Suicide prevention efforts have been bolstered to address this public health crisis. Suicide screening, the new 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline, Zero Suicide campaigns, social media apps, and research into neurobiological risk and protective factors have burgeoned. Suicide prevention efforts highlight risk assessment, management, and effective interventions (
https://www.sprc.org). Despite these important initiatives, some patients will still die by suicide. When providers lose a patient to suicide, the impact can be profound (
9). Responses often include grief, humiliation, fear, anger, guilt, denial, disordered sleep, and feelings of professional and personal inadequacy (
9,
10). Loss of a patient by suicide has also been linked to burnout, compassion fatigue, and a negative impact on relationships (
11,
12). Trainees may be particularly vulnerable to the impact of a patient’s death by suicide, as they are in the process of developing a sense of competence that may be shattered by self-doubt, professional embarrassment, and potential concern about being blamed or censured (
9,
10). Having had a patient take their own life may have a significant effect on professional practice as well. Caring for subsequent patients with suicidal ideation may provoke fear, leading to more defensive and risk-avoidant practice, including a lower threshold for referral to an emergency department (ED) for risk assessment and for involuntary commitment of patients when they express thoughts of suicide (
13).
Clinical Vignette
Dr. Gomez is a postgraduate year 2 psychiatry resident on rotation at a Veterans Administration (VA) hospital. He was on call in the ED at the hospital that evening. It was a busy evening, and Dr. Gomez was just finishing up his assessment and discharge plan with one patient when Mr. Morgan arrived. Mr. Morgan was a 34-year-old veteran of the war in Afghanistan. As a child, his mother and he were the victims of domestic violence perpetrated by his alcoholic father. Mr. Morgan joined the military right out of high school to escape this abusive situation. He was deployed to the front lines in Afghanistan, where his convoy was attacked and the jeep in front of his was blown up by a mine bomb planted on the dirt road. He was minimally injured, but he was plagued by symptoms of PTSD: flashbacks, hypervigilance, sleep difficulties, and excessive drinking. His long-time girlfriend intermittently “kicked him out” of their apartment when he was too irritable or intoxicated, but she had always taken him back after about a week when he promised to do better.
Mr. Morgan was a “frequent flier” to the ED, and he had multiple brief hospitalizations. He was receiving partial disability payments from the VA for service-related PTSD. He had lost a number of jobs because of poor job attendance, drinking, and disrespect to employers. Mr. Morgan advocated for physicians to “get me 100% service-connected disability” because of his joblessness. Although some physicians had attempted to help him, his treatment team determined that he would likely drink more and become more psychiatrically disabled if he did not have the motivation and daily structure of work. The team connected Mr. Morgan to a supervised work placement, but his attendance was waning, even when transportation came to his house in the morning.
The ED intake nurse gave Dr. Gomez a woeful look when he announced that Mr. Morgan was in the waiting room to be seen by a psychiatrist.
“Good news,” he told Dr. Gomez. “His alcohol level is only 0.1 today. I wonder if his girlfriend kicked him out again and he needs a place to stay.”
Dr. Gomez rolled his eyes. “I have only been on the service 3 months, and I have already seen Mr. Morgan twice in the emergency room. It seems to be the same story—he has a fight with his girlfriend, threatens to take his life, comes here for respite, gets discharged to a shelter, and then she takes him back.”
The nurse replied with a note of sarcasm, “Good luck getting him discharged. He loves it on the psych ward.”
Dr. Gomez provided a routine psychiatric evaluation and risk assessment. Mr. Morgan had been in a verbal fight with his girlfriend, and he said that she “kicked me out.” Mr. Morgan replied to suicide risk questions as he had during prior ED evaluations: “I’m going to kill myself if I’m not hospitalized.” He did not reveal a specific suicide plan and said he did not own a gun. Despite Mr. Morgan’s insistence that he should be hospitalized, Dr. Gomez determined that Mr. Morgan’s suicidal statements were chronic and that he simply needed a place to stay. Dr. Gomez told Mr. Morgan that they found him a bed in a shelter and that they would send him there in a cab. The caseworker would check on him the next day.
“You’ll be sorry!” Mr. Morgan shouted as he left the ED. He did not get in the waiting cab but began running toward the overpass. Before the VA police could catch him, he jumped over the edge to his death.
When Dr. Gomez heard that Mr. Morgan jumped from the bridge, he sat stunned in horror. “Will he be OK?” he queried.
“He was pronounced dead,” the ED attending physician told him. “Dr. Taylor is the psychiatrist attending tonight. She is on her way in.”
Dr. Gomez put his face in his hands and stifled a sob. In his mind, he repeated, “Why didn’t I admit him? I killed him.”
Dr. Taylor stepped into the office where Dr. Gomez sat.
“Hello, Dr. Gomez,” she said warmly, sitting down across from him. Dr. Taylor paused to give Dr. Gomez time to respond, then continued. “I understand Mr. Morgan jumped off the overpass and died.”
At this point, Dr. Gomez could no longer stifle his sobs. “I shouldn’t have discharged him,” he asserted through his tears.
“We do our best, but none of us can really predict what another will do—especially one as impulsive and ill as Mr. Morgan,” Dr. Taylor said thoughtfully. “I just looked this up. Mr. Morgan has come to the ED 100 times in the past 5 years. He was hospitalized 20 of those times. The other 80 times he left with the exact plan you had for him.”
“But this time was different,” Dr. Gomez said helplessly. “I missed it. I shouldn’t have taken the chance with discharging him. He said that he would kill himself this time.”
