Police suicide: Why the National Police Chiefs’ Council denies the data
The National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) is currently collating data regarding police and former police officer and staff suicides but denies they are doing so. In this piece we examine the data and discuss the denial.
This article discusses suicide, including methods. Please look after yourself when reading and know that there are organisations such as Police Care and Samaritans, as well as your Federation wellbeing leads who can support you if you are affected by its contents.
This article is an approximate 10 minute read.
Background
Six years ago, crime reporter Carl Eve, wrote a bombshell article evidencing that police services ‘had no idea’ the numbers of serving police officers and staff who died by suicide. It took almost two years of him doggedly chasing police services through Freedom of Information (FOI) requests to get this, with some services still not responding by the time of his publication, which is ironic for a body founded on the law.
This was after Police Service Northern Ireland (PSNI) recognised that 20% of officer deaths over a 15 year period were due to suicide, with their Police Federation calling it a “frightening commentary on what is actually happening.”
As confronting as it is to say, the story from Mr Eve was never about how many officers and staff had died by suicide (although it is obviously tragic) but that the organisation didn’t know or even captured this information to begin with. This was, and remains to be, shocking given that policing is founded on collecting and analysing data to determine patterns to influence decisions and actions.
Spreading amongst police social media like wildlife, Mr Eve’s piece was quickly picked up, and praised, by the then head of the Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW), John Apter and the then head of the National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC), chief constable Martin Hewitt who very publicly announced they were ‘shocked’ at the reality of not collecting the data, vowing to take action moving forward.
Since Mr Eve’s first publication, I have been a staunch and vocal advocate for acknowledging and taking action around police suicide prevention and deaths, much to the chagrin of many senior leaders who wish me to remain quiet. Following on from Mr Eve, I wrote my own piece discussing the progress the NPCC had made (spoiler alert, there wasn’t much) after submitting my own FOI request.
Indeed, as Mr Eve noted in his piece, US police sergeant, Andy O’Hara, who founded Badge of Life withdrew from the work because he could never get accurate figures on police suicide other than identifying that more police officers died by suicide than were killed in action.
I personally know a great many officers, senior leaders and staff working on suicide prevention within services who truly understand what is needed, are incredibly passionate and extremely dedicated to supporting their colleagues. This piece is not to serve as an attack on those going to unimaginable lengths to keep themselves and their colleagues going. It is entirely about holding senior leaders to account for assurances very publicly made.
Current picture
The working figures of police suicide are thought to be around just over one officer every two weeks. However, it’s important to acknowledge that these vague figures come from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) and are therefore open to underreporting and misrepresentation.
Although the burden of proof for a coroner to find a verdict of suicide was lessened from a criminal to a civilian threshold in 2018, it’s extremely important to acknowledge that the threshold still remains high. A death, for example, can be ‘obviously’ suicide to everyone but because there is no note, a coroner may rule it ‘open’ or ‘accidental’. I would also add here that there are many ways to die by suicide without it looking like one, which is an important issue to acknowledge as police personnel can wish to spare their family the ‘shame’ or issues with life insurance pay outs if a verdict of suicide is made.
The figures also do not capture important information such as length of service, recently resigned/retired and if they were under misconduct proceedings (internally or criminally) at the time of their death, which are all risk factors for suicide.
Another key element missing in police suicide figures is that neither the organisation nor ONS capture data on suicidal ideation and attempts. To obtain this information is fraught with difficulties and we would rely heavily on definitions and confidential self-reporting, given suicide is still such a private and sociologically ‘shameful’ act, despite wishing it weren’t. However, a Call4Backup survey found 20% of respondents had contemplated or attempted suicide and I have personally supported dozens of suicidal officers over recent years.
We also know that 82% of respondents in the PFEW Pay and Morale Survey 2023 “had experienced feelings of stress, low mood, anxiety or other difficulties with their health and wellbeing over the last 12 months.” with 93% admitting that these issues “had been caused, or made worse, by work…”
Studies are beginning to evidence that the organisation is mentally, emotionally and physically detrimental to its people’s health, often more so than their specific roles within the organisation. Queensland Police, for example, recently evidenced that the organisation is up to three times more harmful to its personnel than the trauma they experience in their jobs.
Data denial
Last year I was approached by a whistleblower within the working national ‘police suicide prevention group’, which comprises of police officers, police staff and non-police professionals. They have a range of functions but, in principle, its key objective is to collate and analyse the data around police suicide. The whistleblower gave me a copy of the collated data from the NPCC with an infographic, which I have replicated in full below.
I made attempts to gain the information through official channels and set out to submit a Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the NPCC, given the document I had received confirmed that the NPCC were the body collecting data. I asked for the figures and what followed was weeks of political ping-pong that leaves me writing this with a level of fury I can’t articulate.
Initially I was told by the FOI office that they didn’t hold this data but as a ‘show of good faith’ they told me that the figures across the two years was 80 ‘suspected’ suicides. So, I went back asking for the same figure breakdown on ‘suspected suicides’. They told me they had already replied to me previously, stating they did not hold the information and any such information would likely fall under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (HSWA) meaning they couldn’t share it publicly as it would ‘identify individuals.’
