Quote from: Lucky Cris on January 29, 2014, 07:41:06 PM

Quote from: Gareth (BitInstant) on January 29, 2014, 06:58:24 PM

Quote from: Lucky Cris on January 29, 2014, 06:45:24 PM

Quote from: Gareth (BitInstant) on January 29, 2014, 05:52:06 PM

Quote from: Lucky Cris on January 29, 2014, 05:48:24 PM

Quote from: Gareth (BitInstant) on January 29, 2014, 05:15:56 PM

Maybe you've had better experience than me, but in all the cases i've contacted law enforcement over someone suicidal they've only responded if the person in question was making an active attempt - they did not respond when it was simply suicidal ideation without an active attempt.

When there is an active attempt, they will intervene, otherwise their response has usually been "not our role".

I have up close and personal experience actually. I'm not sure what type of work you do; a public servant/work in civil services... if this applies to you --> Just understand that you too could be named in a lawsuit should someone call LE because their spouse is having suicidal thoughts, LE don't respond for a 'welfare check' and the person follows through. Depending on your role, you could be named a defendant vice witness. I'd have to know more to determine whether vicarious or another form of secondary liability would apply.

But hell, with today's laws, people can sue for anything, right?

Let me get pulled over for intoxication (will never happen, I don't drink) and LE let me go with a warning and I get into a wreck and hurt myself or someone... I'd sue their asses for jeopardizing my life and others' because they failed to arrest me for DUI. Really I wouldn't sue, that's just an example to show you how far things can go.

Back on topic, perhaps you have a lazy department servicing your municipality, or they're just pulling a fast one over your eyes, IDK. Not all of them are good, and we all know the uninformed are taken advantage of. But if I were you, I'd become informed; just so I'd know I'm protected if something like that ever happened. Just saying. Sorry - I know I talk too damn much.

I've run online communities for autistics who tend to also have various mental health problems, including suicide threats - and in every case i've reported a threat to law enforcement they only acted if there was an imminent danger of an actual attempt, otherwise they advised it was not their role and stated that I should contact the individual's healthcare provider.

To be fair, in cases of an imminent attempt (i.e a person posted "i've just taken a bottle of pills") the police were quick to locate them and act. Simply seeing someone express suicidal thoughts was never enough to get law enforcement to respond.

Ah! That brings another beast into the equation... perhaps a slightly different beast? This piece is out of my league; way too many variables for me to even pretend I know what I'd be talking about. So I guess in this situation, the mentally ill person making the threats has immediate supervision (therefore no opportunity), don't have the ability to act, so their life isn't in jeopardy? Just can't imagine a non response in situations where opportunity, ability, and jeopardy exists.

Unfortunately not quite - most people with mental health issues are NOT under constant supervision (and in fact should not be unless it's absolutely necessary).

Neither do they not have the ability to act. Do not read "mental illness" as the hollywood depiction of someone shouting at invisible voices in their head, it's far more complex than that and suicidal depression in itself is a mental illness which manifests purely as regular old depression combined with suicidal ideation.

I won't pretend to know where to begin to with this one; too many variables outside of my scope to consider. Obviously the hollywood versions mandate a response (high potential for violence), and so do cases where a person is clinically depressed (more likely to act). Mentally ill or not, I can't think of one reason why LE won't respond, but evidently they exist. Pure speculation at this point but it could be because it's third party info, the person might not be threatening only thoughts with no desire to act, IDK to be honest. But the last thing I want to do is rent out space in head to thinking about it; that space is already reserved Tongue

I'll have to get back with you if one comes to mind.

Boy, haven't we highjacked this thread? Good stuff though - I hope others found it informative.

And why can't the the majority of communication exchanges on this forum debate with tact like us? Another thread I suppose Tongue

We should do this again.

We have indeed hijacked this thread a tad, i've PMed the OP asking if he's alright and offering to help him contact local services if he needs it.