Suicide Among Veterans

Veterans' Issues in Focus

by Rajeev Ramchand

USA military boots, hat and dog tags with American flag in background. Photo by fstop123/Getty Images

Photo by fstop123/Getty Images

Suicide is a major public health issue and among the top ten causes of death in the United States. Unfortunately, for more than a decade, the suicide rate has been rising in the general U.S. population and especially among veterans, men and women who risked their lives for the country. This Veterans' Issues in Focus Perspective presents data on the magnitude of the problem, identifies particularly noteworthy issues and trends, highlights recent advances, and identifies gaps that deserve increased attention from both researchers and policymakers. In its 2018–2024 strategic plan, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) identified preventing veteran suicide as its highest clinical priority, and the RAND Epstein Family Veterans Policy Research Institute is committed to helping VA—and the country—achieve this critical goal.

Magnitude of the Problem

In 2018, 6,435 veterans and 40,075 nonveteran adults died by suicide. But because there are many more nonveterans in the population, the rate of suicide among veterans was 32.0 per 100,000, compared with 17.2 per 100,000 for nonveterans (VA, 2020b).

Trends over Time

For the past 12 years, suicide rates have been consistently higher among veterans than nonveterans. Furthermore, since 2005, the suicide rate has risen faster among veterans than it has for nonveteran adults. Figure 1 shows age- and sex-adjusted rates over time (which are better for comparing between groups); as of 2019, adjusted rates of suicide were 27.5 per 100,000 for veterans and 18.2 per 100,000 for nonveterans (VA, 2020b).

Figure 1. Age- and Sex-Adjusted Suicide Rates Among Veterans and Nonveterans, 2005–2018

VeteransNonveterans
200518.515.5
200617.814.6
200719.115.0
200820.915.2
200921.415.4
201021.815.9
201122.616.2
201222.816.5
201324.016.5
201425.216.8
201526.317.1
201625.817.3
201727.317.9
201827.518.2

SOURCE: Data from VA, 2020b, data appendix.

Pressing Issues

The greatest difference in suicide rates between veterans and nonveterans is among those ages 18–34.

In 2018, the suicide rate among veterans 18–34 years old was 45.9 per 100,000—higher than in any other age group in either population and almost three times higher than for nonveterans in the same age bracket (16.5 per 100,000). This equated to 874 suicide deaths among veterans ages 18–34 (796 men and 78 women) in 2018.

The largest number of veterans who die by suicide are between 55 and 74 years old.

In 2018, 2,587 veterans ages 55–74 died by suicide, a rate of 30.4 per 100,000 (compared with 17.0 per 100,000 among nonveterans in the same age bracket).

The difference in suicide rates between veterans and nonveterans is greater among women than men, but for both veterans and nonveterans, rates are higher among men.

In 2018, the suicide rate for veteran women was 14.8 per 100,000 (291 deaths), almost twice the rate for nonveteran women (7.6 per 100,000). The difference was greatest among women ages 18–34 (veterans: 21.8; nonveterans: 6.8 per 100,000). That same year, the suicide rate among veteran men was 1.2 times the rate among nonveteran men (33.8 versus 29.0 per 100,000). For men, the difference was also greatest among 18- to 34-year-olds (veterans: 51.5; nonveterans: 26.4 per 100,000).

Veterans who die by suicide are more likely to use a firearm than civilians who die by suicide.

In 2018, 68.2 percent of veterans who died by suicide used a firearm, compared with 48.2 percent of nonveterans. Figure 2 shows these proportions overall and for men and women.

Figure 2. Percentage of Veterans and Nonveterans Who Died by Suicide, Firearm Use, 2018

VeteransNonveterans
Overall68.2%48.2%
Men69.4%53.5%
Women41.9%31.7%

SOURCE: Data from VA, 2020b, data appendix.

Veterans with mental health diagnoses have a significantly elevated suicide risk.

By many measures, the mental health care provided by VA through the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is higher-quality than the care available through private providers, and, in some areas, it might be improving (O'Hanlon et al., 2017; VA, 2020b). However, the rate of suicide among VHA patients with a mental health or substance use disorder diagnosis was 57.2 per 100,000—more than double the rate among those without these diagnoses.

Specifically, suicide rates were highest among VHA patients diagnosed with opioid use disorder or bipolar disorder (both between 120 and 130 suicide deaths per 100,000), followed by schizophrenia and substance use disorders overall (both between 80 and 100 deaths per 100,000), anxiety (67 per 100,000), depression (66.4 per 100,000), and posttraumatic stress disorder (between 50 and 60 per 100,000). There is also evidence that veterans with traumatic brain injuries are at increased risk of suicide compared with those without these injuries (Hostetter et al., 2019).

