Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Sunday, 30th November 2008 Change Date

The Scotsman Digital Archive - Special Christmas Offer

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Scotland On Sunday site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

$50m safety measure for San Francisco 'suicide magnet'



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 12 October 2008
AFTER decades of debate, and unknown numbers of lost lives, the board that controls the Golden Gate Bridge has voted to install a suicide barrier.
At a cost of millions of dollars, stainless steel nets will be hung from the sides of the world-famous bridge in an effort to stop people from jumping to their deaths.

With a 14-1 vote in favour of the net system, the Golden Gate Transportation D
istrict's board of directors rejected several other options to prevent suicide jumps, including extending the existing 4ft railings and leaving the iconic bridge unchanged.

"This is a red-letter day in the history of San Francisco," said Dr Mel Blaustein, the president of the Psychiatric Foundation of Northern California, which has lobbied for a barrier. "It's a suicide magnet. And sometimes all they need is a certain amount of time to stop, reflect and change their minds."

Officials said the steel nets, which would hang 20 feet below the bridge and extend about 20 feet from each side, would save lives without marring the California landmark's appearance. "The net offers a way to do the most humane and highest-minded thing… in a way that is aesthetically (minimal] as far as impacts on the bridge," said board member Charles McGlashan.

About 20 people take fatal jumps from the bridge every year, but 38 jumped last year and 19 have leaped so far this year, bridge officials said.

The net system, which is expected to cost between $40m and $50m to build, still requires a final environmental review. It will cost about $100,000 a year to maintain the nets, compared with $500,000 a year in maintenance costs for other suicide barriers, said Mary Currie, spokeswoman for the bridge authority.

Board member James Eddie voted against the plan because he was worried about the cost. "I want to ensure, if we build it, we're not indebting our children," he said.

Board member Joanne Sanders said commuters should not pay higher tolls to cover the net system's expense; instead, a pedestrian toll should cover the costs.

Tom Ammiano, board member and long-time advocate of the barrier, said he has been speaking about funding to state and federal officials, who have been supportive of the idea.

Proponents of a suicide barrier applauded after the board's vote Friday. John Brooks, 52, whose daughter Caley jumped from the bridge in January, said the barrier was a "moral imperative". "There is a good chance that had a barrier been there, she'd still be here," he said.

But opponents say a barrier won't deter people from committing suicide and question whether money would be better spent on mental health treatment. "We should help these people long before they get to the bridge," said Mill Valley resident Clark Hinderleider.





The full article contains 473 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 11 October 2008 8:53 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
 
1

Postmark-55,

China, 12/10/2008 05:10:20
What a total waste of money. Those wanting to commit suicide will, there are limitless amount of places and ways to choose from.
This coming from a country who has the world's highest military budget just so that it can kill people who want to live and yet wastes another 50 million dollars to save those who don't want to live. Go figure.
2

Jim A,

12/10/2008 05:24:14
Postmark, you wrote, "This coming from a country who has the world's highest military budget just so that it can kill people who want to live and yet wastes another 50 million dollars to save those who don't want to live. Go figure."

Postie, c'mon man, where's the love? :-)
3

Postmark-55,

China, 12/10/2008 06:39:18
#2 Jim A,
Hey Jim, fancy meeting you here eh?
My love lies with the Catholic Church Jim, and you know it.;-)
4

Jim A,

12/10/2008 07:46:14
#3 Postmark, really mate, I'd never have had you pegged as a left footer.
5

Bolivarian Scot,

London 12/10/2008 11:53:29
Interesting article.

One of the many legends about the Golden Gate bridge is that the guard-rail on its walkway was originally planned to be 5.5 feet high but this was lowered to 4 feet in the final construction because the bridge's architect, Joseph Strauss, was a short man and wanted to be able to see over its side!

A story so daft that it might just be true. I may ask my mate from university, who for some reason prefers living in California's sun-kissed wine region as opposed to Dumfries..... strange chap!
6

Selgovae,

12/10/2008 17:49:50
#1 "What a total waste of money. "

Not at all. Think of the families who may be sailing under the bridge.
7

,

12/10/2008 20:21:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
8

jarmon,

12/10/2008 22:08:53
Not only could they save money by not incresing the barrier,but they could make money by charging admission to watch the jumpers.And there are probably some people who would pay to see that.
9

Matt there,

12/10/2008 22:43:55
2Board member James Eddie voted against the plan because he was worried about the cost. "I want to ensure, if we build it, we're not indebting our children," he said."

Fool. It is the children this would save.
10

thatscottishman,

13/10/2008 04:35:37
Why are the Gays jumping off the landmark?
11

Douglas,

Bathgate 13/10/2008 17:33:29
Landing on a steel net after falling 20 feet will be a bit nippy. Has the cost of defending lawsuits brought by the injured been considered I wonder?
12

American,

13/10/2008 20:20:46
Another bad decision on how to spend money. If someone wants to kill themselves, there are many other ways.

#11-douglas-Good point!! I assume the "suicide attempts" will rise after word gets out about the first lawsuit settlement.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.