Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-x9fsb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-24T07:23:11.736Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Psychiatrists’ Awareness and Use of Voluntary Self-Prohibition as a Firearm Suicide Prevention Tool in Virginia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 July 2025

Bryan Barks ,
Shannon Frattaroli  and
Paul S. Nestadt Open the ORCID record for Paul S. Nestadt [Opens in a new window]
Bryan Barks
Affiliation:
Tennessee Suicide Prevention Network, Nashville, United States
Shannon Frattaroli
Affiliation:
Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, United States
Paul S. Nestadt*
Affiliation:
Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, https://ror.org/037zgn354Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, United States
*
Corresponding author: Paul S. Nestadt; Email: pn@jhmi.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Voluntary self-prohibition (VSP) is a suicide prevention policy that allows individuals who recognize their risk for suicide to voluntarily prevent themselves from purchasing firearms through systems requiring background checks. It is unclear whether psychiatrists are aware of this suicide prevention tool or when to recommend it appropriately.

Aims

To evaluate Virginia psychiatrists’ awareness and use of VSP alongside Substantial Risk Orders (SROs) to inform policy and practice.

Methods

A convenience sample of Virginia psychiatrists was surveyed on knowledge and use of VSP and SRO, including vignettes of patients at varying risk levels.

Results

Sixty-three psychiatrists completed the survey. Most (66.7%) were unaware of VSP or SRO. After brief education, 74.1% of respondents chose VSP in the vignette where it was most strongly indicated and 72.2% chose SRO in the vignette where it was most strongly indicated. After learning about VSP, 83% agreed or strongly agreed that VSP could be a useful tool.

Limitations

The sample was small and did not collect certain information which may have provided additional insight into respondents’ choices.

Conclusion

After brief education, most respondents found VSP potentially useful. Ensuring knowledge of VSP and SRO may improve the uptake of both policies and suicide prevention efforts.

Keywords

SuicideFirearmsLethal MeansVoluntary Self ProhibitionSubstantial Risk Order

Information

Type
Independent Articles
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , First View , pp. 1 - 6
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ayres, I. and Vars, F., Weapon of Choice: Fighting Gun Violence While Respecting Gun Rights (Harvard University Press, 2020): at 13–38; F. Vars, “Voluntary Do-Not-Sell Lists - An Innovative Approach to Reducing Gun Suicides,” The New England Journal of Medicine 383, no. 14 (2020): 1299–1301, https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp2011339.Google Scholar
Delaware State Code § 9.11.98 (2024); Utah State Code § 53.5c.301 (2023); Virginia State Code § 12.52-50 (2020); Washington State Code § 9.41.350 (2019).Google Scholar
Fast Facts: Firearm Injury and Death (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), https://www.cdc.gov/firearm-violence/data-research/facts-stats/index.html (last visited December 2, 2024); Suicide Data and Statistics (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), https://www.cdc.gov/suicide/facts/data.html (last visited December 2, 2024).Google Scholar
Anestis, M., Guns and suicide: An American epidemic (Oxford University Press, 2018): at 33–44; R. Pallin and A. Barnhorst, “Clinical strategies for reducing firearm suicide,” Injury epidemiology 8, no. 1 (2021): 57, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40621-021-00352-8.Google Scholar
Anglemyer, A., Horvath, T., and Rutherford, G., “The accessibility of firearms and risk for suicide and homicide victimization among household members: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Annals of Internal Medicine 160, no. 2 (2014): 101–110, https://doi.org/10.7326/m13-1301; See Anestis supra note 4.Google ScholarPubMed
See Anestis supra note 4; see Anglemyer et al, supra note 5; Studdert, D. et al., “Handgun Ownership and Suicide in California,” The New England Journal of Medicine 382, no. 23 (2020): 2220–2229, https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa1916744.Google ScholarPubMed
Hawton, K., “Restricting access to methods of suicide: Rationale and evaluation of this approach to suicide prevention,” Crisis: The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention 28, supp. 1 (2007): 4–9, https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1027/0227-5910.28.S1.4; M. Daigle, “Suicide prevention through means restriction: assessing the risk of substitution. A critical review and synthesis,” Accident Analysis and Prevention 37, no. 4 (2005): 625–632, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2005.03.004.Google Scholar
See Ayres and Vars, supra note 1; See Vars, supra note 1.Google Scholar
“The National ERPO Resource Center,” The Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions and the US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, (2023), https://www.erpo.org.Google Scholar
Betz, M. and Wintemute, G., “Physician Counseling on Firearm Safety: A New Kind of Cultural Competence,” JAMA 314, no. 5 (2015): 449–450, https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2015.7055.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ahmedani, B. et al., “Racial/Ethnic differences in health care visits made before suicide attempt across the United States,” Medical Care 53, no. 5 (2015): 430–435, https://doi.org/10.1097/mlr.0000000000000335; J. Swanson et al., “Risk-Based Temporary Firearm Removal Orders: A New Legal Tool for Clinicians,” Harvard Review of Psychiatry 29, no. 1 (2021): 6–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/HRP.0000000000000278.Google ScholarPubMed
See The National ERPO Resource Center, supra note 10.Google Scholar
Knapp, S., “Lethal Means Counseling for Suicidal Firearm Owners ,” Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy (2023): 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10879-023-09588-5; B. Stanley and G. Brown, “Safety planning intervention: A brief intervention to mitigate suicide risk,” Cognitive and Behavioral Practice 19, no. 2 (2012): 256–264, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpra.2011.01.001.Google ScholarPubMed
Virginia State Code, § 19.2-152.14 (2020).Google Scholar