Use money to raise bar on suicide prevention, not deterrence
Editor, The Times:
When I heard that Seattle would be spending $4.5 million on a suicide-prevention barrier fence, I was aghast [“Work on Aurora Bridge to occur mostly at night,” NWWednesday, April 21].
Not only is this is a waste of money, it is not likely to be effective in the way that the city is hoping. I do not think that anyone desperate enough to take his or her own life could be deterred by something as simple as a metal fence. It could even be seen as one more painful barrier.
If Seattle is so desperate to throw a few million dollars around, I have a few suggestions where it can spend it instead.
Suicidal people would benefit more if we invested in mental-health care and suicide-prevention programs. Putting up a fence will not stop anyone from committing suicide. These people need personal help, not a metal substitute.
It is very sad when someone chooses death over life; I do not think that the solution is in this barrier. There are other ways to lead people from the ledge of the Aurora Bridge. They may not be the easiest ones, but choosing what is right should be what matters the most.
— Andra Amador, Lake Forest Park
State jumping into unnecessary, costly project
Folks in Seattle seem to think the Aurora Bridge needs a fence around it, apparently to protect people who will just find some other way to commit suicide.
The state wants to spend a fortune on new cables for a floating bridge that could be destroyed in four more years.
Some other government brainstorm is blowing $90,000 to count grizzly bears.
And I keep hearing about other financial fiascos. Most of them seem to be the result of federal money that comes with many strings attached. Locals have to spend it on preordained, stupid projects, or they do not get the money. I know this is simple-minded thinking, but why couldn’t the federal government just leave out money here, where we have a chance of spending it on something we actually need?
— David Alvar, Edmonds