There is mixed evidence about the role of combat exposure in suicide risk. In one study, among all service members who deployed from 2001 to 2007, deployment was not associated with increased suicide risk between 2001 and 2009 (Reger et al., 2015). However, among those who served in the active-duty Army between 2004 and 2009, suicide risk was elevated during active service for currently and previously deployed soldiers (Schoenbaum et al., 2014).

Data on Veteran Suicide

In 2012, VA and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) collaborated to create the VA/DoD Mortality Data Repository. Each year, VA and DoD generate a list of all veterans, nonveteran VA patients (such as the eligible dependents of veterans), and active-duty military personnel, which is matched to the National Death Index maintained by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This produces a data set with causes of death for all veterans each year, regardless of their eligibility or use of VA benefits (Hoffmire et al., 2020).

Notable Advances in Research and Practice

The rate of veteran suicide, reflecting thousands of lives lost each year, warrants greater attention from VA, other federal agencies, state and local governments, and organizations that serve veterans. There have been some notable advances in research and practice that might help reduce suicide among veterans.

Emerging evidence suggests that screening and risk assessments for suicide can be lifesaving.

Screening all patients for suicide risk in mental health, emergency, and primary care settings can detect those who might be thinking about harming themselves, discern their current level of risk, and provide opportunities to offer appropriate care—ultimately reducing suicide attempts (Miller et al., 2017). Screening can be conducted efficiently using validated tools, such as the Ask Suicide-Screening Questions (ASQ) tool, across health care settings (Roaten et al., 2018; National Institute of Mental Health, undated; Thom, Hogan, and Hazen, 2020). As part of its National Strategy for Preventing Veteran Suicide, VA developed Risk ID, a three-stage suicide screening process that has been implemented successfully in VA settings (VA, 2018; Bahraini et al., 2020).

VA's ReachVet program can identify veterans at risk of suicide who would have otherwise been missed.

VA's ReachVet program applies statistical algorithms to clinical data to produce a monthly list of veterans with the highest probability of dying by suicide (Reger et al., 2019). A coordinator at each VA facility receives the list of at-risk patients and alerts the veterans' health care providers.

VA is expanding its Caring Contacts program based on promising evidence that such contacts can save lives.

Caring contacts are brief, personal, nondemanding follow-up messages sent to patients after they receive care. These messages have been linked to decreased suicide attempts (Motto and Bostrom, 2001). VA now sends follow-up letters to veterans who receive care at a VA facility or call the Veterans Crisis Line and choose to identify themselves to the call responder (VA, 2020a). VA researchers are testing the approach with other patient populations, including those seen in VA emergency departments (Landes et al., 2019).

Community-based initiatives could yield promising approaches to preventing veteran suicide.

Several efforts have recently been launched to promote community-based approaches to suicide prevention. The CDC's community prevention framework has seven components, ranging from providing economic support to promoting connectedness and creating a protective environment (Stone et al., 2017). In partnership with VA, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) recently issued a challenge (and is providing assistance) to governors and mayors across the United States to create and implement suicide prevention plans targeting service members, veterans, and their families. As of November 2020, 27 states and 18 communities were participating in the program (SAMHSA, 2020). Prior community-based initiatives similar in structure but focused on youth suicide prevention have produced promising results (Garraza et al., 2015, 2018, 2019).

Directions for Future Research

Researchers have been engaged in multiple research efforts to address veteran suicide, and many studies are ongoing. There remains much to explore to better understand why veterans take their lives and how policies and practices could enable effective interventions.

  • Although VA has implemented various suicide prevention strategies, not all veterans are eligible or opt to receive care through VA. Among veterans who died by suicide in 2018, 63 percent (4,057 of 6,435) did not have an encounter with VHA in the year of their death or the year prior. However, many may have been receiving care outside of VA; among the general insured population, as many as 83 percent of those who die by suicide had a health care visit in the year before their death (Ahmedani et al., 2014). There is a need for more research on veterans' non-VA health care encounters and for studies to develop, test, inform, and evaluate community-based efforts to reach veterans outside of VA.
  • There are groups of veterans that are hard to reach and may be at increased risk of suicide, including those who are involved in the criminal justice system; those who are experiencing homelessness; those who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ); those who have received other-than-honorable discharges from the military; and veterans who are isolated or lonely. Veterans could fall into more than one of these groups. There is a need for research to identify whether and to what extent specific veteran subpopulations are at heightened risk for suicide and whether unique supports are needed to address their risk.
  • There are gaps in most U.S. communities' ability to effectively intervene with individuals in crisis. They often rely on legal interventions or unnecessary hospitalizations that either delay or increase suicide risk (Hogan and Goldman, 2021). There is a need for more research to evaluate the harms of current crisis responses, particularly among high-risk veteran subpopulations; to identify novel solutions for responding to crises; and to evaluate the effectiveness of promising new approaches.

