Why does this not surprise me. We are here to volunteer because we care. We want to give 100% of our efforts but the baloney we have to go through just on the politics side of things, I'm not even going to touch the occasional confusion on the regs.
When you have to live with the thought that the IG may call anytime because there is a sitation in your squadron that they want your input on. The Commander that pumps his or her chest to want to look good but in actuality is destroying morale. You could use a pat on the back because you just did 48 hours of CAP work.
The fear you have rubbed somebody wrong and they are just looking for you to mess up.
The long time member who had a heart attack because the work he had to do was so stressful and he knew he was between a rock and a hard place.
These are true things that have happened to really good people I know. They stay because they care and desperatly hope things will get better. They aren't quitters because they believe in the program.
When will somebody wake up to all of this. Yes there are some unstable people out there. On the same hand CAP is all some people have and the only friendships they have.
???
Quote from: Eclipse on June 17, 2009, 10:03:27 PM
Quote from: notaNCO forever on June 17, 2009, 07:37:39 PM
Quote from: dwb on June 17, 2009, 07:36:24 PM
???
+1
+ one more.
And me.
The culture in CAP is causing people to kill themselves. Is that what you're trying to say?
I can say from first hand experience that CAP kept me from killing myself. It gave me a purpose during a very dark time in my life so I guess I would have to disagree with your assessment.
I think he is trying to say there was something mentioned on suicide by CAP Members at the National Board Meeting??
If that is not the case........I am totally confused. Some times when I get so confused I want to jump off a bridge and...........
I'm guessing some didn't get the "CAP and Suicide" handout...
Quote
Civil Air Patrol and Suicide
Prepared by Sam D. Bernard (PhD) Lt. Col
National CISM Team Leader
Whereas:
1. In 2006, 33,300 Americans died by suicide with the following breakdown:
a. 26,308 males and 6,992 females
b. 30,138 whites, 3,138 non-whites of which 1,954 Blacks
c. 5,299 elderly (65+)
d. 4,189 youth (15-24)
e. 219 pre-youth (0-14)
2. In 2006, the number of deaths by suicide
a. 91 people a day die by suicide
b. 72 males and 19 females a day die by suicide
c. 82 whites, 8 non-whites and 5 blacks a day die by suicide
d. 14 elderly (65+) people a day die by suicide
e. 11 young (15-24) people a day die by suicide
3. An average of 1 person every 15.8 minutes dies by suicide,
a. An average of 1 older person every 1 hour and 39.2 minutes dies by suicide,
b. An average of 1 young person every 2 hours and 5.5 minutes dies by suicide,
4. Suicide is the 11th ranking cause of death in the USA, homicides rank 15th
a. 3rd for young (15-24)
5. 832,500 suicide attempts in the USA (25:1) (attempts: completions)
a. 1 attempt every 38 seconds
i. 100-200:1 for young (15-24)
ii. 4:1 for elderly (65+)
iii. 3 female attempts for each male attempt
6. "Survivors" (friends and family members of a loved one who died by suicide)
a. Intimately affects at least 6 other people,
b. Based on 766,042 suicide from 1982-2006, 4.6 million suicide survivors in the USA
i. 1 of every 65 Americans in 2006
ii. Number grew by 199,800 in 2006
c. Approximately 200,000 new survivors per year
7. All branches of the US military now address suicide,
8. CAP has 56,759 Total members
a. Cadets: 22, 426 39.5% of total members
b. 65+: 7,961 14% of total members
9. Suicide contagion is real – "copy cat", "werther effect", "suicide contagion"
10. Within the past year, CAP had cadet/former cadets complete suicide, and unknown seniors.
Therefore:
Civil Air Patrol would be well served to address suicide in a proactive manner by:
1. Developing protocols/education with the goal of preventing deaths by suicide in cadets and seniors,
2. Develop protocols/education with the goal of providing appropriate intervention when suicide warning signs are noticed,
3. Develop protocols/education with the goal of providing appropriate intervention after a death by suicide
4. Develop protocols/education with the goal of adequately and appropriately addressing the potential for "copy cat" suicides
Potential Training Resources:
• QPR: Question, Persuade and Refer, Well known program, 2 hours long http://www.qprinstitute.com
• ICISF: 2 day training, familiar model www.icisf.org
• ASIST: Canada based program, 2 days of intense training & role play http://www.livingworks.net/AS.php
• Yellow Ribbon: "card" based program http://www.yellowribbon.org/
• Jason Foundation: focusing on schools – expanding to faith-based http://www.jasonfoundation.com/
• American Association of Suicidology: international leader
http://www.suicidology.org/web/guest/home
Resources:
Warning Signs: http://suicidology.org/web/guest/stats-and-tools/warning-signs
2006 National statistics: http://suicidology.org/web/guest/stats-and-tools/statistics
Fact Sheets: http://suicidology.org/web/guest/stats-and-tools/fact-sheets
Other web sites of interest:
American Association of Suicidology: http://suicidology.org/web/guest/home
Tennessee Suicide Prevention Network: www.tspn.org
American Foundation for Suicide Prevention: http://www.afsp.org/
Suicide Prevention Resource Center: http://www.sprc.org/index.asp
Suicide Prevention Action Network: http://www.spanusa.org/
Sunday, June14, 2009
CAP & Suicide
The "handout" is a good general representation of why we have a "CISM" program. Suicide is not caused by any program. It is caused by the mismanagement of stress and depression in individuals; not just CAP members. We need to recognize situations which may lead individuals to suicide and help them get the treatment or counciling to prevent it.
The handout was not presented at the NB meeting however, it was discussed at a recent NB teliconference.
Quote from: N Harmon on June 17, 2009, 11:09:57 PM
I'm guessing some didn't get the "CAP and Suicide" handout...
Quote
SNIP
Not only didn't get it, I've never heard of it.
I am confused. I am unfamiliar with CAP causing suicides. I've had some frustrating experiences with CAP, but never considered offing myself over missing paperwork or frustrating wing staff officers.
I've been really reaaaaaally frustrated over some missed opportunities by past wing commanders and other wing staff (not that they're bad folk, I've never encountered a person on my wing's staff who is just a downright sucky human being), but even after 10 years, I don't see how members might feel like they have no alternative over CAP related things. I've seen a lot of really great people leave CAP because of various issues with it, but offing themselves? ???
Sorry, but I am not impressed by the handout. It fails to provide any type of linkage from suicides in general to CAP specifically. Does CAP have the same numbers of suicides as the population in general? Lower or higher? If we already have lower numbers, then what is the goal they want to achieve? Looks like just another program in search of a sponsor unless they can provide a linkage to CAP duties causing a higher suicide rate than average.
CAP could piggyback on the DARE program teaching kids to play quarters with water and have a suicide awareness and noose tying class.
Seriously this is retarded, check out #9 on the list. That is valid concern and because of that anti-suicide stuff has to be undertaken with care. It is in the publics interest to not report suicides if possible. Which makes the whole thing baffling and a really bad idea.
Quote from: Short Field on June 17, 2009, 11:43:31 PM
Sorry, but I am not impressed by the handout. It fails to provide any type of linkage from suicides in general to CAP specifically. Does CAP have the same numbers of suicides as the population in general? Lower or higher? If we already have lower numbers, then what is the goal they want to achieve? Looks like just another program in search of a sponsor unless they can provide a linkage to CAP duties causing a higher suicide rate than average.
Part of the problem is that there is no reliable way to determine a suicide rate for CAP members, and without that questions such as yours become impossible to answer with any degree of confidence.
We are continuing to look at a possible suicide prevention program for CAP, even if CAP itself is not a contributing "cause" to a tragically high suicide rate among Americans in our age cohort.
After all, we have a DDR program that is designed to help our cadets resist peer pressure. In theory, so too could a well-designed suicide prevention program help "immunize" our cadets from suicidal ideation.
Of course there are substantial (and possibly impossible) challenges when it comes to designing such a program for a part-time program like ours. Matters of subject matter expertise, an effective "evidence based" curriculum and resource materials, etc. are certainly daunting.
But NHQ CP, health services, and the CISM crew are continuing the conversation.
Ned Lee
QuotePart of the problem is that there is no reliable way to determine a suicide rate for CAP members, and without that questions such as yours become impossible to answer with any degree of confidence.
And yet...
QuoteWe are continuing to look at a possible suicide prevention program for CAP,
So, despite the fact that there is evidently no evidence that CAP has a worse than expected suicice rate or the more likely (in my opinion) situation that CAP has a much better than expected suicide rate, we're considering an anti-suicide program.
CAP can not solve all the problems of all our cadets. Yes, with 24K cadets there are going to be occassional sucides and our CISM folks should be aware of that and get some training in dealing with the aftermath. But, I knew when I first saw that post that we were going to be heading towards mandatory suicide prevention programs for everybody and that is certainly what Ned is implying.
Why do I feel like I'm just knocking my head against a wall today about statistics? CAP needs to hire a statistician to both collect relevant information and put it in context for our decision makers and teach them a few things about the scientific method as well.
Maybe we'll pull back from the precipice this time...
I'm sorry....but is it me or does this just seem like the CISM team is trying to justify their existance?
Don't get me wrong....I think it is a good idea in concept....but I get a nasty feeling that we got a new manditory suicide prevention breif/training/cbt heading our way.
Suicide prevention is requires contact time....and lets face it....2-3 hours a week with 10-20 cadets is just not enough to catch the signs.
Good grief. I'll be pissed if this turns into another useless training/awareness class. CAP needs to round up the do-gooder recreational bureaucrats and shoot them dead. ;)
It's hard to believe that the document was written by a PhD. He shows statistics to demonstrate that suicide exists, then merely mentions that former or current cadets committed suicide in the last year, and implies that maybe-kinda-sorta a SM might have too. What an incredibly sloppy piece of thinking and typically bureaucratic and [self-serving] attempt to inculcate CAP with the culture of pseudo-psychology. Yes, lets let the people who spent our money on NASCAR create yet another pointless and impotent system to address a risk that may not even exist beyond normal Bell curve distribution. There is excellent evidence to indicate that CISM programs reinforce and perpetuate Delayed Stress Syndrome claims, so maybe we should start the suicide prevention program by investigating whether these people create more problems than they solve. Sweet mother of Buddha!
Major Lord
edit: watch the language [mod]
Quote from: Climbnsink on June 18, 2009, 01:57:28 AM
Good grief. I'll be pissed if this turns into another useless training/awareness class. CAP needs to round up the do-gooder recreational bureaucrats and shoot them dead. ;)
Or give them the guns to shoot themselves dead (this post was about suicides.....remember??)
CAP can't solve every problem of its seniors or cadets, nor should it try.
Quote from: Climbnsink on June 18, 2009, 01:57:28 AM
Good grief. I'll be pissed if this turns into another useless training/awareness class. CAP needs to round up the do-gooder recreational bureaucrats and shoot them dead. ;)
Gregg,
I don't understand the hostility here. I certainly agree that nobody wants or needs some sort of useless "death by PowerPoint" class disguised as a Suicide Prevention program.
Which is why we are looking for the genuine article - an evidence based program that we could effectively employ given the exisiting training and resource limitations of our dedicated senior members.
It is worth remembering that according to the CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/Suicide-DataSheet-a.pdf), suicide is the third leading cause of death for Americans in the 15-24 year old age group, accounting for over 12% of deaths annually in that cohort.
We may or may not be able to measurably reduce the risk to our cadets. We can't know until we take a look at the "state of the art" / best practices in the field, and assess whether they can be employed in our unique program.
It could be something as simple as posting local Suicide Prevention numbers in unit bulletin boards and including suicide as an item to be considered during RST.
But we will continue to look at this as long as it presents as a serious risk to our cadets.
Before we do this
QuoteWhich is why we are looking for the genuine article - an evidence based program that we could effectively employ given the exisiting training and resource limitations of our dedicated senior members.
Shouldn't we at least evaluate this?
Quoteit presents as a serious risk to our cadets.
There is no evidence of this. Yes, it is a risk to youths in general, but is there evidence that CAP is experiencing more than it should? About the same as you would expect? Or much less than you would expect? If it is the latter, maybe no program is needed....
The first google result I got for "teen suicide rates" was this http://www.familyfirstaid.org/suicide.html indicating that in 2001 the teen suicide rate was 0.01%. For a cadet population of 22,426 that means we should expect about 22 cadet suicides a year. If we only had a couple then I'd say we're already on top of things and no action is necessary. (Yes, this is somewhat old data and there are some other issues with it and I'm sure more current stuff is available, but it is meant to give you an example of the sort of thinking that we should be doing before implementing new programs).
Quote from: Ned on June 18, 2009, 03:52:37 AM
I don't understand the hostility here. I certainly agree that nobody wants or needs some sort of useless "death by PowerPoint" class disguised as a Suicide Prevention program.
