New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Active Duty Army Suicide Attempts Analyzed

Researchers gathered data from various Army databases to analyze nearly 10,000 attempted suicides of active duty personnel. Cynthia Graber reports

 

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On average, every day one active duty member of the military and 22 veterans commit suicide. And from 2005 to 2009, Army suicide attempts and suicides rose sharply. In an attempt to figure out how to focus early interventions, a team of researchers has pulled together data from various Army databases to analyze nearly 10,000 attempted suicides of active duty Army personnel.

The first major point they make is that enlisted soldiers, not officers, attempt suicides at higher rates. Enlisted soldiers represent about 83 percent of the Army, but make up nearly 99 percent of the suicide attempts.

Narrowing in on the data, the researchers determined that females were more than twice as likely as males to attempt suicide. Also at higher risk: soldiers who entered the army at age 25 or older. And suicides were higher for those who’d never been deployed or those who were home from deployment than for those who were currently deployed.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Suicides were highest in the first two years of service, particularly the first year. And among soldiers who attempted suicide, more than half had received a mental health-related diagnosis in the previous month. The study is in the journal JAMA Psychiatry. [Robert J. Ursano et al, Suicide Attempts in the US Army During the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, 2004 to 2009]

One limitation of the study, the researchers acknowledge, is that it only includes data from the Army’s own health care system. So it lacks information about suicides or attempts handled by civilian facilities, as well as unreported attempts. The study authors recommend that future research should focus on determining the individuals at greatest risk. This preliminary assessment could still help target assistance and prevention programs to soldiers who need it most.

—Cynthia Graber

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Cynthia Graber is a print and radio journalist who covers science, technology, agriculture, and any other stories in the U.S. or abroad that catch her fancy. She's won a number of national awards for her radio documentaries, including the AAAS Kavli Science Journalism Award, and is the co-host of the food science podcast Gastropod. She was a Knight Science Journalism fellow at MIT.

More by Cynthia Graber

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe