LA Times; SGLI causes suicide
Bill sends us a link to the LA Times which speculates that Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (SGLI) and the fact that it pays off in the event of suicide may be the reason suicides are so high in the military;
Army Spc. James Christian Paquette walked into the benefits office at Ft. Wainwright, Alaska, with a question: Did his military life insurance policy pay in cases of suicide? He was assured that it did.
Less than two weeks later, he shot and killed himself — and his family collected $400,000.
His widow struggles with the question of whether he would have proceeded with his plan if suicide had not been covered. “He just wanted to know we would be provided for,” Jami Calahan said. “It may have been a weight taken away.”
The role of life insurance has not been closely examined in the quest to understand why 352 active-duty service members took their own lives last year — more than double the number a decade earlier.
Well, since most civilian life insurance policies also pay off (after a two year cooling-off period) for suicides, then the LA Times should look at the way it effects the suicide rate among civilians, too. The suicide rate among civilians of the same demographics as most military people is somewhat higher, too. What makes more sense to me is if there was someone in that “benefits office” (whatever that is) who could have alerted Paquette’s chain of command that he’d asked that question so they could keep an eye on him and warn his family.
Category: Military issues
Yup, I am going with the why in the hell whomever he had asked did not notify his Chain of Command that they had a suicidal troop asking about his Life Insurance. Wasn’t that handled through PAC? SGLI I mean….
Blaming Life Insurance for his death? Whatever it takes the family to get through their grief I suppose.
That’s right up there for blaming the gun he used for the suicide.
A prominent Taiwanese manufacturer had a spate of worker suicides a while back and drew international criticism… so besides installing safety nets etc. they stopped paying death benefits for suicides (formerly they had.) The rash of suicides stopped. Not to say SGLI needs to change – but there are some cultures and places in which that approach works.
I’ve heard this story in different flavors rather often. Solider asks his chain of command/benifits coordinator if sucide is covered and they tell him yes. A few days later he offs himself.
What strikes me as odd, is that for as often as I’ve heard this story, I’ve never heard of an investigation into the chain of command or the benifits coordinator. This tells me there is either one hell of a cover up going on (possible I suppose given that peoples careers would be at stake), or there isn’t enough evidence to get these claims even to the 15-6 level.
Hopefully this NYT article will get the traction needed to take a careful look at this and make a determination one way or another. More likely though it’ll turn into a witch hunt, with lots of flash and bag and plenty of showy stuff, but in the end leaving the matter unresolved.
I think Jonn’s headline is a little irresponsible. I read the article and the LAT in no way blames SGLI for military suicides. It simply states the case that some military members already at risk for suicide may be further motivated by the insurance money to follow through with their suicidal ideation. They go on to point out that the suicide rate increases dramatically for civilians once their coverage expands to cover suicide. Its an interesting article, and in my opinion it’s evenhanded and isn’t biased against SGLI.
@5 The first three paragraghs of the story are about Spc. Paquette’s suicide and his wife’s reaction. Whatever followed in the article would not make the impact the suicide story did. That’s why MSM articles are written the way they are — to grab your attention, and if possible, sway your opinion. They’re not in the least bit shy about putting the knee-jerk emotions up front in their articles.
Jonn’s headline plays off that tendancy. And I have yet to see him be “irresponsible” with his writing.
@5. IF SGLI suicide coverage is, as you say, a suicide motivator, AND civilian suicides increase when coverage extends to suicides, THEN coverage by SGLI is what? ‘Come on. You can say it. It’s okay. We all know.’ (c/o My Cousin Vinnie) Is it SGLI alone? Of course not, BUT since servicemen are covered by SGLI, who are you going to call out, Mutual of Omaha?
I think reading the LA Times is more liable to lead to suicide.
@7 – Good point.
No doubt there would’ve been a HIPPA violation in that crazy mess of chain of command. The benefits counselor might have been fired due to a HIPPA violation by telling someone in the chain of command, which is REALLY DUMB IMHO, but regulations is regulations, no?
Yeah, and cars cause drunk driving deaths because, ya know, like every drunk driver owns one. Probably serial killers do, too. Just think, we could eliminate drunks AND serial killers by getting rid of all automobiles and pick up trucks!
Did you know that the rise in military suicides over the past decade has actually brought the rate closer to the civilian rate—and not, as is widely assumed and reported, in excess of it? The problem with the bad information is the bald comparison of suicide rates for military and civilians without controlling for the gender factor, among other things. The gender factor is HUGE inasmuch as roughly 85% of the military is male and males commit suicide at a rate 4 times that of females. But this is often overlooked in the military suicide ‘crisis’ stories. And then we have—as an aside—the war factor. Although many who write about military suicides make the assumption that combat anxiety and being witnesses to war are factors in military suicides, half of all military suicides are committed by people who never deployed. Me, I like the insurance angle. It’s not new but it tends to show that for some people—civilian and military—suicide is not an impulsive act but the outcome of a thoughtful plan to both end one’s life and benefit others monetarily.
I got a civilian life insurance policy about 10 years ago and it coveres suicide after two years. I haven’t felt the need to kill myself.
@ Twist…we took out as much as the policy would allow w/o the health exam and we read it all. It covered suicide after three years…To me, knowing all that you can about protection and what you pay for is a good thing. Life can change in an instant and we never know why people do things.
I am sad for his family. He surely must have had bad thoughts for longer than two weeks and was pushed over by knowing that his family would sort of be okay. People who off themselves are just not right, and most aren’t ever thinking of what/who gets left behind.
Atleast he thought about supporting his family. No one could truly made that soldiers LIFE anymore irrelevant then family. Thats all he had and when the made him feel unwanted time and time again, he felt like there was no use in trying anymore. No one even cared enough to wonder why he would ask such a bizzare question from the direct source. That cry for help from an ill depressed man was sadly unanswered. I believe he was brave and fearless. It has to be extremely frightening to to take ones life. He thought about his family’s finances, and maybe thats how they made him feel. Finances were his only true contibution to his family. Maybe he felt unwanted everywhere.
Sorry for the typos. Smartfone ;(