Who You Treat: Marginalized Populations

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Suicidality

Posted on by erics

Please note the following post uses identity-first language, though acknowledges that preferences may differ between self-advocates.

Background

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is a developmental disorder characterized by ongoing differences and challenges in social communication and restricted and repetitive behaviors (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Research has highlighted increased early death in autistic individuals, and suicide is a primary cause (Cassidy et al., 2014). Autistic adults are at increased risk for suicide compared to non-autistic adults (Hedley et al., 2017). In a study of a large, diverse population of adults in the United States, the risk of suicide attempts was five times higher for autistic adults than for non-autistic adults (Croen et al., 2015). While suicide research has largely focused on autistic adults so far (McDonnell et al., 2020), autistic youth are also more likely to attempt and die by suicide (Navaneelan, 2012). A study of autistic individuals aged 4-20 years evaluated during a psychiatric hospital stay found that 22% of autistic youth commonly talked about death or suicide (Horowitz et al., 2018). While studies differ about exact prevalence rates, experts agree that there is reason for concern.

Despite the increase in research and autistic self-advocacy groups’ attention on this topic, there continues to be a major lack of tools to manage suicidal behaviors in the autistic population. Therapists feel less confident providing care to autistic individuals experiencing suicidal thoughts (Jager-Hyman et al., 2020). The good news is that there are efforts to validate screening tools for use with autistic adults, including screeners (e.g., SBQ-ASC, SIDAS-M, STUQ), and more in-depth assessment tools such as the Suicide Assessment Kit-Modified Interview (Hedley et al., 2025). However, these tools are designed for adults, and there are not yet appropriate for autistic youth. This is important when considering existing screening tools, given that autistic individuals may not always exhibit traditional suicide symptoms and warning signs. For example, autistic individuals may present with facial expressions which may not directly match their emotional experience (e.g., laughter when anxious or depressed) or have difficulty verbalizing their thoughts, feelings, and experiences when overwhelmed (Oliphant et al., 2020).

While quality access to mental health services is a problem for all children and adolescents, this challenge is worse for autistic individuals and their families (Cervantes et al., 2023). In fact, many providers do not accept autistic patients. In a study of over 6,000 outpatient mental health facilities in the United States, only half offered services to autistic children (Cantor et al., 2022), which is particularly concerning given this group’s increased mental health care needs. When these needs go unmet, autistic youth are more likely to present to Emergency Departments (EDs) (Badgett et al., 2023). Unfortunately, EDs and psychiatric hospitals are not designed for autistic individuals’ needs from both an environmental perspective (e.g., sensory sensitivities to bright lights, crowdedness, unpredictability) and a treatment standpoint (e.g., stigma related to mental health in medical settings, lack of training related to autistic learning styles, and behavior management techniques). Sadly, this can then lead to negative or traumatic experiences, inappropriate treatments, excessive interventions (e.g., physical or chemical restraints, seclusion), and longer admissions (Gabriels et al., 2012; Klinepeter et al., 2024).

Adapting evidence-based suicide-focused treatments, such as Dialectical Behavioral Therapy (DBT) (Ritschel et al., 2022) and Safety Planning Intervention (Rodgers et al., 2023), remains an area of emerging research. Therefore, evidence-based suicidality treatment made for autistic individuals is a sparsely available, yet urgently needed service.

Clinical Insights

Unfortunately, many of the clinicians who treat suicidality or autism remained siloed in their respective treatment areas, without clear communication and overlap, despite extensive research and clinical experience on both sides. To treat suicidality in autism, it is necessary that these “worlds” collaborate, create synergistic relationships, and develop treatments to address this life-threatening phenomenon.

Recent work has suggested that some general changes to treatments can be helpful for autistic learning styles, such as visual supports, environment and sensory considerations, making language more concrete, caregiver collaboration, and embedding special interests into treatment (Schwartzman et al., 2021; Dickson et al., 2021).

As a result of this critical gap in services, a clinic was created to treat suicidality in autistic youth at a large children’s hospital, the Clinic for Autism and Suicide Prevention (CLASP). As mentioned above, collaboration between the autism center and the hospital’s department of behavioral and mental health was necessary and invaluable. The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS was) incorporated as the primary treatment framework when appropriate, and autism-specific interventions were then plugged in to address specific drivers. The CAMS Framework® identifies the “drivers” that a patient says make them consider suicide as an option.

For example, if a patient identified difficulty with change as a driver, an autism intervention, such as Unstuck and on Target, was used. If a patient identified loneliness as a driver, then social skills practice or PEERS videos were incorporated to improve relationships. Additionally, interventions such as cognitive behavior therapy, dialectical behavior therapy, and trauma-focused cognitive behavior therapy were often used to address many other drivers such as conflict with others, traumatic experiences, or difficulty managing strong emotions.

The clinic provides individual weekly therapy to autistic youth experiencing suicidality and has successfully discharged several patients due to reduced suicidality. We have learned many key insights from this clinic and from the powerful, brave work these patients are doing. Below are some recommendations for working with autistic clients who experience suicidality.

Recommendations for clinical practice:

  • Consider whether there are outside factors which can be addressed or managed. For example, if a patient is struggling with bullying, consider whether school can intervene. Remember that autistic are neurodivergent individuals living in a world designed for neurotypical needs!
  • Take your time and expect that treatment progress may take longer. Negative repetitive patterns can be “stickier” in autistic individuals and breaking out of these cycles can require more effort and time.
  • Create structure when possible. CAMS forms (e.g., the Suicide Status Form, the Stabilization Support Plan for parents and caregivers and the CAMS Therapeutic Worksheet) are a great way to introduce a visual form and help clients know what to expect from session to session.
  • Determine whether expressing suicidal thoughts is a form of communication and if so, consider what the patient is communicating and whether this can be addressed. For example, if a patient repeatedly makes suicidal comments when transitioning away from a preferred activity (e.g., video game, favorite location), consider working on transitions with behavioral strategies. Think about whether there are other ways the patient can communicate their frustration.
  • Discuss what happens both for the patient and others when they share suicidal thoughts. First, understand what the patient is feeling and why they are sharing. Next, while openness is important, some individuals may not be aware of the procedures certain organizations have to follow when someone makes a suicidal comment (e.g., school policies, medical staff) and explaining what to expect can help reduce emotional overload.
  • Help increase emotional awareness. In some autistic clients, the ramp up to a crisis moment can be much faster than in non-autistic individuals, so increasing emotional self-monitoring can improve their ability to access coping strategies earlier.
  • Do not assume that physical, social, or human contacts are the only way to reduce suicidal risk. Perhaps there are other non-human or non-physical connections which can be important for coping, such as a preferred stimming object, online video game friends, or an important pet. Stimming (i.e., repetitive self-soothing movements, such as pacing, rocking, humming, finger tapping) can be helpful both during therapy and as part of a stabilization plan.
  • Do not assume that all autistic patients need autism-specific treatments. This can create barriers and close important doors to care. Some autistic patients benefit from working with clinicians experienced in autism, though this is not necessary for every patient. Our saying is “when you’ve met one autistic person, you’ve met one autistic person!”

Most importantly, remember that autistic clients often have amazing and powerful insight into their emotional experiences that leads to suicidality. Start with the patient perspective first, gather additional information, and empower the client to work collaboratively toward a life worth living one small step at a time!

Below are several helpful resources available online including those developed by autistic self-advocates:

References

American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th edition). Arlington, VA: Author.

Badgett, N. M., Sadikova, E., Menezes, M., & Mazurek, M. O. (2023). Emergency department utilization among youth with autism spectrum disorder: exploring the role of preventive care, medical home, and mental health access. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 53(6), 2274-2282.

Cantor, J., McBain, R. K., Kofner, A., Stein, B. D., & Yu, H. (2022). Where are US outpatient mental health facilities that serve children with autism spectrum disorder? A national snapshot of geographic disparities. Autism, 26(1), 169-177.

Cassidy, S., Bradley, P., Robinson, J., Allison, C., McHugh, M., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2014). Suicidal ideation and suicide plans or attempts in adults with Asperger’s syndrome attending a specialist diagnostic clinic: a clinical cohort study. The Lancet Psychiatry, 1(2), 142-147. https://10.1016/S2215-0366(14)70248-2

Cervantes, P. E., Conlon, G. R., Seag, D. E., Feder, M., Lang, Q., Meril, S., … & Horwitz, S. M. (2023). Mental health service availability for autistic youth in New York City: An examination of the developmental disability and mental health service systems. Autism, 27(3), 704-713.

Klinepeter, E. A., Choate, J. D., Nelson Hall, T., & Gibbs, K. D. (2024). A “whole child approach”: parent experiences with acute care hospitalizations for children with autism spectrum disorder and behavioral health needs. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1-15.

Croen, L., Zerbo, O., Qian, Y., Massolo, M., Rich, S., Sidney, S. & Kripke, C. (2015). The health status of adults on the autism spectrum. Autism, 19(7), 1-10. https://doi/abs/10.1177/1362361315577517

Gabriels, R. L., Agnew, J. A., Beresford, C., Morrow, M. A., Mesibov, G., & Wamboldt, M. (2012). Improving psychiatric hospital care for pediatric patients with autism spectrum disorders and intellectual disabilities. Autism research and treatment, 2012(1), 685053.

Hedley, D., Uljarević, M., Wilmot, M., Richdale, A., & Dissanayake, C. (2017). Brief report: social support, depression and suicidal ideation in adults with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47(11), 3669-3677. https://10.1007/s10803-017-3274-2

Hedley, D., Williams, Z. J., Deady, M., Batterham, P. J., Bury, S. M., Brown, C. M., … & Stokes, M. A. (2025). The Suicide Assessment Kit-Modified Interview: Development and preliminary validation of a modified clinical interview for the assessment of suicidal thoughts and behavior in autistic adults. Autism, 29(3), 766-787.

Horowitz, L. M., Thurm, A., Farmer, C., Mazefsky, C., Lanzillo, E., Bridge, J. A., Greenbaum, R., Pao, M., & Siegel, M. (2018). Talking about death or suicide: Prevalence and clinical correlates in youth with autism spectrum disorder in the psychiatric inpatient setting. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48(11), 3702-3710. https://10.1007/s10803-017-3180-7

Jager-Hyman, S., Maddox, B. B., Crabbe, S. R., & Mandell, D. S. (2020). Mental health clinicians’ screening and intervention practices to reduce suicide risk in autistic adolescents and adults. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(10), 3450-3461.

McDonnell, C. G., DeLucia, E. A., Hayden, E. P., Anagnostou, E., Nicolson, R., Kelley, E., … & Stevenson, R. A. (2020). An exploratory analysis of predictors of youth suicide-related behaviors in autism spectrum disorder: implications for prevention science. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(10), 3531-3544. https://10.1007/s10803-019-04320-6

Navaneelan, T. (2012). Suicide rates: An overview. Ottawa (ON): Statistics Canada.

Oliphant, R. Y., Smith, E. M., & Grahame, V. (2020). What is the prevalence of self-harming and suicidal behaviour in under 18s with ASD, with or without an intellectual disability?. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(10), 3510-3524.

Ritschel, L. A., Guy, L., & Maddox, B. B. (2022). A pilot study of dialectical behaviour therapy skills training for autistic adults. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 50(2), 187-202.

Rodgers, J., Goodwin, J., Nielsen, E., Bhattarai, N., Heslop, P., Kharatikoopaei, E., … & Cassidy, S. (2023). Adapted suicide safety plans to address self-harm, suicidal ideation, and suicide behaviours in autistic adults: protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial. Pilot and feasibility studies, 9(1), 31.

How CAMS Empowers Families to Support Suicidal Loved Ones

Posted on by STOLBER Digital

Youth mental health remains a growing concern in the U.S. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), suicide is the second-leading cause of death for teens and young adults between the ages of 10–34 in the U.S. [1] Additionally, 36.7% of young adults ages 18–25 have mental health needs that are not being treated. [2] 

It is common for family members, especially caregivers, to feel overwhelmed. They may wonder what to do when a loved one talks about suicide. CAMS (Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality) is an evidence-based treatment for suicide that allows family members to be a part of the process. It puts emphasis on the “collaborative” aspect. Rather than teaching and handing off the tools to the at-risk person to manage themselves, CAMS strives to involve parents and caregivers. The Stabilization Support Plan is one way that CAMS does this. This plan provides guidance to family members to help support their child’s treatment moving forward. This helps create a bigger system of support for the person who is struggling.  

The Role that Family Plays

Family members and caregivers play crucial roles in helping support their child’s mental health. Adolescence is often a time of instability and change—from changes in friendships to increased demands at school and other activities. Children and teens who are close with their family members have positive, built-in relationships with people they can rely on for help and support through the ups and downs. Here are a few specific ways that family members can help each other when it comes to mental health and suicide prevention. 

Offering emotional support

In a healthy dynamic, family members can provide emotional support to one another. They provide safe spaces for each other to open up and share about their struggles. Families often have deep bonds from shared experiences, good and bad. They know each other’s history, struggles, and triumphs. They are often the first place that people go to with those struggles and triumphs. Having people available to lean on during these times can be extremely helpful.  

Detecting early warning signs of suicide

Family members may be more in-tune and aware of certain warning signs, sensing when things seem “off.” They can easily detect abnormal behavior since they’re familiar with what normal behavior looks like. They are often able to be on alert for signs of distress. Being able to identify warning signs and abnormal behaviors in someone is a key first step to suicide prevention.

Being involved with treatment

When it comes to treatment, family members and caregivers are able to be more easily and seamlessly involved than those on the outside. Parents and caregivers can help their child stay healthy. They can manage logistics like scheduling and driving to appointments. They can also encourage their child to follow treatment plans. 

Family: A Protective Factor 

When talking about suicide, risk factors and protective factors are important to discuss. Risk factors are things that make suicide more likely. Protective factors are things that make suicide less likely. Some people are naturally more at risk than others depending on their background and living situation. According to the Suicide Prevention Resource Center, social isolation can be a big risk factor. Connectedness to other individuals, community, and family is a protective factor. [3] Therefore, it’s important for families to be present and know how to help their child or adolescent through their struggles.

Ways CAMS Supports Family Involvement

Unlike many other types of treatment methods, CAMS puts a large emphasis on collaboration when it comes to working with and supporting the at-risk individual. CAMS is set up to help family members be involved and take an active role in their loved one’s treatment, especially when dealing with parents and children. One way is through CAMS-4Teens®. CAMS-4Teens is a specific method of using the CAMS Framework® to treat children, teens, and young adults who are struggling with thoughts of suicide. Parents and caregivers are engaged in this process, as well. They are given expectations and information up front about the treatment. They are updated regularly as the treatment goes on. They join sessions to learn about their child’s “suicidal drivers.” They also discuss stabilization and support plans, among other topics.

Allowing parents to have a more active role in their child’s treatment allows for open communication and helps reduce the stigma about mental health and suicide. Parents and caregivers can learn about what leads to thoughts of suicide. They can also understand the CAMS therapy approach. This knowledge helps them better understand their child’s mind. 

Benefits of CAMS for Families

CAMS not only benefits the person at risk, but it can help families as a whole grow closer and move forward together in confidence. Here are a few of the specific areas in which families can benefit when working with CAMS.  