Maybe because you don't have to sit through the "death by PowerPoint" briefings that get mandated by National and Wing. The squadron endured the first hour of a CRM briefing at the last meeting. The briefer was just reading the slides and then ad libbing stuff for each bullet. I swear he gave the same points and the same discussion items multiple times before the briefing was over. After an hour, we still have not gotten to "crew". The previous meeting we heard a briefing that was designed by National for Wing PAOs. The intended audience was NOT your squadron level personnel. That 15 minute briefing (as scheduled and advertised) was packed into a "fun filled" 45 minutes as the briefer rambled on.
As I indicated, there is no practical way to determine the actual number of CAP member suicides per annum, for a whole lot of different reasons.
But there is certainly no reason to believe that our teen suicide rates are any different then the general population, either.
And, using your figures, 22 deaths a year is a huge loss. That's the equivalent of losing an entire squadron full of cadets each year. Each of which was almost certainly preventable.
Again, I don't know whether we can field an effective program given our limited expertise and resources.
But are you arguing that we shouldn't even do the research to see what is available and practical?
Let's save the argument for the time, if any, that a specific proposal is available for discussion. Until then, it just feels a little creepy to argue that CAP shouldn't even bother to try to prevent 22 cadets deaths a year.
The research needs to be done BEFORE a handout like that is disseminated.
The number given above for suicides in 1966 was 33,000. In a 300,000,000 population that's .01% or (in the cadet population) 2.42 cadets. While this is always a horrible tragedy, do we stand a chance to find those 2 cadets even with putting lots of resources into it? Probably not.
These cadets have parents, teachers, friends, clergy, etc who spend a lot more time with them than we do. I don't think we're the venue for this. We already give cadets many things that the general population doesn't get: belonging, achievement, recognition, mentorship, and a bit of anti-drug rah-rah. My hunch is that our suicide rate (while not zero - NatCap had one a couple of years ago) is lower than the general population.
I don't understand why CAP would have suicide rates, I mean CAP pulled me from a hard time in my life. I quit going to counseling every week and maybe check in with her once a month. CAP isn't ever going to be a problem or cause for depression, for me atleast, it was a solution.
I still don't get the point of this thread. I don't think people kill their selves because of the Civil Air Patrol. Most Cadets are in High School or just graduated. Maybe it is because of the stress of school or just life itself (Problems at home). It is not because of CAP. I don't know why anybody would even think it is because of CAP. Civil Air Patrol Cadets don't see combat. There is nothing to kill yourself over in CAP.
Talking about suicides is one thing that we know for certain increases suicides. Do we want the same CAP geniuses that taught quarters in a DARE program to talk about suicide? Especially when suicide isn't a problem for our population. I don't want to belittle anyone's death but a couple of members killing themselves every year is not a problem to be addressed. I wonder how many CAP members die per year falling off ladders? I think we should have mandatory ladder safety classes and work or way up to suicide prevention. Wait let's do shower safety, ladder safety, then suicide. ::)
Let me make things a little clearer....
CAP DOES NOT HAVE A SUICIDE PREVENTION PROGRAM!!!!!
However, we do have a CISM program which is quite effective and, the "handout" was produced by the National CISM officer. The sheet was written to inform the NB of the prevalence of suicide in the population and the "copycat" nature of suicide in teenagers and young adults.
As leaders and mentors of cadets, it is our responsibility to recognize this and to watch for certain behaviors, to refer to the chaplains or to parents and, when traumatic events occur in a unit, insure there are appropriate avenues to work things out.
Their is also a Moral Leadership class (or whatever they call it now) about suicide. I don't now if it's one of the older classes but it is one that should be taught. I think the most CAP could do is require a class like that to be taught annually; otherwise, I don't think much more can be done.
QuoteAs I indicated, there is no practical way to determine the actual number of CAP member suicides per annum, for a whole lot of different reasons.
Oh, I don't know about that. To start with, we do track deaths of CAP members, though the system isn't all that airtight http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/news/cap_news_online/final_salute/index.cfm
And if we thought it was important enough to be considering a program, you could survey squadron commanders about it.
And if we have no way to track CAP member suicides, just how do we expect to determine if any program designed to prevent it is working?
QuoteBut are you arguing that we shouldn't even do the research to see what is available and practical?
Yes. First you do the research to determine if CAP has a suicide "problem" and then if you determine that this is the case, then you do the research to figure out the best way of addressing it.
QuoteBut there is certainly no reason to believe that our teen suicide rates are any different then the general population, either.
I would propose that our rates are probably better than the general population, at least among cadets active in the program. Again, this is something we should actually know before trying to do something about it.
Quote from: Ned on June 18, 2009, 04:53:53 AM
Again, I don't know whether we can field an effective program given our limited expertise and resources.
Again Ned, you and the other out of touch
"leaders" at NHQ don't know if you
can field an effective program, but you can cram a bunch more useless, time consuming, restrictive mandates down the throats of our paying volunteer members
for problems that don't exist or that you lack the
"expertise and recourses" for so that the NB can have a warm fuzzy feeling when they sit at the bar and pat each other on the back.
Cadet leaders should be aware of this issue and be able to recognize when someone is at risk. Make a notification to parents if needed. Don't play amateur counselor.
I don't want CAP to try and become my smothering Big Brother.
As far as PowerPoints go, the term "Death by PowerPoint" exists for a reason. The thought of combining suicide prevention and PowerPoint creates visions of gasoline fumes and matches.
Quote from: Major Lord on June 18, 2009, 02:16:47 AM
It's hard to believe that the document was written by a PhD. He shows statistics to demonstrate that suicide exists, then merely mentions that former or current cadets committed suicide in the last year, and implies that maybe-kinda-sorta a SM might have too. What an incredibly sloppy piece of thinking and typically bureaucratic and [self-serving] attempt to inculcate CAP with the culture of pseudo-psychology. Yes, lets let the people who spent our money on NASCAR create yet another pointless and impotent system to address a risk that may not even exist beyond normal Bell curve distribution. There is excellent evidence to indicate that CISM programs reinforce and perpetuate Delayed Stress Syndrome claims, so maybe we should start the suicide prevention program by investigating whether these people create more problems than they solve. Sweet mother of Buddha!
Major Lord
edit: watch the language [mod]
The word you censored means " : excessively self-absorbed or self-indulgent " Its not what you think......
Just out of curiosity, what are the other two leading causes?
(A quick google search reveals that traffic accidents are #1, and youth violence is #2. Not 100% sure of the validity of this stat..)
So this begs the question: what are we doing to reduce the potential for youth death in CAP traffic accidents (oh, wait..) and youth violence awareness?
*sigh*
Much as I hate to admit it, Maj Lord is right: The paper quoted above does a poor job of showing decision makers that Civil Air Patrol, specifically, has a suicide problem. At least any more so that, say, a school or neighborhood. I am loathe to call it "fear mongering" but the way its written leaves the conclusion so unclear that I get the impression that the author hopes that people will make a leap of logic and assume that because the stats for the country are there, and we draw from the population of our country, clearly we have a "problem" when probably we do not.
I would tend to believe (and this is based on nothing so more than my own experiences in the program, both as a participant and as a leader) that CAP cadets probably have a LOWER incidence of suicide and youth violence due to the inherent support mechanisms in the units, and the overall "being a part of something larger." If we attract loners, they either tend to become a part of the group (and then, by definition, potentially cease being "loners") or they leave CAP (because it doesn't suit their personality/lonerness.. for lack of a better term). Bullies and miscreants who would perpetrate youth violence don't don't do well in our environment, and since our cadets can now associate themselves with a "big blue gang" and become adherents to our Core Values, I would expect that they'd find themselves further and further from the situations, places and people that would expose them to youth violence. (however, if youth violence is pervasive in that cadet's area, like, say, an inner-city area, that might be a moot point).
That's just an off the top of my head spitball there, but my guess is that I'm not too far off the mark.
Seriously......who here knows of a Cadet (and I mean personally met the individual) that committed suicide? Anyone here in a Squadron that had a Cadet commit suicide? Anyone at an activity where a Cadet committed Suicide??
I know of ONE. In my long time in CAP, I have met one Cadet who for all intents and purposes seemed absolutely normal, and showed no signs or symptoms.
The best we can do here is steal the Army/ Air Force suicide "help card" that shows what symptoms and signs to look for. However, it has been proved that usually there are no signs because the individual keeps his or her emotions bottled up. Unless the kid starts giving all of his or her things away and saying stuff like "man life would be better if I were dead", or "I am going to kill myself with Dad's gun tonight", we can not pick up on the signs and symptoms in the short amount of time we spend with them at unit meetings.
If it comes down to me having to stand in front of my Cadets and asking "does anyone here feel like committing suicide".....it may be time for me to leave CAP. WE (most of us) are not trained to discuss these personal issues or counsel children on this kind of level. Last I looked, you need a license in my State to do that. Heck, we should even call in outside professionals should a Cadet decide to kill himself or herself. Which was not the case in the situation I personally know about.
Quote from: Major Lord on June 18, 2009, 02:06:31 PM
The word you censored means " : excessively self-absorbed or self-indulgent " Its not what you think......
There was probably a better word to use than that particular one.... ;D
I think it is important to note: The use of CISM-trained members would be entirely appropriate in circumstances where there has been a suicide in a unit. If my unit had a situation like that, I'd get the wing chaplain, our CISM folks, and any other resources I had at my disposal in to talk to my folks, etc. And potentially, surrounding units if the cadet were someone, say, who was an encampment staff member, well-liked CAC cadet, etc.
I spent 28 years as a cadet & senior. I know of only a few incidences of suicide in CAP in those 28 years, most of them anecdotal, not someone in my unit or even someone I knew.
Quote from: Spike on June 18, 2009, 02:16:33 PM
Seriously......who here knows of a Cadet (and I mean personally met the individual) that committed suicide?
One former cadet. It was a recent thing. He quit quite a while ago and I only met him once or twice.
Quote from: Spike on June 18, 2009, 02:16:33 PM
Seriously......who here knows of a Cadet (and I mean personally met the individual) that committed suicide? Anyone here in a Squadron that had a Cadet commit suicide? Anyone at an activity where a Cadet committed Suicide??
In 30 years in this program I know 1 (one) that I personally met, had him at encampment. Thats one person out of over 2500 cadets that I have been in contact with at 15 encampments.
Quote from: NIN on June 18, 2009, 02:23:01 PM
I spent 28 years as a cadet & senior. I know of only a few incidences of suicide in CAP in those 28 years, most of them anecdotal, not someone in my unit or even someone I knew.
Strike that. A former member, a guy who I was a cadet with and later he served as my deputy commander, pitched himself off a building couple years back after being convicted of bilking law firm clients of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
He hadn't been a member for 10+ years when this happened, so I hardly think its would have been CAP's issue in any event.
Quote from: Spike on June 18, 2009, 02:31:41 AM
Quote from: Climbnsink on June 18, 2009, 01:57:28 AM
Good grief. I'll be pissed if this turns into another useless training/awareness class. CAP needs to round up the do-gooder recreational bureaucrats and shoot them dead. ;)
Or give them the guns to shoot themselves dead (this post was about suicides.....remember??)
Even in jest, these posts are uncalled for and offensive.
Quote from: RedFox24 on June 18, 2009, 01:15:31 PM
Again Ned, you and the other out of touch "leaders" at NHQ don't know if you can field an effective program, but you can cram a bunch more useless, time consuming, restrictive mandates down the throats of our paying volunteer members for problems that don't exist or that you lack the "expertise and recourses" for so that the NB can have a warm fuzzy feeling when they sit at the bar and pat each other on the back.
Woah, there, nelly.. I missed this in my initial read-thru.. That was a little over the top.
a) Ned's not suggesting this is something we need to pursue, and in fact seems to me to be suggesting that this might actually be tilting at windmills to throw any more mandates on the membership surrounding something that is, at the face, probably a non-problem and is not even supported by any evidence...
b) If you're also making commentary on the new safety program, then I assume you believe that preventable accidents that cause injury in CAP is also a "problem that does not exist." When we have substantial evidence that we do, indeed, have preventable accidents that cause injury in CAP. The jury in still out, however, on the efficacy of the corrective measures in the National Commander's recent policy letter. That's an
entirely different kettle of fish.
Quote from: Climbnsink on June 18, 2009, 12:23:15 PM
Talking about suicides is one thing that we know for certain increases suicides. Do we want the same CAP geniuses that taught quarters in a DARE program to talk about suicide? Especially when suicide isn't a problem for our population. I don't want to belittle anyone's death but a couple of members killing themselves every year is not a problem to be addressed. I wonder how many CAP members die per year falling off ladders? I think we should have mandatory ladder safety classes and work or way up to suicide prevention. Wait let's do shower safety, ladder safety, then suicide. ::)
That statement is patently false. Talking about suicides realistically, directly and with a trained person prevents suicide.
I feel for the families and friends of those that have taken their own life. But in CAP, it is rather rare. I would make an educated guess and say that in the past 10 years there have been less than 10 suicides by CAP members. Granted one is too many!
The very last one was very, very tragic. However, from speaking with her friends and those personnel around her at the time, she showed no signs or symptoms before she killed herself.
Quote from: DogCollar on June 18, 2009, 02:36:37 PM
Quote from: Spike on June 18, 2009, 02:31:41 AM
Quote from: Climbnsink on June 18, 2009, 01:57:28 AM
Good grief. I'll be pissed if this turns into another useless training/awareness class. CAP needs to round up the do-gooder recreational bureaucrats and shoot them dead. ;)
Or give them the guns to shoot themselves dead (this post was about suicides.....remember??)
Even in jest, these posts are uncalled for and offensive.
Maybe some of us are tired of walking on eggshells around the "politically correct types"
Free speech and all. I remember when it was funny to make fun of others misfortunes. Now do it and you can be sued. What has this country come to.
Quote from: NIN on June 18, 2009, 02:15:14 PM
*sigh*
Much as I hate to admit it, Maj Lord is right: The paper quoted above does a poor job of showing decision makers that Civil Air Patrol, specifically, has a suicide problem. At least any more so that, say, a school or neighborhood. I am loathe to call it "fear mongering" but the way its written leaves the conclusion so unclear that I get the impression that the author hopes that people will make a leap of logic and assume that because the stats for the country are there, and we draw from the population of our country, clearly we have a "problem" when probably we do not.
The paper was not intended to show "decision makers" we have a suicide problem in CAP. I took it as an overview/summary paper on suicide and a need to be watchful of it and, deal with it properly when it does happen. No one expects the membership to become therapists. We do expect however, we all know help is available and, how to refer to the experts who can help when needed.
Quote from: FW on June 18, 2009, 02:46:02 PM
........The paper was not intended to show "decision makers" we have a suicide problem in CAP. I took it as an overview/summary paper on suicide and a need to be watchful of it and, deal with it properly when it does happen.....
Funny that the "Regular Membership" does not take it the same way you took it. (we all must be dumb uneducated grunts trolling around the bottom depths of CAP) Also, "dealing with it properly when it does happen"......well that is like being late to your own party Sir.
How does Finance fit into suicides again? That is what you do..right??
Watch it Spike. You want a vacation?
Guess I cant ask National Board Members questions, or reply to their posts. Ok I see how it is run around here.
I wouldn't subscribe to the idea that "CAP is causing suicides." We don't do CAP activities often enough (most don't do CAP as a daily activity, I mean daily meetings although they might have CAP on their minds.
Now, being aware of suicides and keeping the mental health of our fellow officers and cadets in mind is a part of "fellowship" between squadron members. Sometimes a caring ear and sympathetic support from "friends," true ones, in CAP can stave off such problems.
Good retort, Spike.
As a former squadron/cc, gp/cc, wing/cc, region/cs and now, senior member of the NEC, I think I can offer my opinions on this subject.
Also as a health care professional, CISM trained member and one who has firsthand knowledge of traumatic events, I understand the need for "CISM" and to being aware.
I was also on the "call" when the paper was presented to the NB last week. I know why the paper was presented and, I know what the NB intends to do with this paper, thank you.
As far as the relationship between finance and suicide.... ever go through 1500 unit CAPF 173-2s? ;D
Quote from: Spike on June 18, 2009, 02:55:24 PM
Guess I cant ask National Board Members questions, or reply to their posts. Ok I see how it is run around here.
Not at all. I read your replies and they seem snide and disrespectful.
Either your delivery is poor, or you're really intending to be snide and disrespectful.
In the medium of the Internet, you lose all of the verbal cues (inflection, etc) and many of the non-verbal cues (facial expressions, body language) that you would during normal conversation.
In any event, as is taught in the cadet leadership materials, in the communication process, if the receiver takes the sender's meaning incorrectly, it likely that the sender is sending the "wrong" message.
Quote from: DogCollar on June 18, 2009, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: Climbnsink on June 18, 2009, 12:23:15 PM
Talking about suicides is one thing that we know for certain increases suicides. Do we want the same CAP geniuses that taught quarters in a DARE program to talk about suicide? Especially when suicide isn't a problem for our population. I don't want to belittle anyone's death but a couple of members killing themselves every year is not a problem to be addressed. I wonder how many CAP members die per year falling off ladders? I think we should have mandatory ladder safety classes and work or way up to suicide prevention. Wait let's do shower safety, ladder safety, then suicide. ::)
That statement is patently false. Talking about suicides realistically, directly and with a trained person prevents suicide.
Chaplain, I think you are correct to say talking (which is to say, intervening in a crisis) about suicide to a person at risk ( actively contemplating hurting themselves or others) is probably an effective tool for preventing suicide in those individuals. Teenagers presenting a special risk of suicide are those involved in drugs and alcohol, come from broken or violent homes, victims of sexual abuse, and homosexuals. My guess is that kids drawn to CAP generally don't fall into these high risk groups.
We assume, since the prevention models as exemplified by the Air Force are so prevalent, that they must be effective. The actual evidence suggests otherwise. A good example is the DARE program, a program demonstrated by the U.S GAO to actually make the drug situation
worse in inner cities. Just having good intentions is not sufficient.
If you google "efficacy of suicide prevention programs" you will find that attempts to introduce frank discussion and enforced programs about suicide in broad, and non-select groups of adolescents, actually increases the risk of suicide. To a carpenter, the worlds problems can be solved with a hammer, to a psychologist, therapy and "education" programs are the tools of choice, to a lawyer, risk and liabilty are his gods, and a perfect social order can only be created by having everyone on the planet sign a statement showing informed consent. When we deal with suicide issues, we get an amalgamation of these last two models, the medical and the legal, both of which are clearly imperfect tools.
If you want to eliminate suicide in CAP, just make sure you don't accept any kids from high risk environments-the (anecdotally) near absent risk of suicide among cadets is not sufficient cause to create a program created and administered by amateurs who are more likely to cause more harm then good.
Major Lord
Quote from: NIN on June 18, 2009, 03:00:06 PM
Quote from: Spike on June 18, 2009, 02:55:24 PM
Guess I cant ask National Board Members questions, or reply to their posts. Ok I see how it is run around here.
In the medium of the Internet, you lose all of the verbal cues (inflection, etc) and many of the non-verbal cues (facial expressions, body language) that you would during normal conversation.
I agree, many time my attempts to use so-called STANDARD ENGLISH (the Queen's English) has been misinterpreted as being "arrogant." So even the best constructed and symantically correct posts can be seen for something other than what they are.
On the rare occasions when I have spouted vitriol (long ago before I was pummled by Civil Air Portal and CAPTALK denizens, and my own moral code) I have quickly seen the error and uslessness of being less than respectful.
Quote from: Major Lord on June 18, 2009, 03:04:09 PM
Quote from: DogCollar on June 18, 2009, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: Climbnsink on June 18, 2009, 12:23:15 PM
Talking about suicides is one thing that we know for certain increases suicides. Do we want the same CAP geniuses that taught quarters in a DARE program to talk about suicide? Especially when suicide isn't a problem for our population. I don't want to belittle anyone's death but a couple of members killing themselves every year is not a problem to be addressed. I wonder how many CAP members die per year falling off ladders? I think we should have mandatory ladder safety classes and work or way up to suicide prevention. Wait let's do shower safety, ladder safety, then suicide. ::)
That statement is patently false. Talking about suicides realistically, directly and with a trained person prevents suicide.
Chaplain, I think you are correct to say talking (which is to say, intervening in a crisis) about suicide to a person at risk ( actively contemplating hurting themselves or others) is probably an effective tool for preventing suicide in those individuals. Teenagers presenting a special risk of suicide are those involved in drugs and alcohol, come from broken or violent homes, victims of sexual abuse, and homosexuals. My guess is that kids drawn to CAP generally don't fall into these high risk groups.
We assume, since the prevention models as exemplified by the Air Force are so prevalent, that they must be effective. The actual evidence suggests otherwise. A good example is the DARE program, a program demonstrated by the U.S GAO to actually make the drug situation worse in inner cities. Just having good intentions is not sufficient.
If you google "efficacy of suicide prevention programs" you will find that attempts to introduce frank discussion and enforced programs about suicide in broad, and non-select groups of adolescents, actually increases the risk of suicide. To a carpenter, the worlds problems can be solved with a hammer, to a psychologist, therapy and "education" programs are the tools of choice, to a lawyer, risk and liabilty are his gods, and a perfect social order can only be created by having everyone on the planet sign a statement showing informed consent. When we deal with suicide issues, we get an amalgamation of these last two models, the medical and the legal, both of which are clearly imperfect tools.
If you want to eliminate suicide in CAP, just make sure you don't accept any kids from high risk environments-the (anecdotally) near absent risk of suicide among cadets is not sufficient cause to create a program created and administered by amateurs who are more likely to cause more harm then good.
Major Lord
Thank you. There is a ton of research that shows that suicides and talk of suicides beget more suicides. It is somewhat odd as a publicized suicide will raise an areas suicide rate, then the rate drops back to normal, it isn't folks that were waiting and chose to off themselves because 'now is the time' it is a different subset of people that commit suicide. It is dangerous and counterproductive for CAP to be messing with stuff. And it is far more complicated than read the pamphlet and pass the online 'suicide prevention hero test.' CAP should leave this one alone. PS I still think the do-gooder recreational bureaucrats should be shot.
Suicide problem in CAP is caused by too many uniform changes and the associate CAPtalk threads.
Quote from: Climbnsink on June 18, 2009, 04:24:34 PM
Quote from: Major Lord on June 18, 2009, 03:04:09 PM
Quote from: DogCollar on June 18, 2009, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: Climbnsink on June 18, 2009, 12:23:15 PM
Talking about suicides is one thing that we know for certain increases suicides. Do we want the same CAP geniuses that taught quarters in a DARE program to talk about suicide? Especially when suicide isn't a problem for our population. I don't want to belittle anyone's death but a couple of members killing themselves every year is not a problem to be addressed. I wonder how many CAP members die per year falling off ladders? I think we should have mandatory ladder safety classes and work or way up to suicide prevention. Wait let's do shower safety, ladder safety, then suicide. ::)
That statement is patently false. Talking about suicides realistically, directly and with a trained person prevents suicide.
Chaplain, I think you are correct to say talking (which is to say, intervening in a crisis) about suicide to a person at risk ( actively contemplating hurting themselves or others) is probably an effective tool for preventing suicide in those individuals. Teenagers presenting a special risk of suicide are those involved in drugs and alcohol, come from broken or violent homes, victims of sexual abuse, and homosexuals. My guess is that kids drawn to CAP generally don't fall into these high risk groups.
We assume, since the prevention models as exemplified by the Air Force are so prevalent, that they must be effective. The actual evidence suggests otherwise. A good example is the DARE program, a program demonstrated by the U.S GAO to actually make the drug situation worse in inner cities. Just having good intentions is not sufficient.
If you google "efficacy of suicide prevention programs" you will find that attempts to introduce frank discussion and enforced programs about suicide in broad, and non-select groups of adolescents, actually increases the risk of suicide. To a carpenter, the worlds problems can be solved with a hammer, to a psychologist, therapy and "education" programs are the tools of choice, to a lawyer, risk and liabilty are his gods, and a perfect social order can only be created by having everyone on the planet sign a statement showing informed consent. When we deal with suicide issues, we get an amalgamation of these last two models, the medical and the legal, both of which are clearly imperfect tools.
If you want to eliminate suicide in CAP, just make sure you don't accept any kids from high risk environments-the (anecdotally) near absent risk of suicide among cadets is not sufficient cause to create a program created and administered by amateurs who are more likely to cause more harm then good.
Major Lord
Thank you. There is a ton of research that shows that suicides and talk of suicides beget more suicides. It is somewhat odd as a publicized suicide will raise an areas suicide rate, then the rate drops back to normal, it isn't folks that were waiting and chose to off themselves because 'now is the time' it is a different subset of people that commit suicide. It is dangerous and counterproductive for CAP to be messing with stuff. And it is far more complicated than read the pamphlet and pass the online 'suicide prevention hero test.' CAP should leave this one alone. PS I still think the do-gooder recreational bureaucrats should be shot.
I would have been happier to have you agree with me had you left out the rhetorical wishes for gunshot wounds. Having had some experience with shootings, I can safely say that its not something I would wish on someone merely because they disagree with me. I am sure you mean it as a joke, but frankly, it makes you sound like a nut.
Major Lord
Quote from: Climbnsink on June 18, 2009, 04:24:34 PM
Thank you. There is a ton of research that shows that suicides and talk of suicides beget more suicides. It is somewhat odd as a publicized suicide will raise an areas suicide rate, then the rate drops back to normal, it isn't folks that were waiting and chose to off themselves because 'now is the time' it is a different subset of people that commit suicide.
Hey, call it crazy, but we experience an unusual "bump" in the number of people who want to skydive in the wake of an accident at a DZ. Weird, huh? We had a skydiver get stuck in a tree couple weeks back, must have been a slow news day in Boston as we had two news helos overhead and two news crews show up on the ground. Skydiver wasn't hurt (more embarrassed) and the phones rang off the hook for the next two days with people wanting to book tandem jumps. Seriously!
Major Lord it's a joke that offended so I repeated it. Some of us roll that way. >:D >:D
There seems to be some consensus here that a CAP-wide anti-suicide program isn't warranted by any evidence on the table in front of us. And I think most would agree in having it be something our Chaplains receive training on.
But, I don't think we're going to reach agreement on incorporating it into the CISM program due to the very heated opinions expressed in other threads as to the CISM approach.
Here is some more for the heated debate
TRAIN outside of CAP in the REAL ES and EM world...get it accredited per those institution(s) and put that in the CAP personnel folder...
Those agencies who do this on a daily basis and have an accredited program are MORE believable than an online course
IF members have to sit in on CLC and SLS courses for CAP leadership...then it behooves those individuals in the CISM program have to sit through a 40 + hour training program or what ever is dictated by States or accreditation authority
IF CAP was more responsible in this arena....THEY would put it on, sponsor it, and deliver the bill to NHQ and this type of training should be held every 2 years just like a NCPSC or a NESA type deal, but with the folks with the credentials
Its is a skill that is important and should treated as such.
^ I agree totally. However, I don't think it would be a problem for health service officers or CISM officers to get extra training if desired. IMHO, it isn't desirable for the general membership to engage in this type of "job specific" training mentioned in the paper.
^^^
There should NOT be problem with a Wing sponsor at Wing traini ng cost to those folks who desire and want to function in that world.
Everone else .......start flaming ....It's time CAP pay for a little more not just the member >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
There's nothing wrong with it at all, if the Wing has the budget and the desire, however there's probably not much point to it, either.
YMMV, but the odds that a CISM coordinator or CAP Chaplain, absent an outside relationship with the member, is going to be able to have much impact in the few minutes or hours each month they work with the membership are pretty slim.
This is one of the places that the military model for CAP doesn't work. We don't "own" the members' lives for more than a few hours or days a month. The rest of the time they are on their own, working with medical and psychological health professionals and clergy of their choosing and belief.
In a military context, the rank-and-file have nowhere to turn but to the resources provided by their service, especially in a combat zone, and its the service's responsibility to provide for their medical, mental, and spiritual needs.
If I've got mission stress or other personal or family issues, the last person I'm going to seek as a resource is some random CISM coordinator I've never met, or a Chaplain who doesn't know me and probably isn't even from my faith.
Granted I'm an adult with resources, family, and little personal drama. I've seen way too many cadets with personal lives that frankly are simply shocking, but I'd still question whether a low-contact-time situation with CAP CISM or Chaplains is going to be of much more than interventional value, and would seriously question the appropriateness of long-term "care" by CAP CISM or Chaplains. That's not what we do.
Quote from: Eclipse on June 18, 2009, 08:30:14 PM
Granted I'm an adult with resources, family, and little personal drama. I've seen way too many cadets with personal lives that frankly are simply shocking, but I'd still question whether a low-contact-time situation with CAP CISM or Chaplains is going to be of much more than interventional value, and would seriously question the appropriateness of long-term "care" by CAP CISM or Chaplains. That's not what we do.
Very true. It would not be appropriate to expect CISM officers or CAP Chaplains to provide anything but short term "first aide" and referral source to handle this type of incident.
Frankly, I would expect that CAP Chaplains wouldn't really need any extra training from CAP as this is the sort of thing they should already be very familiar with from their outside careers.
Quote from: RiverAux on June 18, 2009, 06:22:05 PM
There seems to be some consensus here that a CAP-wide anti-suicide program isn't warranted by any evidence on the table in front of us. And I think most would agree in having it be something our Chaplains receive training on.
But, I don't think we're going to reach agreement on incorporating it into the CISM program due to the very heated opinions expressed in other threads as to the CISM approach.
Two things:
1. We do not have enough chaplains to cover what we ask of the chaplain service now.
2. This is already a CISM function.....ICISF has 4 core elements of CISM training:
*Group Crisis Intervention (the only one CAP requires for CISM team membership)
*Individual Crisis Intervention and Peer Support
*Suicide Prevention, Intervention and Postvention
*Advanced Group Crisis Intervention
Quote from: RiverAux on June 18, 2009, 08:54:08 PM
Frankly, I would expect that CAP Chaplains wouldn't really need any extra training from CAP as this is the sort of thing they should already be very familiar with from their outside careers.
Most of the CISM courses I have taken have been through the Salvation Army not CAP. There are a lot of clergy in all of these. And the one thing they say over and over is seminary teachs you about theology and philosophy, not crisis intervention.
How many are too many??????????
Many seem to think this is not a big enough issue? How many cadets or seniors can we let die by suicide? How many units can we have impacted by these deaths? When does it become a problem we should address?
I think teaching our members and leaders about signs of suicidal behavior is at least as important as teaching them how to complete an ORM form.
QuoteHow many are too many?
An excellent question to ask before deciding we need to do something.
QuoteMany seem to think this is not a big enough issue?
Because no one has provided any evidence that it actually IS an issue for CAP.
We've already got a DDR program that has apparently never been evaluated to see if it is actually doing any good and we don't need another one along the same lines.
CAP does not exist to solve its members personal problems. If it was, I want to speak to whoever is in charge of finding dates for me.
Quote from: John Bryan on June 18, 2009, 10:29:07 PM
Two things:
1. We do not have enough chaplains to cover what we ask of the chaplain service now.
...and what, specifically, would that be, exactly?
Since I have to do the ORM thing, lets just use a little part of that course to back up what I've been saying.
Step 1:. Yes it is a risk to our members. No argument there.
Step 2 of ORM? Assess the risk
QuoteAssess the risks:
Quantify and qualify the probability and severity of loss from exposure to the hazard. Examine each hazard and determine the exposure, severity and mishap probability for the activity. After a hazard is examined, risk can be established. Use the Risk Assessment
Index, to prioritize the hazards into levels of risk and work on the worst one first.
Evidently we're thinking of skipping this step as there apparently hasn't been any work to determine the probability that this would happen.
Following that example, I'll skip to Step 6: Supervise and Review:
QuoteReview is the systematic measurement of whether or not the benefit was worth the cost.
Since we haven't assessed the probability of this happening and it has been asserted that we can't measure the number of CAP-related suicides, there is no way to follow this part of ORM.
So, lets use the Risk Assessment Matric to address the CAP member suicides.
Severity: Catastrohpic (death)
Probability: Unlikely (Can assume will not occur in career/equipment service life. All members exposed. Possible, but improbable; occurs only very rarely.)
Put those together and the Risk Assessment Matrix tells us that this is a Medium Level Risk (Below Extremely High, and High, but above Low).
So, to me this certainly wouldn't put it at the head of the line to be addressed and certainly does not warrant any sort of mandate for all members to take some sort of course.
And no where on the ORM worksheet is there a spot to say you actually trust the pilot's judgement to fly the mission safely and you believe he will fly the mission as briefed. My point? How many Commanders will actually flag someone as a suicide risk and get them (or their parents) to seek professional help?
Quote from: Eclipse on June 18, 2009, 11:50:22 PM
Quote from: John Bryan on June 18, 2009, 10:29:07 PM
Two things:
1. We do not have enough chaplains to cover what we ask of the chaplain service now.
...and what, specifically, would that be, exactly?
Since this is not the topic of this....I will give only one example and move on.....Moral Leadership - until ever cadet & composite squadron has a chaplain or CDO I would say this is not properly covered by the CAP Chaplain Service. This is just one example.
Quote from: Short Field on June 19, 2009, 12:49:37 AM
And no where on the ORM worksheet is there a spot to say you actually trust the pilot's judgement to fly the mission safely and you believe he will fly the mission as briefed. My point? How many Commanders will actually flag someone as a suicide risk and get them (or their parents) to seek professional help?
Yes.....I know of a case already. I won't go into details but the answer to the question is yes. But the case did include CISM folks with training.
Quote from: RiverAux on June 19, 2009, 12:08:40 AM
Since I have to do the ORM thing, lets just use a little part of that course to back up what I've been saying.
Step 1:. Yes it is a risk to our members. No argument there.
Step 2 of ORM? Assess the risk
QuoteAssess the risks:
Quantify and qualify the probability and severity of loss from exposure to the hazard. Examine each hazard and determine the exposure, severity and mishap probability for the activity. After a hazard is examined, risk can be established. Use the Risk Assessment
Index, to prioritize the hazards into levels of risk and work on the worst one first.
Evidently we're thinking of skipping this step as there apparently hasn't been any work to determine the probability that this would happen.
Following that example, I'll skip to Step 6: Supervise and Review:
QuoteReview is the systematic measurement of whether or not the benefit was worth the cost.
Since we haven't assessed the probability of this happening and it has been asserted that we can't measure the number of CAP-related suicides, there is no way to follow this part of ORM.
So, lets use the Risk Assessment Matric to address the CAP member suicides.
Severity: Catastrohpic (death)
Probability: Unlikely (Can assume will not occur in career/equipment service life. All members exposed. Possible, but improbable; occurs only very rarely.)
Put those together and the Risk Assessment Matrix tells us that this is a Medium Level Risk (Below Extremely High, and High, but above Low).
So, to me this certainly wouldn't put it at the head of the line to be addressed and certainly does not warrant any sort of mandate for all members to take some sort of course.
Depends.....again I don't feel we should get into details but I know my wing has had the issue come up 3 times in the last 9 months. Some wings it might not have been an issue in years.
What does it hurt to error on the side of safety....does training our members hurt anyone....can it maybe help someone?
How many times has a Ground Team from your wing saved a life.....my wing it has not happend in over 20 years or more but we still train.
My wing has only lost one plane in 67 years of operations yet we still have a flight safety program. We would not wait till we were having a crash a week and 52 deaths a year before we addressed a flight safety issue. Prevention seems worth the time.
John, if thought there was a chance that all we were talking about was NHQ providing some background information, an article about it, or even just a presentation that would be made available for use by squadrons, I would be on board.
However, NHQ is beginning to convince me that they have no sense of proportionality and I am about 85% confident that we will end up with an ill-conceived mandated program that will be implemented in haste with little stufy of what we're trying to achieve and no follow-up to see if we've achieved anything.
I'm no opponent of additional training and I've supported the program as we've strengthened ES requirements over the years and have even suggested we go farther in certain areas. I've battled against those that suggested we've putting too many mandates on our members. While certainly not the most vocal person, I've generally supported the positions of those wanting to see improvements in the quality of our officer training.
But, we seem to have turned some crazy corner this past year and these broad mandates have just exploded and I see no signs of this letting up and no evidence that they're worth the trouble.
Every volunteer has their own version of the risk matrix discussed in ORM. But, the key factors involve the time and money it costs a volunteer to participate in the program vs the rewards they get from that (however they want to define it). The more we move away from requirements directly related to our purposes, the worse off CAP gets in that matrix.
When it comes right down to it, we're basically here to teach the cadets about aviation not to make sure they don't commit suicide. We should definetely provide an environment that doesn't contribute to such thoughts, but thats as far as we should be going.
Quote from: heliodoc on June 18, 2009, 06:31:55 PM
Here is some more for the heated debate
TRAIN outside of CAP in the REAL ES and EM world...get it accredited per those institution(s) and put that in the CAP personnel folder...
All CIS training is accredited by a national agency, the ICISF, based in Maryland....any CAP members qualified in CIS have completed rigorous training to their standards.
Quote from: RedFox24 on June 18, 2009, 01:15:31 PM
Again Ned, you and the other out of touch "leaders" at NHQ don't know if you can field an effective program, but you can cram a bunch more useless, time consuming, restrictive mandates down the throats of our paying volunteer members for problems that don't exist or that you lack the "expertise and recourses" for so that the NB can have a warm fuzzy feeling when they sit at the bar and pat each other on the back.
Maj Robertson,
My sense is that you were a little angry when you wrote this.
You are certainly correct that I don't know if CAP can or should field an effective, evidence-based program. I've said as much in this very thread.