References

  • Ahmedani, Brian K., Gregory E. Simon, Christine Stewart, Arne Beck, Beth E. Waitzfelder, Rebecca Rossom, Frances Lynch, Ashli Owen-Smith, Enid M. Hunkeler, Ursula Whiteside, Belinda H. Operskalski, M. Justin Coffey, and Leif I. Solberg, "Health Care Contacts in the Year Before Suicide Death," Journal of General Internal Medicine, Vol. 29, No. 6, June 2014, pp. 870–877.
  • Bahraini, Nazanin, Lisa A. Brenner, Catherine Barry, Trisha Hostetter, Janelle Keusch, Edward P. Post, Chad Kessler, Cliff Smith, and Bridget B. Matarazzo, "Assessment of Rates of Suicide Risk Screening and Prevalence of Positive Screening Results Among US Veterans After Implementation of the Veterans Affairs Suicide Risk Identification Strategy," JAMA Network Open, Vol. 3, No. 10, October 21, 2020, article e2022531.
  • Garraza, Lucas Godoy, Simone Peart Boyce, Christine Walrath, David B. Goldston, and Richard McKeon, "An Economic Evaluation of the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Suicide Prevention Program," Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, Vol. 48, No. 1, February 2018, pp. 3–11.
  • Garraza, Lucas Godoy, Nora Kuiper, David B. Goldston, Richard McKeon, and Christine Walrath, "Long-Term Impact of the Garrett Lee Smith Youth Suicide Prevention Program on Youth Suicide Mortality, 2006–2015," Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, Vol. 60, No. 10, October 2019, pp. 1142–1147.
  • Garraza, Lucas Godoy, Christine Walrath, David B. Goldston, Hailey Reid, and Richard McKeon, "Effect of the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Suicide Prevention Program on Suicide Attempts Among Youths," JAMA Psychiatry, Vol. 72, No. 11, November 2015, pp. 1143–1149.
  • Hoffmire, Claire A., Shannon K. Barth, and Robert M. Bossarte, "Reevaluating Suicide Mortality for Veterans with Data from the VA-DoD Mortality Data Repository, 2000–2010," Psychiatric Services, Vol. 71, No. 6, June 2020, pp. 612–615.
  • Hogan, Michael F., and Matthew L. Goldman, "New Opportunities to Improve Mental Health Crisis Systems," Psychiatric Services, Vol. 72, No. 2, February 1, 2021, pp. 169–173.
  • Hostetter, Trisha A., Claire A. Hoffmire, Jeri E. Forster, Rachel Sayko Adams, Kelly Stearns-Yoder, and Lisa A. Brenner, "Suicide and Traumatic Brain Injury Among Individuals Seeking Veterans Health Administration Services Between Fiscal Years 2006 and 2015," Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, Vol. 34, No. 5, September–October 2019, pp. E1–E9.
  • Landes, Sara J., JoAnn E. Kirchner, John P. Areno, Mark A. Reger, Traci H. Abraham, Jeffery A. Pitcock, Mary J. Bollinger, and Katherine Anne Comtois, "Adapting and Implementing Caring Contacts in a Department of Veterans Affairs Emergency Department: A Pilot Study Protocol," Pilot and Feasibility Studies, Vol. 5, October 10, 2019, article 115.
  • Miller, Ivan W., Carlos A. Camargo, Jr., Sarah A. Arias, Ashley F. Sullivan, Michael H. Allen, Amy B. Goldstein, Anne P. Manton, Janice A. Espinola, Richard Jones, Kohei Hasegawa, and Edwin D. Boudreaux, "Suicide Prevention in an Emergency Department Population: The ED-SAFE Study," JAMA Psychiatry, Vol. 74, No. 6, June 2017, pp. 563–570.
  • Motto, J. A., and A. G. Bostrom, "A Randomized Controlled Trial of Postcrisis Suicide Prevention," Psychiatric Services, Vol. 52, No. 6, June 2001, pp. 828–833.
  • National Institute of Mental Health, "Ask Suicide-Screening Questions (ASQ) Toolkit," webpage, undated. As of May 2021: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/research/research-conducted-at-nimh/asq-toolkit-materials/
  • O'Hanlon, Claire, Christina Huang, Elizabeth Sloss, Rebecca Anhang Price, Peter Hussey, Carrie Farmer, Courtney Gidengil, "Comparing VA and non-VA Quality of Care: A Systematic Review," Journal of General Internal Medicine, Vol. 32, No. 1, January 2017, pp. 105-121.
  • Reger, Greg M., Mary Lou McClure, David Ruskin, Sarah P. Carter, and Mark A. Reger, "Integrating Predictive Modeling into Mental Health Care: An Example in Suicide Prevention," Psychiatric Services, Vol. 70, No. 1, January 1, 2019, pp. 71–74.