Knowing I held the data, I went back explaining that their denial was “disappointing” given I had already seen the figures they claimed not to hold, stating I would include the NPCC’s denial when I wrote my next piece on police suicide. Suddenly, the FOI correspondent was extremely apologetic, claiming they had “misunderstood” my request and would pass it on to the relevant person.
When I eventually received a reply from the colleague, I was given just two figures covering the years in question – male and female totals – with the rest, once again, supposedly falling under the HSWA and therefore the NPCC wouldn’t disclose. It was at this point I was left in no doubt that their ignorance was not a misunderstanding or ‘omission of truth’ but a calculated denial.
If we have clear post-vention protocols (structured check-ins post-suicide) in place but are doing the bare minimum (I’m aware of trauma-training being rolled out) to address, and change, the systemic issues that contribute to police suicide, the message this sends to those within policing is clear – “lessons will be learned” is easy to say but too difficult to action.
Suicide data
Let’s talk about the data that we do have and offer some brief analysis on it.
Disclaimer: Although it is best practice within the media not to disclose the method of suicide when discussing an individuals’ death, I am including it in my replication of the NPCC data because we need to know the issues if we’re going to use the data for demonstrable action.
Discussion
Objectively, there are no great surprises within the above data. More males complete suicide and more suicides occur in the 45+ age group, with hanging in their private residence the most common suicide method and location. However, going against the generalised civilian trend, it is married serving and former serving personnel dying as opposed to those single, divorced and widowed.
- Sex. It’s important to recognise that male suicide still overwhelmingly outnumbers female but, given ‘the police’ is still male-dominated, this shouldn’t be a surprise to many. However, this does not mean that we can only focus on males. There is research to evidence that females attempt suicide at 1.2 times the rate of males but are often minimised as ‘self-harming behaviours’ as there is still such medical misogyny in play.
- Race and ethnicity. Disappointingly, neither of these are captured within the data. I do believe they’re important as we need to be able to identify those most at risk and if there are any cultural and/or discrimination issues potentially at play. One of the issues with recording this is how we define it and if we allow self-reporting i.e. someone may consider themselves black (only), whilst another would consider themselves mixed race.
- Criminal/misconduct proceedings. Again, this is not recorded, which feels both apathetic and manipulative. I can’t help but feel that the organisation recognises that if it doesn’t acknowledge those who die by suicide whilst under investigatory proceedings, it means it doesn’t have to amend its system when it, and its people, contributes to them.
- Services/counties not named. Surprisingly neither the police services nor counties are captured so we can’t make any comparisons or identify any potential issues locally and/or nationally. As noted on the document above, not even every service delivered the data to the NPCC (make of that what you will).
- Health issues. Whether the individual had physical and/or psychological illnesses before their death is not recorded. This would be important to attempt to identify if there were opportunities to prevent their suicide such as getting them quicker access to support etc.
What next?
Anticipating the criticism I will inevitably get for writing this piece and ‘exposing’ the NPCC and wider police suicide figures, it would be extremely remiss of me not to acknowledge the strong feelings people have around suicide, especially to those who have lost colleagues and loves ones. However, one of the reasons why the military is much further forward than other uniformed services when it comes to suicide prevention (and they still have a long way to continually go) is because they’ve started to discuss it more openly.
Everyone from the general public to the government themselves are demanding more with less from police and if it’s a choice between quick wins for public perception and unspoken, internal systematic change, they’ll take the former every time. However, given that every suicide is said to cost the economy £1.7 million and a significant portion of that will be tens of thousands of pounds invested in officer and staff training, it’s incredibly short-sighted not to be doing more.
No one is arguing that every police suicide has work-based causes, and therefore the organisation holds legal liability, but that suicide is complex and we have a moral and legal obligation to reduce the harm we evidentially know the organisation and many of its people contribute to. Resilience to trauma exposure is highly individual, dependent on a multitude of factors, but it’s my experience that organisational moral injury (management being unsupportive etc) is often what tips the individual over.
When it comes to suicide, it can be argued the organisation doesn’t care (though many individuals within it do). And I don’t write that for dramatic effect but to remind everyone that although policing is not a business in the traditional sense, it still has to balance the financial books for political and public oversight and individuals are merely a number that can be replaced.
Many officers who pour themselves into their work to the detriment and sacrifice of their lives outside ‘The Job’ would do well to remember the necessary work-life balance at times of distress, especially when enduring protracted and traumatising disciplinary processes.
We have got to stop giving senior leaders platforms at symposiums to announce signing up to the latest mental health agreement/’covenant‘ we all know isn’t worth the recycled paper it’s written on.
Police suicides are not ‘marginal losses’ nor ‘collateral damage’ (both of which I’ve heard uttered from senior leader’s mouths) but people, with lives and loved ones in and outside the job.
They are members of the very same communities and wider society police are tasked with overseeing, and the organisation continues to let them down.
Toni White is a men’s and workplace mental health specialist with over 20 years experience in peer support through a combination of ethnographic and academic research and practical work. She supports individuals as well as presenting to, and working with, organisations, and is the founder of ForOurMen.
