identify anyone on this spectrum if they are not signalling verbally or behaviorally.

For first responders and military, the radar of suicidal influence is even more remote and unreliable.

 Much of our Preemptive Suicide Intervention training is based on two significantly credible sources: 1) the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide, as well as its supportive publications and researchers, and 2) decades of intervention strategies used by the California Highway Patrol at the Golden Gate Bridge.  

The Interpersonal Theory of Suicide

The interpersonal theory of suicide is a research study that attempted to explain why people die by suicide, how we can identify individuals who are at risk, and what we can do to intervene. It was developed by Dr. Thomas Joiner and was first introduced in his groundbreaking book, Why People Die By Suicide. The theory consists of three components that together lead to suicide attempts, with two of them being the principle motivators, and the third being the enabler. 

In light of the study's transparent ability to be falsified, The Interpersonal Theory of Suicide has, on the contrary, become the most empirically tested theory on why people commit suicide—no other study on suicide has been more thoroughly tested. Out of a systematic review of 66 studies around the world that used the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide, all of them resulted in the same conclusion.

As noted in Wikipedia:

“A number of risk factors have been linked to suicidal behavior, and there are many theories of suicide that integrate these established risk factors, but few are capable of explaining all of the phenomena associated with suicidal behavior as the interpersonal theory of suicide does. Another strength of this theory lies in its ability to be tested empirically. It is constructed in a way that allows for falsifiability.”

The researcher, Dr. Thomas E. Joiner Jr. attended Princeton University and received his PhD in Clinical Psychology from the University of Texas at Austin. He is a professor of psychology and the director of the Laboratory for the Study and Prevention of Suicide-Related Conditions and Behaviors at Florida State University.

Other collaborative publications from Dr. Joiner which have influenced our curriculum are, The Interpersonal Theory of Suicide: Guidance for Working With Suicidal Clients, Managing Suicidal Risk: A Collaborative Approach, Treating Suicidal Behavior: An Effective, Time-Limited Approach (Treatment Manuals for Practitioners), and Simple Treatments For Complex Problems: A PATIENT WORKBOOK. 

The California Highway Patrol

Apart from The Interpersonal Theory of Suicide, we model much of our suicide intervention techniques on those used by the California Highway Patrol at the Golden Gate Bridge, in particular, both passive and direct conversational dialogue that can assess risk and focus intervention on which of the three suicide components are strongest, and which have a greater likelihood of being deescalated.

The three factors the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide revealed are: thwarted belongingness, perceived burdensomeness, and acquired capability.  In summary, the theory purports that the most dangerous form of suicidal desire is caused by the simultaneous presence of thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness, while existing under the influence of hopelessness that these conditions will change.

The study found that the capability to attempt suicide is, however, different than the desire to attempt suicide. Very few people have both the desire and capability to attempt suicide, apart from the combined influence of both thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness. Suicidal people do not choose suicide because they desire the option; on the contrary, they battle the unnatural instinct of survival to become capable to follow through despite not desiring such a choice. The capability for suicidal behavior is acquired through repetitive exposure to painful and fear-inducing experiences, while reinforcing a perception of hopelessness that these conditions will never change.

Acquired Capability

Acquired capability refers to the ability to overcome the natural innate priority of survival we operate with from birth. It is a complete diversion from the protective properties of “flight, fight, or freeze” triggered in the amygdala of our brain. 

Acquired capability tends to develop much faster in combat veterans and first responders than civilians, as they have already conditioned the habit of courage and fearlessness despite the threat of death. For civilians, this component is often the last element missing from the persuasion to go from suicide consideration to suicide attempt, but for combat veterans and first responders, acquired capability is less acquired and more preexisting.

Thwarted Belongingness (I am isolated)

Thwarted belongingness (referred to in our curriculum as isolation) refers to a specific type of isolation that comes from feelings of disconnection with otherwise beneficial relationships. This may or may not show up in external expression, as many suicidal people are internally isolating themselves from sharing their private battles and seeking help, and yet outwardly capable of socializing as normal, even appearing happy, humorous, confident, and competent, especially in the area of public safety where many must compartmentalize their humanity and its emotions in order to avoid its interference to do the job. This isolation factor prevents many from seeking life saving help. It is also responsible for a spiritual disconnection from God, which research shows increases suicidal tendencies.

This phenomenon also explains the common blindside of suicide occurring in those whom few, if any, suspected of being suicidal—spouses and family members among them.  It is also why we cannot resort to reliance on merely a list of warning signs. Many suicide victims told others they were fine shortly before taking their own life.

Statistically, about 30% of civilians voice no indication of suicidal thoughts prior to an attempt; however, this rate is much higher with first responders, who fear they may lose the trust of peers who depend upon their competence, or be passed over for promotions, and even terminated if they mention being under suicidal influence. 

Burden to Others (I am a burden)

Burden to others describes the dangerous lie believed by suicidal people that their friends and loved ones would be better off without them, because their very existence is a liability of burden. This conceptual fallacy is the single most dangerous element in the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide and all of its 66 duplicated studies. Burden to others is most often the last straw that convinces an individual to move forward with an attempt. Countless interviews with suicide attempt survivors, including those who jumped from the Golden Gate Bridge, remark on the overwhelming influence of believing themselves to be a burden to those they loved.

Burden to others is the absolute strongest influence in first responder suicide attempts, and the reason so many perplexingly do so despite healthy marriages, parenting roles, and otherwise thriving relationships with others. It answers the haunting question, “How and why could they do that to their family?” The answer being that, in the disregulated state of their brain and nervous system, and under significant emotional constraint, they firmly believed their death would spare their loved ones of an inevitable burden greater than their suicide, and no amount of love shared between them will overcome this false narrative in their mind, which they perceive as truth.

Preemptive Suicide Intervention involves systematic methods of addressing the three primary influences that motivate people to attempt suicide, and to address them preemptively to others, rather than waiting for indications of crisis. 

The methods work best in a blanket approach to a total population, rather than attempting to distinguish between those who may or may not be on the spectrum of suicidal influence; however, they are highly effective in peer-to-peer encounters when a peer is suspected to be a risk. The methods can also be used individually in the from of self-awareness and self-regulation of the three influences.

Our Preemptive Suicide Intervention methods focus on planting neurological “seeds” of intervention that will “sprout and grow” within the mind of a person who is under the influence of any spectrum of  suicidal influence between initial considerations to lethal crisis. These neurological “seeds” specifically counter these three influences that lead people to consider or attempt suicide.

Decades of suicide intervention training have focused on crisis intervention, and, although elements of crisis intervention are indeed needed, the absence of preemptive measures of intervention have created a huge gap in the culture of public safety that leads to far more suicides that what otherwise would occur. To put it bluntly: waiting for suicide to become a crisis is part of the problem.

An abundance of research supports the truth that most suicide attempts, especially first responders and combat veterans, are made alone and without any cry for help allowing for intervention; therefore, we simply cannot expect suicide crisis intervention to share the same success rate as other crises intervention like addiction, since the failure rate rarely affords second chances.

The reality is, most suicide programs address awareness, not intervention. We have become experts at quoting facts and figures and suicide rates, but include little on what anyone can do about it. Telling first responders they are 3 to 4 times more likely to die by suicide than line of duty threats, without teaching them how to avoid becoming such a statistic is a strategy that must change. We must implement measures into the culture that address the three risks we mentioned before in a way that diverts crisis altogether, and if we do find ourselves addressing crisis, we must have a better method of focusing less on the circumstances of influence, and more on the neurology of influence that leads them to attempt suicide. People don't attempt suicide because of the adversity of their circumstances; they do so under the adversity of how their brain is reacting to them.

Our methods have been field tested with first responders, therapists, military veterans, and civilians working in suicide outreach. Remarkable feedback, some of which has come directly from suicide survivors, has provided us with examples where either suicide attempts or the intention of suicide attempts were diverted specifically in relation to the preemptive methods we teach. 

In one instance, a woman who already made an attempt by taking a lethal dose of pharmaceuticals self-intervened by calling 911 after she recalled the “seeds” of intervention references that were discussed with her by an individual trained in our Preemptive Suicide Intervention.

While the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide gives us huge leverage in a preemptive strike against future suicidal influences within the culture of public safety. Much of the intervention methods used by the California Highway Patrol on the Golden Gate Bridge have been studied and applied to our training. Although these are cases of dire crisis intervention, the conversational focus and listening skills are also applied in our preemptive measures. 

We do this by teaching what to ask, how to ask it, and what not to ask, when assessing the risk factor of another, along with a highly effective “conversational radar” for detecting any of the three Interpersonal Theory components and how to respond if detected. 

We also address a short but reliable way to ask someone if they are having suicidal thoughts, and in a way that is blunt but non-confrontational, and is quite often answered honestly.

Our course also includes a post-suicide reaction plan (an immediate chain-of-response for a peer suicide), and a post-suicide recover plan (an extended response that includes help for both the department, the city, and the surviving family), which covers the first month and on into the first year. These reaction and recover plans are tailored to give specific direction of service to those who need it, and to promote a healthier mental recovery over time.

We are currently in development for an online version of this course and hope to have it available soon. The finished product will allow us to add high quality elements such as interviews with the researchers of the studies we model the training from, as well as individuals with the California Highway Patrol who have spent their career working the Golden Gate Bridge. 

In the meantime, we suggest that anyone who is distant from the Dallas/Fort Worth area of Texas (where we host training) and would prefer to save travel time and cost, should consider taking the condensed 5-hour version of the course via Livestream. This is also a great way to determine whether or not you want to have one or more of your staff certified to teach our course.

Let's face it—Preemptive Suicide Intervention training is all about saving lives. Minding the Badge™ is in the business of trying to save wellness, save marriages, and save careers, but saving lives is our top priority. We can all help someone repair their wellness, their marriage, their career...but we cannot bring them back to life. Every problem faced by someone who attempts suicide is fixable, except a successful suicide.

It is for this reason that we do not want to turn anyone away from getting this important training due to cost. We offer our suicide intervention training on a sliding scale that considers each scenario. Small departments obviously have smaller budgets than large departments; some students are therapists, non-profit workers, or first responders who have to pay out of pocket because their department won't.

If you are interested in this training and would like to talk about a sliding scale cost, then, by all means, reach out to us and we will contact you and work something out. If you are with a department with a budget that can afford to pay our standard price, you will help offset the reduction in price we offer for the small budgets.