Suicidal person alert?
Anything you post to the internet lives forever. We see this with job-seekers who find their social media posts are being searched as part of an employment reference check. We see this with political campaigns when comments from 10 years past are resurfaced as evidence of racism, sexism, or personal ethics. There are countless other examples of this. Even a name and a picture online can become a problem for those who want to remain anonymous or get caught doing something questionable.
This also means the information shared about a missing person will live forever - even when there is a "happy" ending if that person is found.
In my work with the NYSDCJS Missing Persons Clearinghouse, we had long and hard conversations about the information they would consider sharing about a missing person. The top priority is to find the person. In doing so, the alert must include a description of their physical characteristics, notable behaviors, and other vulnerabilities that would increase the likelihood that the person returns home. But there was always a concern about the alert living on forever and the need to protect the privacy of individuals who were momentarily at high risk. This was especially prescient in our conversations about youth, young adults, and adults in crisis. Naming a person and their associated mental health conditions in a public space like a missing person alert means that information can go far and wide and cannot be removed once it is shared. In the future, that information can be found and used to affect their employment, volunteerism, or other activities that require vetting.
An additional and related concern is the stigmatization that can occur when an individual is labeled with any sort of mental health issue. Describing a person's mental status can not only "live on" as a permanent record on the internet, but that record can follow them even as they recover from temporary crises.
Importantly, HIPAA laws do not apply to an emergency manager or law enforcement entity, therefore they are not restricted from sharing critical information in a warning about a person's mental health status. In practice, however, that decision can result in ongoing harm to the individual, even if they are found safe.
Given all of these concerns, one recent WEA stands out to me and it is worth discussing. This alert clearly included a named individual who was in crisis and labeled them so two times in the same message. In the message below, their name has been removed to protect their confidentiality.
This message includes key components that are recommended for missing person alert (message source, alert type, location, description of the missing person, guidance instructions). However, instead of using the alert type "missing person," the county labels the event as "suicidal person." They do provide a location where the person was last seen, describe their clothing, and ask people to contact 9-1-1 if they see the person. Missing is any element of time and any description of what the person looks like, such as hair color/style, height, weight. What is clearly included are statements about the person's mental health status.
There are many recommendations that can be offered about how to characterize a person who is in crisis rather than saying "suicidal person" or "experiencing suicidal concerns." Beginning with the message heading, it would be useful to state that this is an alert for a missing person or a missing endangered person. In place of "experiencing suicidal concerns" it would be useful to share how they may be behaving, such as tearful, disoriented, or confused. In place of "could hurt someone or himself" it would be useful to explain that they may be in need of assistance or medical help. This is especially so if there is no indication that the person is carrying a weapon that they might use to harm another person. In sum, choosing how to characterize the person without labeling their mental health status preserves their privacy and can provide better behavioral clues to the message receiver.
Having a plan for how to write a message like this is becoming more important, especially if you, as a message writer, intend to rely on your local web browser or AI to help generate a good message. As I did research to write this blog, I asked Gemini to answer this question "why is it important not to name a suicidal person in an emergency alert" and to point me to reference material that I could site. Over an over again, I was directed to references (10 at a time) with no direct answers or summaries. I thought, perhaps there was something wrong with my searching. So I asked "is Gemini broken?" The answer was astounding. Due to safety policies, regarding self-harm and crisis situations, Gemini is restricted from generating custom text or advice on the topic. Instead, it automatically redirects to standard, vetted safety resources where the reader can investigate further.
In other words, if you are a message writer and you hope to get a quick review of your work from the most frequently used web browser/free AI assistant, you will be out of luck.
I understand the reasons for the safety policies - it is better for the user, it is also better for Google. But it will not help an emergency manager to write better alerts.
We have a manuscript under review that will provide these kinds of suggestions for missing persons messages. As soon as it is published, it will be shared widely on The Warn Room. In the meantime, be sure to look at the other blogs I have posted on missing persons. Or reach out for assistance; we'll be glad to help.
WEA 90CH EN
Cecil County Dept of Emergency Services Shelter in place. Law enforcement activity.
The 90 character message looks like a mistake.
This is a missing person. Why say "suicidal" person? What benefit is this? I removed the name of the person from this blog.
