Written by: John Draper, Ph.D.
Golden Gate Bridge Image Provided By Marin Independent Journal
Since its completion in 1937, the Golden Gate Bridge has captivated San Francisco Bay area visitors. For some, the bridge view may evoke a heavenly gateway, while others are haunted by its shadowy legacy as the world’s leading ‘suicide hot spot.’ Nearly 1,800 people have jumped to their deaths from the bridge since its opening, with an average of 20-30 deaths annually. In 2024, after decades of suicide prevention efforts, the completion of the safety net under the bridge will reduce this annual number to zero. Alongside the launch of 988, this 5-year construction project marks one of America’s greatest suicide prevention milestones of the past century.
The path to installing the net was fraught with challenges. For over 50 years, transportation and health authorities cited prohibitive costs as a barrier to implementing suicide-protective measures. Engineers recognized the bridge’s unique design, requiring careful planning for an effective yet compatible barrier. Many Bay Area residents opposed altering the iconic beauty of the Bridge with a barrier. Year after year, it seemed that the social and public health impact of those who leaped from the bridge evaporated soon after they disappeared into the Bay.
In 2006, two significant events shifted the fate of the Golden Gate Bridge barrier. Eric Steele’s powerful documentary, “The Bridge,” was released, featuring footage of 23 out of 24 suicides on the Golden Gate Bridge in 2004. Steele’s interviews with friends and family, coupled with the actual suicide footage, left an impression of despair and grief on viewers, highlighting the social and emotional ripple effects of these incidents for generations to come.
Steele contacted me about a month before the film’s release to discuss how the Lifeline could support its suicide prevention message. Despite concerns that the film’s depiction of bridge jumps might lead to more incidents, the studio was determined to release it nationwide. We collaborated to add a “call Lifeline” end card to the documentary and organized a pre-screening for AAS (American Association of Suicidology), AFSP (American Foundation for Suicide Prevention), SAMHSA (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration), and other suicide prevention stakeholders to prepare them for the film’s impactful messages. After viewing the film, the bridge district board and Bay Area community members could never “unsee” suicides off this majestic structure again.
A view of the suicide safety net in November 2023 Photo – Justin Sullivan – Getty Images
In 2006, another significant development was the establishment of the Bridge Rail Foundation. This foundation resulted from a collaboration between Dave Hull, who tragically lost his 26-year-old daughter Kathy to suicide from the Bridge, Paul Muller, a marketing business owner whose partner also experienced a family loss due to a bridge jump, and Patrick Hines, a banker whose son, Kevin Hines, miraculously survived a leap from the Golden Gate Bridge in 2000. The Foundation’s mission was to raise public awareness and secure funding for a suicide-deterrent barrier on the Golden Gate Bridge.
The Foundation created a strong platform for individuals who had experienced losses related to the Bridge. They used this platform to push for change in district and community hearings. When “The Bridge” documentary was released, it shared heartbreaking personal stories of tragedy from the Bridge Rail Foundation. These stories gained even more attention through social media. As a result, more and more Bay Area residents started supporting the installation of a barrier on the bridge, surpassing those who opposed it. This increased support led to the raising of both local and federal funds and construction of the barrier started in 2018.
Even though my focus was on promoting the effectiveness of suicide hotlines, I became compelled to join the fight for suicide bridge barriers in 2008. There were numerous opponents to suicide deterrent structures on “suicide hot spot” bridges worldwide. While much of the resistance has come from authorities concerned about construction costs and engineering challenges, the most vocal critics have often come from the communities where the “suicide hot-spot bridges” are located. These sites are often beautiful and popular tourist destinations, with many residents reflexively opposing anything that might mar the scenic views. Bridge authorities and advocates for preserving the scenery suggested installing suicide hotline phones and signs on the structures, such as “Life is worth living. Call the Lifeline…” as a more cost-effective yet compassionate alternative to physical barriers.
Suicide emergency phone on the San Francisco Golden Gate Bridge
I had considerable experience with the ineffective “bridge phone” approach in New York’s suicide hot spots and was troubled by the undue praise it received from its advocates. While crisis lines were effective for people in safe environments, using them on a hot spot bridge was different. Suicidal individuals did not typically visit these bridges to make phone calls. As a bridge patrolman once testified regarding someone intent on suicide near a bridge rail, “It’s like having a gun to their head, their finger on the trigger, and the hammer pulled back.” In this context, I believed that crisis hotlines like Lifeline were becoming “barriers to the barriers,” and Lifeline and its network of crisis centers needed to take a proactive stance in communities where suicide hot spots existed.
In 2008, with the approval of Lifeline’s National Steering Committee of suicide prevention experts, I published a position paper within the Lifeline network advocating for barriers as the most effective means of deterring suicides. This paper included a comprehensive collection of research, hotline data, and news reports on suicide hot spots and bridge deterrents from around the world. At the time, it was regarded as the most authoritative statement on the topic. The Bridge Rail Foundation frequently referenced this paper in district hearings and discussions with public authorities in other suicide hot spots. A decade later, I updated the paper with additional research following the approval of the Golden Gate Bridge district’s deterrent construction. I hope that this paper continues to serve as a resource for suicide prevention advocates advocating for deterrent structures in suicide hot spots worldwide.
In the near century-long shadow of the fight to prevent suicides on the Golden Gate Bridge, a powerful legacy for suicide prevention now stands. Kevin Hines, who improbably survived a leap from the bridge, has become one of suicide prevention’s most powerful voices over the past 20 years, whose speaking engagements, social media, documentaries, and books have inspired countless others in crisis to seek help and find hope. Kevin Briggs, known as “the Guardian of the Golden Gate,” saved over 200 lives through his bridge patrol work and now tours with Kevin Berthia, whom he persuaded not to jump, to promote suicide prevention. The Bridge Rail Foundation continues to offer expertise and consultation to public health and transportation authorities considering bridge barriers in suicide hot spots. And finally, the protective net on the Golden Gate Bridge itself will forever be a national monument to both beauty and compassion.
You must be logged in to post a comment.