Did you know that the Aurora Bridge has the second highest suicide rate for a bridge in the nation, just behind the Golden Gate Bridge? In 1932 the Aurora Bridge was marked as a National Historic Landmark named the George Washington Memorial Bridge; but, sadly, today it is known because of its suicide rate.
According to the Take Back The Bridge Project, one person a month attempts suicide on the Aurora Bridge, on average. The organization is asking the community to take a stand against this deadly trend because, they write, “It’s not just the hopeless and their families who suffer. This problem impacts those who live and work in the neighborhood.”
Two events are scheduled next week, on October 8th and 9th:
24-Hour Prayer Vigil
A 24-Hour Prayer Vigil will be held on the Aurora Bridge beginning, Friday, October 8th at 11:00 a.m., ending Saturday, October 9th, at 11:00 a.m. During this time, individuals are welcome to walk the bridge in order to bring awareness to this tragic issue and to pray for the faith of the bridge and the neighborhoods it surrounds. Registration is available for one hour time slots through the Take Back The Bridge Project.
Community March
Saturday, October 9th, 12:00 p.m. The march is about two miles, which includes a few stair flights. Meet at The Vine Christian Ministries in Wallingford, 4000 Whitman Ave. N, at 12:00pm for the opening announcements. The $20 registration fee includes a t-shirt and goes to benefiting the Crisis Clinic. Register here.
There’s also an effort underway to retrofit the bridge with a “Suicide Fence”, an 8’9″ tall barrier that will deter people from jumping. Crews will be working through Thursday of this week and then again on October 3rd. There’s more information on the the WSDOT web site.
“and to pray for the faith of the bridge and the neighborhoods it surrounds”.
Being new to Seattle, I appreciate that the WSDOT website actually explains the project and the rationale for various decisions. I’ll miss the unobstructed views while running on the bridge, but I guess there’s a need.
Honestly, instead of spending taxpayer dollars to deface a historic bridge, during a recession even, I’d rather see a creative, non-impactful approach like this:
http://adweek.blogs.com/adfreak/2010/09/suicide-ads-projected-under-bridge-jumpers.html
I’m all for assistance lines, advertising, even phones, but I’m also of the libertarian view that people have the right to choose when to die, as long as they’re not hurting anyone else in the process. That’s not a sentiment that’s shared by organized religious groups that seek to restrict our personal freedoms (e.g., pelvic issues in addition to suicide). Are these the same ones that believe that a bridge has “faith”, by the way? I must acknowledge that the suicides from the Aurora Bridge have often disrupted matters for friends working at the Adobe/Google offices underneath. But building suicide fences smacks of legal paternalism to me.
If it’s true, as the theory behind the current project goes, that most suicides are somewhat impulsive, and that a lot are averted when people merely stop to think about them for a second, then something like the Serbian idea you linked might be nearly as effective as the fence, without putting up something that will be a pretty oppressive feature for people using the bridge.
I’m probably not quite as libertarian as you on this in theory — I’d accept a bit of paternalism if suicide rates were really high. From what I can tell from some of the links here, we’re looking at 5-10 per year, and a spike in 2009 that probably doesn’t correlate to anything site-specific. At that rate, my libertarian impulses are enough to try lighting up a message in the ship canal before putting up a fence.
I’ve only been over this bridge a couple times since moving here, but I feel it’s worth mentioning the bridge in its unprotected state as a public good beyond its utility for transportation. There’s a thrill like running along the edge of a canyon, that there’s only air between me and the water below. I haven’t yet seen the fence in person, but it’s likely to feel more dangerous, yet less beautiful and less fun. In light of that, it doesn’t seem that the bridge is being “taken back”, but given away to the constant reminder of suicide. That strikes me as backwards and Orwellian. I can understand the desire to put up the barrier, and that the calculus looks right to a lot of people. But it’s certainly not “taking back” the bridge.
Schellsburg: The fence is what, 5 million?
The bridge closes during an attempted or successful suicide. There’s an economic impact when infrastructure like our highways close.
Recovering a body has an economic impact. Rescue workers, parmedics, vehicles/boats involved.
Counseling to survivors (family, rescue workers, co-workers, etc) has short-term and long-term economic effects.
Post-mortem work is more expensive on a suicide victim with the kind of trauma inflicted on a jump.
So though I believe in personal freedom – we must remember that we’re free so long as it doesn’t invade the freedom of others.
Invest in mental health services. Suicidality isn’t going to go away because we put fences on bridges – we need to treat depression, schizophrenia, bipolar, and other illnesses that increase suicide rates in those afflicted. Mental health is sadly underfunded in this country – it is nearly impossible for people who are un or under-insured to access mental health services including drug and alcohol counseling. I’d rather see this effort and concern going into something that would really prevent suicides. If someone is really suffering, is really ‘lethal,’ and there’s a fence over the bridge, they’ll find another way. They need help before they get to that bridge.
If we had adequate resources, I’d be all in favor of adding another layer of protection. But we don’t (or rather, we’re not willing to), so let’s use what we have efficiently!