But that is the point of the National Staff taking a look at the problem. So we can figure out if we can. Somebody else posted figures that suggested that we may well be losing 20 or more cadets to suicide every year. And that is consistent with the statistics I've seen for our cadet age group.
Darin and others are correct that this is "only" the third leading cause of death for cadets, but preliminary ORM may well suggest that with the proper program, we could save more cadets with an effective suicide prevention program than a "buckle-up" program to reduce death by automobile accidents.
But the bottom line is that we don't and can't know until we do our homework. The paper presented to the NB (for their use) is part of the normal staff cycle.
I may be naive, but I am having trouble understanding the anger and pushback on this subject. We don't yet have anything approaching consensus on how to proceed, let alone a specific proposal that can be debated and ORM's on its merits.
It's not like we are spending appropriated or corporate dollars on research and consultants. We have volunteer staff members gathering data and reviewing existing programs. I certainly appreciate all the advice on how I and other staffers should spend our volunteer time and how we should prioritize our duties. It is part of my job to listen to the concerns of the members. And I've got your vote down for "don't bother looking at potential suicide prevention programs." And it is not like this is the only project on my plate; or even the project with the highest priority. I have lot's of other projects to do, just like any other staffer. As others on this board can recall, I have been researching and seeking input in this area since last fall. I will probably continue to do so until we reach a conclusion one way or another.
But probably not here on CT. 8)
Finally, as a senior CP leader, I'll bet you've taught classes on the CAP Core Value (http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/u_082503081659.pdf) of "Respect." That's the one that talks about "members treat[ing] each other with fairness and dignity and working together as a team."
Time to review those lesson plans again.
Just saying . . .
Ned Lee
If you would, please amplify on that a bit. Is the "rigorous training" you mentioned the 14 hour Group Course, or is there some mandated training in addition to this? What training is required of a CAP member to be "qualified" by CAP standards?
Major Lord
Quote from: Ned on June 18, 2009, 04:53:53 AM
As I indicated, there is no practical way to determine the actual number of CAP member suicides per annum, for a whole lot of different reasons.
Again, I don't know whether we can field an effective program given our limited expertise and resources.
But are you arguing that we shouldn't even do the research to see what is available and practical?
If we had a 22 member a year suicide rate we'd know it. The HSO's had discussed a suicide prevention program years ago. Unfortunately those documents no longer appear on the HSO Yahoo group pages. A google news search for cadet suicide shows one in 1955 and the tragic events in FL in Feb 2005.
As you say if CAP needs to do research to prepare a program it should be done by people with experience in this sort of event. It should be done by Emergency Nurses, EMT-P's and Mental Health Professionals. This isn't something for people without specialized research and clinical training.
I also say it belongs with the specific HSO people I listed rather than CISM. CISM people are not focused on prevention but reaction. CISM is for right now. CISM people are not all medical people. They are
peer people. If they are medical people they are not necessarily specialty people. Most medical surgical nurses would run screaming into the night if they were pulled off the floor to work the ER. Injury and suicide prevention are a function of ER nursing and are tested for nurses aspiring to specialty certification. The same can be said for physicians who are not Emergency Boarded. CISM is based on the Mitchell Model. Emergency nursing and paramedicine is now evidence based practice.
I would argue that any study be done through the HSO program and then they present a needs analysis. However, I think such a study would be extremely difficult to accomplish. CAP has no effective way to gather that type of in depth information to flesh out that data. Without that information a program becomes another solution in search of a problem.
TC
RN CEN EMS RN CFRN
Quote from: flyerthom on June 19, 2009, 05:12:39 AM
Quote from: Ned on June 18, 2009, 04:53:53 AM
As I indicated, there is no practical way to determine the actual number of CAP member suicides per annum, for a whole lot of different reasons.
Again, I don't know whether we can field an effective program given our limited expertise and resources.
But are you arguing that we shouldn't even do the research to see what is available and practical?
If we had a 22 member a year suicide rate we'd know it.
The stats given, as I stated above, would only be a rate of 2.2 members. That's needle in a haystack stuff for a national program.
Quote from: Spike on June 18, 2009, 02:16:33 PM
Seriously......who here knows of a Cadet (and I mean personally met the individual) that committed suicide? Anyone here in a Squadron that had a Cadet commit suicide? Anyone at an activity where a Cadet committed Suicide??
I know of ONE. In my long time in CAP, I have met one Cadet who for all intents and purposes seemed absolutely normal, and showed no signs or symptoms.
The best we can do here is steal the Army/ Air Force suicide "help card" that shows what symptoms and signs to look for. However, it has been proved that usually there are no signs because the individual keeps his or her emotions bottled up. Unless the kid starts giving all of his or her things away and saying stuff like "man life would be better if I were dead", or "I am going to kill myself with Dad's gun tonight", we can not pick up on the signs and symptoms in the short amount of time we spend with them at unit meetings.
If it comes down to me having to stand in front of my Cadets and asking "does anyone here feel like committing suicide".....it may be time for me to leave CAP. WE (most of us) are not trained to discuss these personal issues or counsel children on this kind of level. Last I looked, you need a license in my State to do that. Heck, we should even call in outside professionals should a Cadet decide to kill himself or herself. Which was not the case in the situation I personally know about.
In all seriousness, in the last 3 to 4 years, I know of 4 that have committed suicide, 5 that have attempted, and 3 cadets that have threatened( 1 at a NCSA) and 1 SM.
Given the ripple effect of their actions, many more people are affected by this than most would like to believe. Isn't 1 member even thinking about it more than enough?
Their was a cadet in my squadron who attempted suicide multiple times. The thinking that only people living in poverty are the ones committing suicide, in my experience, is not really the truth. It seems the majority of depressed/ potentially suicidal people I meet are middle class or rich. That might just be my personal experience and not true for the majority of people.
I don't know of anyone who thinks only people living in poverty are likely candidates for suicide per se, but many of the known contributory factors are often coincidental with lower socioeconomic groups. (Broken homes, drugs, and alcohol, sexual abuse, etc) clearly these factors are not exclusive to the poor, but the risk factors are often concurrent.
Ned mentioned that there is no reason to believe that there is no reason to believe that the rate of suicide in CAP is any higher or any lower than the general population, but I think he is in error on this. CAP Cadets tend to come from families that are supportive and have the financial resources to let their kids participate in a relatively expensive program, and further, one that (ostensibly) supports the values of the US Air Force, where drugs and homosexual conduct are not generally considered desirable. Poor performance in school, another predicative factor for suicidal risk, is in my experience, a much rarer thing in CAP then in the general teenage population.
To the poster of the ad hominem attacks on Ned, to malign Ned as a FEMF is way off base. He is a gentleman of great character and achievement, an actual warrior (rare in CAP), and one of CAP's true scholars. To link him temperamentally with the chair-warming Pinedados of NHQ is unfair and untrue, and anyone doing so in my presence had best be armed.
Ned did the raise the question though, of why this question raises so much hostility. It's safe to say that this board like many others has a high percentage of people who have little confidence in NHQ to do the right thing at the right time. As an organization, they sat by and watched their own good people be destroyed by a despotic tyrant, causing the honor of the organization to be tarnished, spent money on NASCAR, and a host of other misdemeanors, but I don't think these alone explain why a Suicide Prevention program should be so inherently repulsive.
I think the underlying cause is the revulsion of the members to be subject to yet another ritualistic politically correct program. In the recent past, these have just been things like the "Safety Pledge", and a raft of 10 question online quizzes designed to create a better world. Now it appears that CAP wants to take on the mantle of mental health practitioners. Whether this is a well-founded fear or not, the specter of CAP using the pseudoscientific tools of Psychology and creating yet another echelon of enforced political correctness is in fact revolting. As the book says: "physician, heal thyself" and there are many more avenues of reform that the organization can constructively address without having to create humanitarian solutions to non-existent problems.
Major Lord
QuoteSomebody else posted figures that suggested that we may well be losing 20 or more cadets to suicide every year. And that is consistent with the statistics I've seen for our cadet age group.
I'm confused. Earlier you said that there was no way to track it and now you're saying that you have statistics and that they would be consistent with 20+ a year. Which is it.
I think what you're interpreting as hostility is a very healthy skeptisim.
If you can prove to me that the suicide rate of CAP members is higher than expected based on national statistics, I'll conceed that it is something that we might need to address.
To be fair to you, this wasn't a thread that you started so its not like you came on to present a case in favor of such a program, but when you start discussing things that NHQ is considering doing that you know about, you should be prepared to bring some facts to the table you will get people like me hounding you for data to back up the need for what you say NHQ is considering.
Quote from: Major Lord on June 19, 2009, 04:10:16 AM
If you would, please amplify on that a bit. Is the "rigorous training" you mentioned the 14 hour Group Course, or is there some mandated training in addition to this? What training is required of a CAP member to be "qualified" by CAP standards?
Major Lord
I believe the requirement has been expanded to include what is being described as a "3 day course", which includes Group, Individual, Suicide Prevention....not sure what else.
My point was that CAP already trains to the standards of a recognized accrediting organization in this area.
Quote from: RiverAux on June 19, 2009, 03:17:06 PMIf you can prove to me that the suicide rate of CAP members is higher than expected based on national statistics, I'll conceed that it is something that we might need to address.
To be fair to you, this wasn't a thread that you started so its not like you came on to present a case in favor of such a program, but when you start discussing things that NHQ is considering doing that you know about, you should be prepared to bring some facts to the table you will get people like me hounding you for data to back up the need for what you say NHQ is considering.
Yup, you're correct I didn't start this thread, in part because there is no program on the table to propose, so there really isn't anything to discuss.
The whole notion that I (or anyone at NHQ) have to prove to you that a given topic is even worth considering or researching is the strangest aspect of this thread.I've said several times that none of us can (yet) provide that kind of information. That is sorta the whole point of having a staff research and consider things - to gather the information that may prove the point one way or another.
It is not yet time to debate the "true" number of cadet suicides, and then somehow weigh and balance that against a given prevention proposal.
But if you'd like to help out, start by taking a look at the CDC data (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5635a2.htm) and scoping out WISQARS (http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html) and let us know what you find.
And clearly, one of the things that we are looking at is SM expertise. It should not surprise you that the National HSO, CISM chief, and I have discussed this very issue - whether the necessary expertise is most likely to be found, if at all, in medical, CISM, or CP. We get that.
Really, really.
Quote from: Gunner C on June 19, 2009, 05:19:51 AM
Quote from: flyerthom on June 19, 2009, 05:12:39 AM
Quote from: Ned on June 18, 2009, 04:53:53 AM
As I indicated, there is no practical way to determine the actual number of CAP member suicides per annum, for a whole lot of different reasons.
Again, I don't know whether we can field an effective program given our limited expertise and resources.
But are you arguing that we shouldn't even do the research to see what is available and practical?
If we had a 22 member a year suicide rate we'd know it.
The stats given, as I stated above, would only be a rate of 2.2 members. That's needle in a haystack stuff for a national program.
Given a membership of approximately 65,000 the overall rate is 3.39 per cent. Based on your figure of 22 per year
Quote from: Cecil DP on June 19, 2009, 04:30:44 PM
Given a membership of approximately 65,000 the overall rate is 3.39 per cent. Based on your figure of 22 per year
Remember, that wasn't my number. I haven't posted a rate or number because my research is incomplete.
That was RiverAux's number from his reply at the top of page 2 of this thread.
And one thing that my research has disclosed is that it is probably not very helpful to talk just about deaths - attempts need to be included as well. And that number, whatever it is, is inevitably going to be much larger.
Ned
You don't need to prove anything
NHQ has to prove its leadership by attaching a !@#$r rudder to this boat called CAP
Maybe PROVE there is TRUE leadership at Maxwell; More leadership and lESS glitzy reports to Congress
This suicide stuff ...... Leave this to the REAL professionals
NHQ needs a rudder and true captain maybe an Ensign to get this boat steered right
Steered right .......39-1, suicides studies and ALLLLLL
Pardon me if I sound like I'm being insensitive, it is not intended to be that way.
I am of the opinion that our organization is drifting further from it's core missions, more and more becoming focused on other things - essentially an organization that is "everything to everyone."
What we apparently seem to be trying to create is a civilian version of "The Air Force." We may have the identifier of "Auxiliary of the USAF" but that doesn't mean that we have to follow their models for everything or institute every program, job, organizational structure, requirements, etc that they have.
I talked about the safety program requirements that we got the other day and how our focus should be on properly training the management. In my opinion, this (suicide awareness training) is something that I don't think I'd mind having included as a subset of something like UCC and RST. But I don't think that we need to develop "suicide intervention teams" and have a "suicide prevention program" instituted nation-wide.
Perhaps we should look at revamping our management schools and courses to include things like this that every other organization in the world does.
