1

Introduction

This proceedings provides a synthesis of key themes identified during a virtual workshop convened on April 25–26, 2023, to identify challenges in and opportunities for measuring suicide in the law enforcement occupation. Law enforcement is broadly defined in the statement of task (Box 1-1) to include positions such as correctional¹ officers and dispatchers, in addition to law enforcement officers, or what might be colloquially referred to as a police officer. Nearly 200 people registered to attend the livestream workshop; all presentation materials and videos are available on the project website.²

The director of the Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT), Melissa Chiu, opened the workshop by stating that suicide is an event that shatters lives and families. She shared the mission of CNSTAT (Box 1-2) and emphasized, “We must first understand how to measure this event to be able to help inform interventions.” Chiu thanked the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) for bringing this topic of inquiry to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, and she thanked the planning committee for its service. She acknowledged the complexity of approaches to measuring law enforcement suicide and recognized the interdisciplinary expertise represented in the planning committee, spanning the fields of statistics, public health, epidemiology, criminology, clinical psychology, and industrial and organizational psychology.

___________________

¹ The terms corrections and correctional are used interchangeably throughout this report, based on the usage of the speakers and studies referenced.

² https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/approaches-to-improving-the-measurement-of-death-by-suicide-of-law-enforcement-officers-in-the-united-states-a-workshop

The planning committee’s co-chairs, Vickie M. Mays (University of California, Los Angeles) and Joel Greenhouse (Carnegie Mellon University), welcomed the virtual audience and thanked the planning committee members for their time and expertise in shaping the agenda. Mays outlined the committee’s goals for the workshop:

1. Assess current data collection systems and identify opportunities for improvement of measurement of suicide in law enforcement and

1. corrections officers and dispatchers; and collecting and investigating correlates associated with law enforcement completed suicide.
2. Identify data practices and approaches for the measurement of law enforcement suicide that provide accurate, high-quality, comprehensive, and timely data for all.
3. Introduce approaches for enhancing measurement of law enforcement suicide by combining information from multiple data sources through data linkages that improve the quality and completeness of data based on a comprehensive data infrastructure.

Mays reminded everyone at the workshop that, while there would be a lot of discussion about suicide, data and measurement would take center stage and that the emphasis would be on how to provide greater insight to survivors, researchers, and those committed to zero suicide in the law enforcement profession particularly. She explained that law enforcement officers play a significant role in society: “We lose a protector when we lose an officer.” Mays encouraged all to think about not only the data but also the human life that is connected to those data.

Alexis R. Piquero, director of BJS (the federal statistical agency sponsoring this workshop), conveyed the importance of measuring law enforcement suicide. He underscored how important mental health is in law enforcement, especially during the past three years: “Many of us could work from home, but law enforcement officers could not, which created additional stress and impacted their wellness.” Piquero stated that it is important to cast light not only on this topic but also on how to measure it. He explained that BJS is in the business of measurement, even when there are disagreements about ways to do this best with the data available. Piquero noted that measurement can be reevaluated to determine better ways to quantify a phenomenon.

This report is organized to flow in concert with the order of presentations and discussions in the workshop. Chapter 2 provides an overview of the federal data sets in law enforcement and public health that are currently available for measuring suicide. Chapter 3 discusses additional sources of data—those that either are not focused on law enforcement suicide exclusively or are nongovernmental sources—that offer insights on how to measure suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and completed suicides. Chapter 4 summarizes the complexities raised during the workshop about how to classify a death and the sources of bias that impact reporting and classification of law enforcement suicide. Chapter 5 discusses several methods that could be used to measure law enforcement suicide, including approaches with an overarching theme of data integration. Chapter 6 draws from discussions over the two days that underscored the importance of the human aspect when considering approaches to measuring law enforcement suicide;

it also highlights speakers who are current or former law enforcement practitioners and leaders of professional associations for these stakeholders. Chapter 7 offers reflections from the planning committee and sponsor, BJS, and future directions for consideration.

The full meeting agenda and biographical sketches of the planning committee members, workshop presenters, and discussants appear in the appendixes. This proceedings was prepared by the workshop rapporteur as a factual summary of what occurred at the workshop. The planning committee’s role was limited to planning and convening the workshop. The views contained in the proceedings are those of individual participants and do not necessarily represent the views of all workshop participants, the planning committee, BJS, or the National Academies.