Dr. Taylor replied, “I think he says that every time. We have a clear postvention plan that you heard a bit about in orientation. I will get us both some cold water. Then we can discuss supports for you, other staff, and family. I will be back in 5 minutes.”
Dr. Taylor returned with a bottle of cold water and a wrapped mint chocolate. “How are you doing?” she asked Dr. Gomez quietly.
“Guilty, sad, incompetent,” Dr. Gomez admitted. “I missed the signs and now he’s dead.”
Dr. Taylor nodded empathically. “Having a patient die by suicide is devastating. I know—I had an outpatient kill themselves when I was in residency. I felt guilty, inadequate, sad, angry, and frightened. It broke my confidence for a while. I even thought of leaving psychiatry. But I’m glad I didn’t. I’ve helped a lot of people, but not everyone.”
Dr. Gomez gazed at Dr. Taylor speechlessly. “What happens next?” he finally asked.
“First, we take care of you. Do you live with someone?” she asked.
“My fiancé,” Dr. Gomez answered. “I talked to her already. She is amazingly supportive.”
“So,” Dr. Taylor continued, “I suggest that she come pick you up, or we can call a driver to take you. But first, we need to complete your ED psychiatric note. When is the last time you saw Mr. Morgan?”
“Well, I saw him angrily take the discharge papers and walk out of the ED,” Dr. Gomez moaned.
“You should write your note like any other ED psychiatric evaluation and end with the discharge plan as of when he left,” Dr. Taylor instructed. “I will write a note about getting a call that he jumped off the overpass and what our postvention plan is. The police will inform his girlfriend and any other next of kin. I have informed the program director, hospital administration, and risk management department.”
“But there are more patients to be seen in the ED,” Dr. Gomez noted anxiously.
“I can see them,” Dr. Taylor said, matter-of-factly. “Most people want to take some time off after a trauma like this. But not everyone. Your program director will call you tomorrow to check in with how you are doing, discuss time off, and review next steps. There will be an incident review. Unfortunately, veterans are a high-risk group for suicide. I doubt you will be called, but refer back to me if the media should contact you. You are not alone in this tragedy. We are a team.”
Dr. Gomez sighed deeply. “Thank you for your support, Dr. Taylor. I . . . I . . . I feel so horrible.”
“I understand, and I’m so sorry you are going through this trauma. Mr. Morgan was very high risk. We can’t hospitalize everyone, and we can’t predict impulsive behavior. You are not alone in this tragedy. We are a team that supports each other in this difficult work.”
Postvention Planning
Postvention refers to the steps taken in the aftermath of a suicide to prevent negative health outcomes and facilitate recovery among the bereaved (
18). Postvention efforts are designed to decrease the possible contagion effect of suicide, destigmatize the tragedy, operationalize the confusing aftermath, and promote caregiver healing (
19). Despite a dearth of rigorous testing of the effectiveness of postvention programs, several retrospective studies highlight the positive impact of support from peers, superiors, and institutions that serve as both a protective factor and a predictor for adaptive coping strategies and lower levels of emotional, traumatic, and professional impacts (
6). Other postvention resources include gathering evidence of effective postvention resources to assist survivors and their families coping with a suicide (
19).
One such evidence-based program is the SUPPORT postvention program for professionals after patient suicide (
20). Using the model of support for professionals proposed by Scott and colleagues (
21), Leaune and colleagues (
20) designed a 6-week program designed to buffer the traumatic, emotional, and professional impacts of patient suicide; improve support for exposed professionals; and promote the return to normal functioning in the institution exposed to the patient death. There are four stages in the SUPPORT model (
20):
Stage 1: Emotional First Aid, which includes providing an organizational framework to build a crisis team dedicated to the management of the aftermath of death of a patient by suicide. Stage 1 aims to promote basic emotional first aid and early detection for those who were most affected through local support from peers and superiors.
Stage 2: Team-Based Intervention, which consists of several hours of debriefing of the traumatic event and its impacts on team members. Stage 2 aims to provide professional emotional aid at an institutional level through an in-depth, team-based debriefing intervention.
Stage 3: Late Detection and Counseling, which provides support for professionals who have been strongly affected or traumatized by exposure to the suicide death. Stage 3 aims to promote a return to normal functioning in the institution at both the individual and organizational levels.
Stage 4: Optional Long-Term Support, for those professionals and teams that have been highly and negatively affected by patient suicide.
Nazem and colleagues (
11) recommend proactive development of a personalized suicide postvention preparation plan. Their proposed postvention plan includes relevant information for an individual who loses a patient to suicide. Sections include contact information for the insurance carrier, clinical supervisors, professional mentors and peers, and nonprofessional significant others, as well as a section designating a realistic self-statement related to suicide, such as “Because I work with people who suffer unique forms of distress, and because some of my patients will be at risk to die by suicide, the odds are that someday one of my patients will die by this tragic act. This will occur despite my very best efforts and intentions” (
11). They also recommend a section that specifies important self-care strategies.
Cazares and colleagues (
10) created a flow chart for psychiatric residencies that specifies the flow of communication after the death of a patient to suicide. The initial contact is from the individual who first hears of the suicide to the attending psychiatrist and program director. If the resident who is most affected does not yet know of the suicide, they are sensitively informed. The program director and chief residents inform the rest of the residency program. A process group is planned, and the responsible residents run the morbidity and mortality conference. Agrawal and colleagues (
22) provide a practical flow chart of initial, primary, and secondary responses in a residency postvention plan. Henry and colleagues (
23) provide a detailed postvention plan that reviews tasks and supports needed for the first 24 hours post–patient suicide, the next 2 weeks, and then afterward. Postvention plans may be created for an individual practitioner, residency training program, and/or institution.