For example, adding Suicide Awareness into the Chaplain Staff College, TLC and UCC would be beneficial. It addresses the "managements" role in recognizing and preventing suicide. At 30-45 minute block wouldn't hurt and meets the need at the level it should.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on June 19, 2009, 05:34:42 PM
What we apparently seem to be trying to create is a civilian version of "The Air Force." We may have the identifier of "Auxiliary of the USAF" but that doesn't mean that we have to follow their models for everything or institute every program, job, organizational structure, requirements, etc that they have.
I have been sustaining a version of this point for 10 years. CAP has some very different factors at work in its membership than does the USAF. If we try to apply every aspect of the USAF on CAP, the results will be more of a problem than a solution.
Yes, some functions are helpful. However, others do not apply.
There is a group fo CAPTALKERs here that assert the notion that we must adhere to USAF style policy and practice, many times as solutions to uniquely CAP problems.
Once we understand that we must start with the framework of CAP, as it exists now, instead of reverse engineering the USAF's policies (which are opt to work in the USAF situation of existing funding, medical infrastructure and daily garrison lifestyle), then we might see some of the internal CAP leadership people desire.
As for this topic, yes, there are places where we can address suicides.. However, blanket systemwide policies, practices and courses that are going to "ground" people that don't have them in a system where member funding is the only type of finance, where there is no medical CAP infrastructure and where meetings held once a month are the norm are simply not the way to go.
QuoteThe whole notion that I (or anyone at NHQ) have to prove to you that a given topic is even worth considering or researching is the strangest aspect of this thread.
I think you will find that I didn't say the overall topic wasn't worth considering, but that considering starting a program to address something that isn't yet a proven problem is not a wise way to go.
And you're right that every NHQ action doesn't need RiverAux's seal of approval. But, you should be incredibly concerned about what the membership is thinking and yes, you do need to prove to the membership in general that something is worth doing, especially in a time when CAP overall is losing membership. One of the top things on every NHQ's staffer's mind
should be whether a particular program is really worth the valuable time of CAP volunteers.
QuoteThat is sorta the whole point of having a staff research and consider things - to gather the information that may prove the point one way or another.
That is not what you said NHQ is doing. You said that they were trying to find a program to address the issue of cadet suicide, not attempting to determine if it is enough of an issue to warrant a program in the first place. I would support the latter and if the evidence shows theres a problem, would be open to various ways to address it.
The document, written by Sam Bernhard PhD, does not suggest we or anyone else conduct studies or surveys, or evaluate the efficiacy of Suicide Prevention programs. He skips over the entire issue of severity and causation, and goes right to "proactive" solutions! Heck, lets not worry about the facts, lets start fixing them! Here are his specifics:
Civil Air Patrol would be well served to address suicide in a proactive manner by:
1. Developing protocols/education with the goal of preventing deaths by suicide in cadets and seniors,
2. Develop protocols/education with the goal of providing appropriate intervention when suicide warning signs are noticed,
3. Develop protocols/education with the goal of providing appropriate intervention after a death by suicide
4. Develop protocols/education with the goal of adequately and appropriately addressing the potential for "copy cat" suicides
Now that they have solved all the really pressing issues of CAP, they can now delve into the general well-being of the members. The nanny-state mentality is bleeding into CAP I am afraid.
Major Lord
Quote from: RiverAux on June 19, 2009, 05:51:56 PMOne of the top things on every NHQ's staffer's mind should be whether a particular program is really worth the valuable time of CAP volunteers.
On this, we could not agree more.
On a purely personal note, it is something I have considered on almost every CAP project I have been assigned or undertaken, from cleaning out the squadron hanger in 1969 to looking at potential SPP programs today.
Let's try to leave it at this: when and if CP proposes a specific SPP, I promise to defend against all criticisms both in front of the NB (if they wish) and here.
And at that time, I will do my best to convince you that 1) there is a significant problem warranting a response at the National level, and 2) that the specific proposal on the table is appropriate for us given the skills and resources of our members, and specifically is worthwhile given the competing needs and requirments at the squadron level.
I won't shrink from a fair and vigorous debate. If I can't defend my specfic proposal against any and all reasonable criticisms, I will modify or withdraw any such proposal.
Deal?
SPP done wrong or implemented half a$$ed is dangerous and can create problems where there weren't any. It is bleeping stupid to go down this road.
Quote from: Ned on June 19, 2009, 06:41:25 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on June 19, 2009, 05:51:56 PMOne of the top things on every NHQ's staffer's mind should be whether a particular program is really worth the valuable time of CAP volunteers.
On this, we could not agree more.
On a purely personal note, it is something I have considered on almost every CAP project I have been assigned or undertaken, from cleaning out the squadron hanger in 1969 to looking at potential SPP programs today.
Let's try to leave it at this: when and if CP proposes a specific SPP, I promise to defend against all criticisms both in front of the NB (if they wish) and here.
And at that time, I will do my best to convince you that 1) there is a significant problem warranting a response at the National level, and 2) that the specific proposal on the table is appropriate for us given the skills and resources of our members, and specifically is worthwhile given the competing needs and requirments at the squadron level.
I won't shrink from a fair and vigorous debate. If I can't defend my specfic proposal against any and all reasonable criticisms, I will modify or withdraw any such proposal.
Deal?
Is this a Jedi-Lawyer trick? I would prefer that you defend the criticisms, rather than defend against them, as you mentioned above!
Major Lord
Quote from: Cecil DP on June 19, 2009, 04:30:44 PM
Quote from: Gunner C on June 19, 2009, 05:19:51 AM
Quote from: flyerthom on June 19, 2009, 05:12:39 AM
Quote from: Ned on June 18, 2009, 04:53:53 AM
As I indicated, there is no practical way to determine the actual number of CAP member suicides per annum, for a whole lot of different reasons.
Again, I don't know whether we can field an effective program given our limited expertise and resources.
But are you arguing that we shouldn't even do the research to see what is available and practical?
If we had a 22 member a year suicide rate we'd know it.
The stats given, as I stated above, would only be a rate of 2.2 members. That's needle in a haystack stuff for a national program.
Given a membership of approximately 65,000 the overall rate is 3.39 per cent. Based on your figure of 22 per year
That's not what it said in the stats at the beginning:
QuoteWhereas:
1. In 2006, 33,300 Americans died by suicide with the following breakdown:
33,300 nationwide suicides divided by 300,000,000 Americans is .011%. In a cadet population of 22,426 that's 2.48 (call it 2.5). Still a needle in a haystack.
Quote from: Climbnsink on June 19, 2009, 06:49:56 PM
SPP done wrong or implemented half a$$ed is dangerous and can create problems where there weren't any.
Insightful.
I supposed I'd have to agree.
Just like ES done wrong, or DDR done wrong, or O-flts done wrong, or CPFTs done wrong . . . .
Quote from: Major Carrales on June 19, 2009, 05:47:35 PM
Quote from: jimmydeanno on June 19, 2009, 05:34:42 PM
What we apparently seem to be trying to create is a civilian version of "The Air Force." We may have the identifier of "Auxiliary of the USAF" but that doesn't mean that we have to follow their models for everything or institute every program, job, organizational structure, requirements, etc that they have.
I have been sustaining a version of this point for 10 years. CAP has some very different factors at work in its membership than does the USAF. If we try to apply every aspect of the USAF on CAP, the results will be more of a problem than a solution.
Yes, some functions are helpful. However, others do not apply.
I've said much the same thing regarding our insistence on maintaining community level "squadrons" with a full staff where there simply are not sufficient members to do so.
Yeah, we have chartered flights, but I'm not sure what the point is, since they are expected to do everything a squadron does!
Returning to the main point, very little evidence has been offered that CAP is facing more risk of suicide by its members than civilian society at large. While the loss of any member in this way is certainly a tragedy, I've yet to be convinced there is a need for yet another new program.
Quote from: Ned on June 19, 2009, 04:23:08 PM
And clearly, one of the things that we are looking at is SM expertise. It should not surprise you that the National HSO, CISM chief, and I have discussed this very issue - whether the necessary expertise is most likely to be found, if at all, in medical, CISM, or CP. We get that.
Really, really.
Then a simple solution Ned. And I'll ask you to pass this up the chain and even volunteer to be a project officer on it:
The Emergency Nurses Association Injury Prevention Institute :
http://www.ena.org/ipinstitute/news/ (http://www.ena.org/ipinstitute/news/)
Offers QPR Suicide Prevention Online training:
Quote#
QPR Suicide Prevention Online TrainingQPR Saves Lives!
QPR - Question, Persuade, and Refer -- 3 simple steps that anyone can learn to help save a life from suicide. Just as people trained in CPR and the Heimlich Maneuver help save thousands of lives each year, people trained in QPR learn how to recognize the warning signs of a suicide crisis and how to question, persuade, and refer someone for help. QPR can be learned in our Gatekeeper course in as little as one hour. To learn more about the online training program, go to http://www.ewu.edu/qprgatekeeper/flashdetect.php?version=old
www.ewu.edu/qprgatekeeper - log in to training after completing payment process
www.ewu.edu/qpr - home page for general information
www.ewu.edu/x40903.xml - page for cost and registration information
Take advantage of the non-profit discount for ENA. The Gatekeeper online training is usually $29.95, but you can register for $24.95 by using the following code: QPRNP
The ENA Injury Prevention Institute STOP Program might also be something CAP should look at: http://www.ena.org/ipinstitute/STOP/default.asp (http://www.ena.org/ipinstitute/STOP/default.asp)
We really should do an epidemiological study though before we go off and add yet more things to do for a volunteer's limited time base.
CAP stress causing suicide? Naw...
Homicide...? maybe. Suicide...? never.
There IS a slight risk of increased suicidal ideation as a result of CAP service, that being the possibility of PTSD as a result of exposure to violently-stressful incidents like the deaths resulting from an aircraft crash. We do have a fledgling program of CISM, that should, when fully implemented, prevent the development of PTSD and the associated depression that follows.
Since so few of our members actually find dead persons (Finding them from 1,000 feet above does not count, any more than bombing from 30,000 feet above causes PTSD) I suspect this problem is minimal and should not occupy 6 pages of discussion, nor ANY time at all of the NB.
However, I think it is indicative of a problem that NHQ has. They are more eager to solve problems that do not exist than to solve problems that do exist and have been identified.
This alone is causing an increasing disconnect between the membership and the National HQ.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on June 20, 2009, 03:01:22 PM
CAP stress causing suicide? Naw...
Homicide...? maybe. Suicide...? never.
There IS a slight risk of increased suicidal ideation as a result of CAP service, that being the possibility of PTSD as a result of exposure to violently-stressful incidents like the deaths resulting from an aircraft crash. We do have a fledgling program of CISM, that should, when fully implemented, prevent the development of PTSD and the associated depression that follows.
Since so few of our members actually find dead persons (Finding them from 1,000 feet above does not count, any more than bombing from 30,000 feet above causes PTSD) I suspect this problem is minimal and should not occupy 6 pages of discussion, nor ANY time at all of the NB.
However, I think it is indicative of a problem that NHQ has. They are more eager to solve problems that do not exist than to solve problems that do exist and have been identified.
This alone is causing an increasing disconnect between the membership and the National HQ.
So really what we need to be looking at is, "Does anything in CAP service have the ability to increase the risk of suicidal tendencies in our organization?" Simpler, does CAP have a negative effect on people causing them to want to kill themselves? If there is, that is what we should be looking at, not a nation-wide program to start diagnosing and evaluating suicidal tendencies of all members hoping to catch a latent risk.
We appear to have that already, CISM and the Chaplain program. We have avenues for people to talk to people, we have Character Development lessons devoted to suicide, DDR has some suicide awareness stuff that they cover from time to time.
The military takes a more active role in suicide awareness and prevention because their mission DOES impact suicide rates because of what the individuals involved do. While there are a few things that might put stress on people in our organization, we have already identified those areas and have things in place to help address the initial signs.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on June 20, 2009, 03:01:22 PM
CAP stress causing suicide? Naw...
Homicide...? maybe. Suicide...? never.
However, I think it is indicative of a problem that NHQ has. They are more eager to solve problems that do not exist than to solve problems that do exist and have been identified.
This alone is causing an increasing disconnect between the membership and the National HQ.
Surely I think any of us who became aware of a member that was going to kill/harm him/herself we would take appropriate action. HOWEVER, we are not extensively educated & trained mental health professionals, who I might add also miss their clients true intentions at times :-[ What would be the expectation of this CAP training ???
When you add mandatory training that members must complete before they can do WHAT REALLY BROUGHT THEM INTO CAP TO DO & WHAT THEY GET ENJOYMENT FROM , the effectiveness of this required training can get diluted by many members overall attitude of "oh no here's another hoop we have to jump through!". Perfect example is the new ORM requirement policy letter that recently came out. Basically EVERYONE has to take that basic course. Likely many more will have to take the advance course (so perhaps for the suicide course there would also be an advanced level) Ooops, have an accident, surely it's your fault; and commanders you are also responsible, surely there should be no accidents if you have an effective program. So now with another potential new program -- I have to wonder, IF someone in your squadron commits suicide (not at a CAP meeting or other CAP activity), what's the chain of command response going to be ???
RM
Guys... it's not like we got CAP members falling out of windows like snowflakes in Michigan... This isn't Wall Street in 1929.
At the National Conference this year there are 3 Learning Labs pertaining to suicide.
DO10 Suicide: Recognition & Intervention Opportunities for CAP
Presenters: Lt Col Sam Bernard, CAP National CISM Team Leader; and members of his staff
In the United States an average of 1 person every 15.8 minutes dies by suicide. Suicide is the 11th ranking cause of death in the USA, with homicides ranking 15th; suicide ranks 3rd for the young, ages 15 to 24. This learning lab will explore the warning signs and tools available to prevent these tragedies in CAP.
HC01 Intermediate QPR Suicide Prevention – Part I
Presenter: Chaplain Lt. Col. James Sickmeyer, North Central Region Chaplain
Dealing with the growing incidence of suicide. Chaplains and CAP members may find themselves in a position to recognize and mitigate suicidal behavior. This class will provide a proven model and encouragement tools designed to recognize early warning signs of suicide. Ask a question, save a life. Learn what questions to ask and how to deal with them.
Chaplain Sickmeyer has been a QPR Triage Trainer at the beginning, intermediate and advanced levels for the QPR Institute of Spokane, WA since 2004.
HC01 Intermediate QPR Suicide Prevention – Part II
Presenter: Chaplain, Lt Col James Sickmeyer, North Central Region Chaplain
Dealing with the growing incidence of suicide. Chaplains and CAP members may find themselves in a position to recognize and mitigate suicidal behavior. This class will provide a proven model and encouragement tools designed to recognize early warning signs of suicide. Ask a question, save a life. Learn what questions to ask and how to deal with them.
Completion of the first session is a prerequisite.
Chaplain Sickmeyer has been a QPR triage trainer at the beginning, intermediate and advanced levels for the QPR Institute of Spokane, WA since 2004.
Quote from: Westernslope on June 22, 2009, 09:32:32 PM
At the National Conference this year there are 3 Learning Labs pertaining to suicide.
HC01 Intermediate QPR Suicide Prevention – Part I
Presenter: Chaplain Lt. Col. James Sickmeyer, North Central Region Chaplain
Dealing with the growing incidence of suicide. Chaplains and CAP members may find themselves in a position to recognize and mitigate suicidal behavior. This class will provide a proven model and encouragement tools designed to recognize early warning signs of suicide. Ask a question, save a life. Learn what questions to ask and how to deal with them.
Chaplain Sickmeyer has been a QPR Triage Trainer at the beginning, intermediate and advanced levels for the QPR Institute of Spokane, WA since 2004.
HC01 Intermediate QPR Suicide Prevention – Part II
Presenter: Chaplain, Lt Col James Sickmeyer, North Central Region Chaplain
Dealing with the growing incidence of suicide. Chaplains and CAP members may find themselves in a position to recognize and mitigate suicidal behavior. This class will provide a proven model and encouragement tools designed to recognize early warning signs of suicide. Ask a question, save a life. Learn what questions to ask and how to deal with them.
Completion of the first session is a prerequisite.
Chaplain Sickmeyer has been a QPR triage trainer at the beginning, intermediate and advanced levels for the QPR Institute of Spokane, WA since 2004.[/i]
My understanding is that these two sessions are training sessions which will result in those participating in both sessions receiving a certificate of completion, etc.
Also Tuesday/Wednesday Pre-Conference class is being offered:
8:00 AM - 5:00 PM
ICISF/CISM Suicide Prevention, Intervention & Postvention
Why do people kill themselves? How do I ask someone if they are feeling suicidal? What do I do if they say they ARE suicidal? How do I deal with the strong emotions suicide generates? This course will provide answers for these and other questions many of crisis interventionists have about suicide. It will provide participants with basic information about suicide as well as help participants develop practical skills for prevention, intervention and postvention. Small group role plays will allow participants to apply the suggested techniques as they are learned.
NOTE: Students must participate fully on both days to successfully complete the course.
I took this class through ICISF and it is very helpful.....I would highly recommend it.
Quote from: Westernslope on June 22, 2009, 09:32:32 PM
At the National Conference this year there are 3 Learning Labs pertaining to suicide.
DO10 Suicide: Recognition & Intervention Opportunities for CAP
Presenters: Lt Col Sam Bernard, CAP National CISM Team Leader; and members of his staff
In the United States an average of 1 person every 15.8 minutes dies by suicide. Suicide is the 11th ranking cause of death in the USA, with homicides ranking 15th; suicide ranks 3rd for the young, ages 15 to 24. This learning lab will explore the warning signs and tools available to prevent these tragedies in CAP.
HC01 Intermediate QPR Suicide Prevention – Part I
Presenter: Chaplain Lt. Col. James Sickmeyer, North Central Region Chaplain
Dealing with the growing incidence of suicide. Chaplains and CAP members may find themselves in a position to recognize and mitigate suicidal behavior. This class will provide a proven model and encouragement tools designed to recognize early warning signs of suicide. Ask a question, save a life. Learn what questions to ask and how to deal with them.
Chaplain Sickmeyer has been a QPR Triage Trainer at the beginning, intermediate and advanced levels for the QPR Institute of Spokane, WA since 2004.
HC01 Intermediate QPR Suicide Prevention – Part II
Presenter: Chaplain, Lt Col James Sickmeyer, North Central Region Chaplain
Dealing with the growing incidence of suicide. Chaplains and CAP members may find themselves in a position to recognize and mitigate suicidal behavior. This class will provide a proven model and encouragement tools designed to recognize early warning signs of suicide. Ask a question, save a life. Learn what questions to ask and how to deal with them.
Completion of the first session is a prerequisite.
Chaplain Sickmeyer has been a QPR triage trainer at the beginning, intermediate and advanced levels for the QPR Institute of Spokane, WA since 2004.
Another example of poor research that doesn't bode well -- despite what they're advertising in the program overall suicide rates have declined since the 1950s according to the CDC. Suicide rates among 5-24 year olds increased through the mid 1990s but have dropped since then. By the way, the suicide rate among 5-14 year olds is 10-20 times less than that of any other age group. The highest suicide rates are in those over 45 and those have dropped by half since the 1950s.
So, basically suicide is a DECLINING issue despite the ad.
By the way, if we're really going to make it a priority to keep CAP members from dying off CAP-time, we forget about suicide and worry about health issues.
The death rate from heart disease is 19 times higher than the suicide rate. The death rate from diabetes is twice as high as the suicide rate.
You know what would probably reduce the number of deaths of CAP members more than anything else? Make all members meet the height/weight restrictions and require PT tests for ES participants.
Suicide is something that everyone should be aware of, and should be alert to the signs of. I believe most suicides are preventable. The question is how do we react to the situation? Will CAP mandate "suicide Prevention classes"? Who will teach them? Who will certify the instructors? Who does one contact, if they find someone at risk?
There is also the unintended consequence of being supposedly trained to know the signs.
We are not, by definition, mental health professionals (even those who are by trade).
Being trained in the signs of suicide infers a responsibility to act on the signs, which in turn opens the window for liability if we don't.
There are times when I have a hard time believing we are looking at the same post.
Quote from: RiverAux on June 23, 2009, 10:13:24 PMAnother example of poor research that doesn't bode well -- despite what they're advertising in the program overall suicide rates have declined since the 1950s according to the CDC.
Maybe it's just me, but I can't find anywhere that the poster "advertised" anything about suicide rates over time. I guess it is always easier to "disprove" an asertion that was never made. This is a fair example of a Strawman Argument (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman_argument).
They did (correctly as near as I can tell) talk about some specific
current suicide factoids.
Do you really dispute the notion that suicide is a current severe public health problem?
(I get the fact that you don't think CAP should have any role in the problem, but do you really believe it is not a huge problem?)
Quote from: National Institute of Mental HealthSuicide is a major, preventable public health problem. In 2004, it was the eleventh leading cause of death in the U.S., accounting for 32,439 deaths.
See the paper
here.Quote from: RiverAux
Suicide rates among 5-24 year olds increased through the mid 1990s but have dropped since then. By the way, the suicide rate among 5-14 year olds is 10-20 times less than that of any other age group.
That may account for why I have met so few clinically depressed kindergartners, but it doesn't seem very helpful to the discussion at hand. You can
cherry-pick the data all you'd like, but you need to deal with the inconvenient fact that suicide is the
third leading cause of death for 15-24 year olds, an age group somewhat more comparable to CAP. And that is right now, today. Not 1950.
CDC Suicide Fact Sheet Quote
So, basically suicide is a DECLINING issue despite the ad.
Good news.
Crime Rates in the US have declined, so there is no further need for police or the courts. Feel free to leave your front door unlocked.
and
Cancer rates are declining as well, so there is certainly no reason to learn how to prevent it.
QuoteBy the way, if we're really going to make it a priority to keep CAP members from dying off CAP-time, we forget about suicide and worry about health issues.
The death rate from heart disease is 19 times higher than the suicide rate. The death rate from diabetes is twice as high as the suicide rate.
You know what would probably reduce the number of deaths of CAP members more than anything else? Make all members meet the height/weight restrictions and require PT tests for ES participants.
More good news!
CAPP 52-18 already teaches about nutrition, obesity, and fitness training. Seniors can read and benefit from this excellent publication.
So since we already "worry" about these issues, tell me again why we shouldn't worry about suicide, too?
Quote from: EclipseThere is also the unintended consequence of being supposedly trained to know the signs.
We are not, by definition, mental health professionals (even those who are by trade).
Being trained in the signs of suicide infers a responsibility to act on the signs, which in turn opens the window for liability if we don't.
Non-concur. We are certainly not medical professionals, either, but we encourage all of our members to receive first aid training to help in emergencies when their skills and abilities permit.
Every SPP I've seen is pretty similar to a mental health first aid program.
Quote from: Ned on June 24, 2009, 04:09:28 AM
That may account for why I have met so few clinically depressed kindergartners, but it doesn't seem very helpful to the discussion at hand. You can cherry-pick (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking)the data all you'd like, but you need to deal with the inconvenient fact that suicide is the third leading cause of death for 15-24 year olds, an age group somewhat more comparable to CAP. And that is right now, today. Not 1950.CDC Suicide Fact Sheet (http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/Suicide-DataSheet-a.pdf)
Ned,
I respect what you've said here, but how is what you said any different from the cherry picking you noted above?
Because suicide is the "third leading cause of death" doesn't make it a pandemic. Tragic, but still not that common. "Accident" is the #1 (33%) and "homicide" is the #2 (15%). Shouldn't we be more concerned about creating a homicide prevention program? Heart disease is #5 (3%), stroke is #7.
So 11% of the deaths in that age bracket are caused by suicide. That doesn't mean that 11% of people in that bracket will commit suicide.
Quote from: Ned on June 24, 2009, 04:09:28 AM
There are times when I have a hard time believing we are looking at the same post.
Quote from: RiverAux on June 23, 2009, 10:13:24 PMAnother example of poor research that doesn't bode well -- despite what they're advertising in the program overall suicide rates have declined since the 1950s according to the CDC.
Maybe it's just me, but I can't find anywhere that the poster "advertised" anything about suicide rates over time. I guess it is always easier to "disprove" an asertion that was never made. This is a fair example of a Strawman Argument (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman_argument).
Well, what do you call this from the agenda for 2 of the 3 learning labs that I quoted?
QuoteDealing with the growing incidence of suicide.
QuoteDealing with the growing incidence of suicide.
Good Grief how many more "feel good" ventures will NHQ come up with! Juveniles are more apt to die or be injured in a vehicle accident than anything else. Does CAP offer them or seniors a safe driving program? Does it provide classes to recognize the signs of an unsafe driver? Of course not because it is beyond the fundamental ability of us as senior members impact their exposure. The only impact we have is risk reduction when they are in CAP vehicles.
Auto accidents, drug abuse and heat exhaustion are far bigger life threatening issues than suicide.
Some will say that we need mandatory training because it MIGHT save a life. The same argument can be made for countless other risks too.
Keep focusing on the mission instead of the latest in what seems to be a long list of distracting mandates from Maxwell.
Quote from: RiverAux on June 24, 2009, 12:57:44 PMWell, what do you call this from the agenda for 2 of the 3 learning labs that I quoted?
QuoteDealing with the growing incidence of suicide.