  • Reger, Mark A., Derek J. Smolenski, Nancy A. Skopp, Melinda J. Metzger-Abamukang, Han K. Kang, Tim A. Bullman, Sondra Perdue, and Gregory A. Gahm, "Risk of Suicide Among US Military Service Members Following Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom Deployment and Separation From the US Military," JAMA Psychiatry, Vol. 72, No. 6, June 2015, pp. 561-569.
  • Roaten, Kimberly, Celeste Johnson, Russell Genzel, Fuad Khan, and Carol S. North, "Development and Implementation of a Universal Suicide Risk Screening Program in a Safety-Net Hospital System," Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, Vol. 44, No. 1, January 2018, pp. 4–11.
  • SAMHSA—See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
  • Schoenbaum, Michael, Ronald C. Kessler, Stephen E. Gilman, Lisa J. Colpe, Steven G. Heeringa, Murray B. Stein, Robert J. Ursano, Kenneth L. Cox, for the ARMY STARRS Collaborators, "Predictors of Suicide and Accident Death in the Army Study to Assess Risk and Resilience in Servicemembers (Army STARRS): Results From the Army Study to Assess Risk and Resilience in Servicemembers (Army STARRS)," JAMA Psychiatry, Vol. 71, No. 5, May 2014, pp. 493-503.
  • Stone, Deb, Kristin Holland, Brad Bartholow, Alex Crosby, Shane Davis, and Natalie Wilkins, Preventing Suicide: A Technical Package of Policy, Programs, and Practices, Atlanta, Ga.: Division of Violence Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2017.
  • Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, "Governor's and Mayor's Challenges to Prevent Suicide Among Service Members, Veterans, and Their Families," webpage, last updated November 10, 2020. As of May 2021: https://www.samhsa.gov/smvf-ta-center/mayors-governors-challenges
  • Thom, Robyn, Charlotte Hogan, and Eric Hazen, "Suicide Risk Screening in the Hospital Setting: A Review of Brief Validated Tools," Psychosomatics, Vol. 61, No. 1, January–February 2020, pp. 1–7.
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, National Strategy for Preventing Veteran Suicide, 2018–2028, Washington, D.C., 2018.
  • ———, "VA Launches Program to Send Caring Letters to 90,000 Veterans," press release, October 5, 2020a.
  • ———, 2020 National Veteran Suicide Prevention Annual Report, Washington, D.C., November 2020b.
  • VA—See U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Research conducted by

This Perspective is part of the "Veterans' Issues in Focus" series. Policy research has an important role to play in supporting veterans as they transition to life after military service. This shift can be challenging—from securing job opportunities and housing to coping with trauma and disability. Researchers at the RAND Epstein Family Veterans Policy Research Institute routinely assess the latest data on critical issues affecting veterans, gaps in the knowledge base, and opportunities for policy action.

Funding for this publication was made possible by a generous gift from Daniel J. Epstein through the Epstein Family Foundation, which established the RAND Epstein Family Veterans Policy Research Institute in 2021. The institute is dedicated to conducting innovative, evidence-based research and analysis to improve the lives of those who have served in the U.S. military. Building on decades of interdisciplinary expertise at the RAND Corporation, the institute prioritizes creative, equitable, and inclusive solutions and interventions that meet the needs of diverse veteran populations while engaging and empowering those who support them. For more information about the RAND Epstein Family Veterans Policy Research Institute, visit veterans.rand.org.

This publication is part of the RAND Corporation Perspective series. RAND Perspectives present expert insights on timely policy issues. All RAND Perspectives undergo peer review to ensure high standards for quality and objectivity.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/research-integrity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.