" To be or not to be...", starts the soliloquy from Hamlet. The question has a timely application to the recurring debate on whether to construct a suicide prevention barrier on the Bridge.
According to todays San Francisco Chronicle, there were 23 suicides from the span in 2005. That number was less than 4% of the total of all suicides in the Bay Area during the period. Yet the meager percentage is the basis of arguments for constructing a barrier. The barriers cost to the public is estimated in the tens of millions. Some of the proponents have humane motivations. Others have monetary or political reasons.
But the public doesn't know the reasons of the jumpers. Since the public is paying, they have the right to know what personal decisions of the jumpers they are interfering with. Maybe suicide was a reasonable and appropriate response to the jumpers problems. Maybe if the public knew what these jumpers were avoiding in real life they would have assisted the jumpers.
Ergo. Without full disclosure of jumper's circumstances, fuding of a barrier would be made on insufficient data.
No comments:
Post a Comment