QuoteDealing with the growing incidence of suicide.
I call that "Oops. My Bad". You were correct.
Look, I don't think we are really very far apart on this.
(Primarily because I don't (yet) have a position to debate.)
But I honestly don't think the threshold question should be "Does CAP aggravate or increase suicidal ideation in our members?" or even "Exactly how many suicides or attempts have occured on CAP time in the last x years?".
I think the threshold question is something more like "Is suicide a significant preventable problem that affects our cadets?" and if so, "Is there anything CAP might reasonably do given our limited resources in time, dollars, and expertise?"
Because, based on what I've seen to this point, nothing suggests to me that CAP somehow causes or aggravates the problem. Indeed, Maj Lord may well be correct that CAP members may well have a lower rate than the general public.
Although the picture isn't complete, it looks like suicide
is a serious issue in the lives of a significant number or our cadets.
The much, much harder question is what, if anything, to do about it.
And before anyone can answer that question, we need to take the time and effort to review the evidence-based programs already in existence to see if any might be appropriate given our limitations.
It may be that there is nothing "off the shelf" that is remotely appropriate.
As it turns out, there is a government database, National Registry of Evidence-based Practices and Programs (http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/) run by the US Department of Health and Human Service's Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration that allows us to review potential programs.
(I note that the QPR Institute's programs are peer reviewed, but not yet accepted for inclusion in the NREPP database.)
But everything that we are discussing is - in essence - classic ORM. You and others are certainly correct that accidents and homicide are greater risks for our cadets and certainly health challenges like heart disease and cancer are serious risks for our older members.
But until we study the issue fully and consider the alternatives we can't begin to answer questions that would allow us to make decisions about what actions, if any, could preserve the largest number of our human assets given our available resources.
And it is worth restating that all the talk about "NHQ mandates" in this area is simply premature "bad mouthing" of a number of hard-working staffers.
There is no mandate. There are no specific proposals to debate. There are no non-specific proposals to debate.
But I guess that has never stopped us on CT before. ;)
I don't think the argument is with you Ned, though you seem to have had the role of advocatus diaboli for the SPP imposed on you. ( A role for which you are well suited) The good doctor in the memo from National does make four very specific recommendations for program development that he states we must act on proactively. None of his recommendations include any studies or attempts at justification other than his pronouncements that it should be done.
His royal "whereas" proclamation implies the facts are fully accepted and understood, and its time to move to his solutions. He appears to be an unpublished expert in the field of suicide and CIS, but his document seems to me, high-handed.
I actually don't have any specifc debate about the four proposals per se, other than that there is no evidence to suggest a need for their imposition upon the members, a fact belabored here in terms ranging from the bellicose to the merely profane.
Major Lord
Quote from: Major Lord on June 25, 2009, 12:33:14 AM
His royal "whereas" proclamation implies the facts are fully accepted and understood, and its time to move to his solutions. He appears to be an unpublished expert in the field of suicide and CIS, but his document seems to me, high-handed.
Major Lord
Major, that is an interesting observation and may have some truth to it however, I won't even begin to count the number of "experts" who have given the NB information on specific programs or other mandates we need to impliment to "improve CAP".
The vast majority of these "requests" are sent to the appropriate committee for evaluation and, eventual discussion to the NB. It could be months, if not years, before the NB decides to act on this. And, with the overwelming negative posts on the subject, I doubt we have much to worry about mandating SPP on the general membership.
Up until this year FW, I probably would have been as optimistic as you were about this, but given the mandates NHQ has voluntarily decided to impose on us lately (not counting the NIMS requirements which we basically had to do to stay in the game), I hold out little hope that any program would not quickly become mandatory, even if it was just optional at first.
Not to get off topic however, up until now, the only "mandatory" program I can remember implimented by the NB for the general membership has been OPSEC, which takes about 5 minutes in front of the computer. The safety programs were implimented because of the well documented rise in aircraft and vehicle damage, as well as bodily injuries. Programs like WIMRS, WBP and, CMX were implimented after great disscusion, field testing and extensive scrutinization from CAP-USAF and our independent auditors. IMHO, I am very optimistic the NB will do what is "needed", not "wanted" for CAP in this case.
Quote from: FW on June 25, 2009, 10:47:52 AM
Not to get off topic however, up until now, the only "mandatory" program I can remember implimented by the NB for the general membership has been OPSEC, which takes about 5 minutes in front of the computer. The safety programs were implimented because of the well documented rise in aircraft and vehicle damage, as well as bodily injuries. Programs like WIMRS, WBP and, CMX were implimented after great disscusion, field testing and extensive scrutinization from CAP-USAF and our independent auditors. IMHO, I am very optimistic the NB will do what is "needed", not "wanted" for CAP in this case.
You should also remember that many of those board members do some crazy mandates in their own wings too. My wing, for example, recently imposed a requirement that all senior members take and complete the Safety Officer Basic Course or else they would not be permitted to participate in any CAP activity.
Guess what. We had two van accidents within a week of each other a few months later. Now, because of these accidents (which were supposed to have been prevented by us taking that course) we have additional van driver requirements that we need to do.
So if we can attribute circumstantial declines in safety records after programs are instituted, can I claim increases because of them?
So far this year I've spent about 20 hours either completing or teaching various safety requirements, OPSEC, etc. Tonight, I'll be spending another few hours instructing more mandated training - and I haven't even done an RST yet this year...
Jimmy, I understand your pain however, I have to go thru the same "mandatory" stuff everyone else does. I also have to deal with "ground handling", ORM, OPSEC, etc. However, except for OPSEC, it should be known that our safety mandates are driven more by CAP-USAF reccommendations than NB reactions. HOWEVER, I also understand the Wing/CCs anxiety level when things go bad with aircraft or vehicles and, G-D forbid, human loss. The question, I think, we should deal with in SPPs or Safety is: Should we be pro or re active with events? What is the cost/benefit for a program? And, is the program necessary/effective?
Oh, please don't take this as criticism towards you or the actions of the board, personally. But I think that there is a disconnect between what the mandate is and what the actual implication is.
Many of these mandates aren't just a single individual completing a course and it's done. What happens is this:
1) The board initiates the mandates - board members do their individual requirements - they're done.
2) The region initiates the communication of the mandate. They're done.
3) The wing initiates the communication of the mandate (maybe). they're done.
4) The local unit gets the mandate. The individuals do what they can, somebody in the unit schedules the initial training, sets up instructors and a time period to do the training. The initial push gets done. Then the next week somebody new joins. The same efforts above need to be completed, again, and again, and again, and again. It never ends for the local unit. So you end up with the equivalent of a single volunteer using 30% of the entire years unit meetings following up on these mandates.
The only follow up that the upper levels do is run a report and tell the local units that they're not compliant, then threaten with shutting down the unit or suspending the non-compliant members. It's not a recurring training event for them, so it's easy to mandate everyone does it. This issue is additionally compounded when the mandate is pushed onto the 12-14 year old bracket.
So say that a suicide prevention training was mandated to be conducted. The initial requirement met by "the uppers" would be short and done quickly, but the recurring training would just be more and more time that we are unable to focus on AE, ES or providing leadership training opportunities and activities.
In my example, in 6 months I have 20 hours dealing with these mandates. That's already nearly 2 months worth of weekly meetings. The trickle at the top is a flood at the bottom. I think that's what people are trying to get at.
I understand well the nature of "floods" :D
Our problem, IMHO: we tend to overwork things. Make the wheel a bit wider, longer, more spokes, bigger axle... When the solution to our "problems" may just be to let the member be. I don't think it is prudent for a PD officer to personally train each new member individually or, set up a new class right away every time a member joins up or someone from above issues a new "mandate".
As a new member, I would expect however, I get the resources needed to participate fully in my unit. I would expect to obtain the information easily and, I would expect I can do this type of training at my convenience (within time constraints). This is why NHQ has set up CAP University and, a plethera of online courses to complete at home.
I'm sure things can be better however, we can't expect perfection. OK , maybe expect it but, we aren't going to get it. 8)
Anyway, Ned hit things right on. This topic is about a paper we (the NB) have not discussed, have not debated on, don't have any idea of its' validity and, have no clue on what will be done about it. Like I said before, I'd rather go flying.
Here's an article I came across this morning:
Quote from: http://www.wmur.com/family/19888418/detail.html
15% of Teens Expect to Die Young
CHICAGO -- A surprising number of teenagers -- nearly 15 percent -- think they're going to die young, leading many to drug use, suicide attempts and other unsafe behavior, new research suggests.
The study, based on a survey of more than 20,000 kids, challenges conventional wisdom that says teens engage in risky behavior because they think they're invulnerable to harm. Instead, a sizable number of teens may take chances "because they feel hopeless and figure that not much is at stake," said study author Dr. Iris Borowsky, a researcher at the University of Minnesota.
That behavior threatens to turn their fatalism into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Over seven years, kids who thought they would die early were seven time more likely than optimistic kids to be subsequently diagnosed with AIDS. They also were more likely to attempt suicide and get in fights resulting in serious injuries.
Borowsky said the magnitude of kids with a negative outlook was eye-opening.
Adolescence is "a time of great opportunity and for such a large minority of youth to feel like they don't have a long life ahead of them was surprising," she said.
The study suggests a new way doctors could detect kids likely to engage in unsafe behavior and potentially help prevent it, said Dr. Jonathan Klein, a University of Rochester adolescent health expert who was not involved in the research.
"Asking about this sense of fatalism is probably a pretty important component of one of the ways we can figure out who those kids at greater risk are," he said.
The study appears in the July issue of Pediatrics, released Monday.
Scientists once widely believed that teenagers take risks because they underestimate bad consequences and figure "it can't happen to me," the study authors say. The new research bolsters evidence refuting that thinking.
Cornell University professor Valerie Reyna said the new study presents "an even stronger case against the invulnerability idea."
"It's extremely important to talk about how perception of risk influences risk-taking behavior," said Reyna, who has done similar research.
Fatalistic kids weren't more likely than others to die during the seven-year study; there were relatively few deaths, 94 out of more than 20,000 teens.
The researchers analyzed data from a nationally representative survey of kids in grades 7 to 12 who were interviewed three times between 1995 and 2002. Of 20,594 teens interviewed in the first round, 14.7 percent said they thought they had a good chance of dying before age 35. Subsequent interviews found these fatalistic kids engaged in more risky behavior than more optimistic kids.
The study suggests some kids overestimate their risks for harm; however, it also provides evidence that some kids may have good reason for being fatalistic.
Native Americans, blacks and low-income teens -- kids who are disproportionately exposed to violence and hardship -- were much more likely than whites to believe they'd die young.
I knew that the chaplains had to be somewhere behind this. >:(
Quote from: Gunner C on June 29, 2009, 07:00:01 PM
I knew that the chaplains had to be somewhere behind this. >:(
Of course they are. Along with CP and HS.
FWIW, I spoke with the National Chaplain last night on this topic, and we are having a face to face on it in about two weeks. We are also working closely with the National HSO in this arena.
That's why it's called a "coordinating staff."
Ned Lee
National Cadet Advisor
(Cool job, Crummy job title)
Quote from: Gunner C on June 29, 2009, 07:00:01 PM
I knew that the chaplains had to be somewhere behind this. >:(
Yeah, we also killed Lincoln, we covered up the Roswell UFO, and we are keeping Elvis out of sight. That's just how CAP Chaplains roll.
Quote from: DogCollar on July 01, 2009, 01:44:51 PM
Quote from: Gunner C on June 29, 2009, 07:00:01 PM
I knew that the chaplains had to be somewhere behind this. >:(
Yeah, we also killed Lincoln, we covered up the Roswell UFO, and we are keeping Elvis out of sight. That's just how CAP Chaplains roll.
Bill...now you went and done it. Since you have exposed our secrets I will be requesting the Chaplains Templar to expel you from our order. ;)
Quote from: DogCollar on July 01, 2009, 01:44:51 PM
Quote from: Gunner C on June 29, 2009, 07:00:01 PM
I knew that the chaplains had to be somewhere behind this. >:(
Yeah, we also killed Lincoln, we covered up the Roswell UFO, and we are keeping Elvis out of sight. That's just how CAP Chaplains roll.
Wait you killed Lincoln, that means you are older than CAP; I smell a giant conspiracy.
Quote from: notaNCO forever on July 01, 2009, 03:53:17 PM
Quote from: DogCollar on July 01, 2009, 01:44:51 PM
Yeah, we also killed Lincoln, we covered up the Roswell UFO, and we are keeping Elvis out of sight. That's just how CAP Chaplains roll.
Wait you killed Lincoln, that means you are older than CAP; I smell a giant conspiracy.
No, they're not older than CAP...they got a TIME MACHINE! :o
It would appear that this one is done.