Insight into the issues

Many young people, especially teenagers, struggle with issues related to friendships, insecurity, and comparing themselves to their peers. In CAMS, the patient is always listened to first. This helps the therapist see the person’s suicidal thoughts from their point of view. This makes it easier to share these thoughts with family members who can then gain a better understanding.  

Greater sense of control and direction

CAMS allows parents and caregivers the opportunity to get a glimpse into what is going on and what their role is in helping their child. This is helpful for the children but also helpful for the parents. It gives them a greater understanding and knowledge about what tools and techniques their child is learning to deal with their difficult thoughts and feelings. 

Strengthening trust and relationships

When mental health is openly talked about, trust is more easily built. Family members of any age can benefit from these open conversations around mental health and struggles. When parents and caregivers see how serious the issue is, it helps their child. They also learn what is being done to help. This way, the child can trust that their parents care about what is happening. 

Increased confidence in dealing with a crisis

A common fear that many parents and caregivers have is that they will make a situation worse by saying or doing the wrong thing, particularly in a moment of crisis. CAMS works with parents to put a plan in place for dealing with emergencies. That way, if a crisis happens, parents and caregivers will know how to respond appropriately.

Warning Signs to Watch For

It’s always important to stay aware of the warning signs of suicide, especially because they may look different for people of different ages. Here are some warning signs to watch for from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA): [4]

Warning signs in adults:

  • Talking about or making a plan for suicide
  • Behaving recklessly or acting agitated
  • Talking about feeling trapped or like a burden
  • Increased use of alcohol or drugs
  • Withdrawing or isolating from others
  • Changes in sleep (increased or decreased)
  • Showing signs of rage 
  • Displaying extreme mood swings

Warning signs in youth and children:

  • Expressing hopelessness about the future
  • Displaying severe or overwhelming emotional distress
  • Withdrawing or isolating from others
  • Changes in sleep (increased or decreased)
  • Sudden anger or hostility that seems out of character
  • Increased irritability 

Supporting a loved one who is struggling with suicidal ideation can feel overwhelming and even scary, especially those who feel ill equipped. CAMS aims to help families by offering them a lifeline and including them on the healing journey. CAMS helps parents and caregivers by encouraging open talks about struggles. It focuses on what matters most to the person at risk. This way, they gain the tools and confidence to support their loved one on the path to recovery.  

Curious to learn more about CAMS-4Teens? See more information in this article here: Proven CAMS-4Teens Strategies to Treat Adolescent Suicide. For those interested in or pursuing CAMS-Trained™ designation, check out our on-demand video CAMS-4Teens: Working with Parents. This 3-hour video training covers how therapists can work with parents to support the use of CAMS treatment with their child using the Stabilization Support Plan. 

For more help and tips on supporting a loved one, see this guide from the Center for Suicide Research and Prevention with resources.

Remember, if you or someone you know is in crisis, reach out to the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline via call, text, or online chat.

 

Sources:

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsrr/vsrr024.pdf
[2] https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/reports/rpt47095/National%20Report/National%20Report/2023-nsduh-annual-national.pdf
[3] https://sprc.org/risk-and-protective-factors/
[4] https://www.samhsa.gov/mental-health/suicidal-behavior/warning-signs

Colorado’s Comprehensive Approach to Suicide Prevention: What’s Working

Colorado's Comprehensive Approach to Suicide Prevention: What's Working

Dr. Lena Heilmann, Director of the Colorado Office of Suicide Prevention (OSP), provided an overview of Colorado’s comprehensive approach to suicide prevention, including the programs OSP funds and leads; Colorado-specific suicide-related data and data systems; a deeper dive into the Colorado-National Collaborative and OSP’s emphasis on suicide-specific care; how OSP works to meet the needs of all Colorado communities, including priority populations that face unique challenges and barriers that can increase risk of suicide; how OSP funds its programs through braided fundings and federal grants; the Colorado Suicide Prevention Commission and collaborations with partners across the state through its five active workgroups covering the programs we run and fund through OSP; what a comprehensive approach is; what the CNC is; that we work to meet the needs of all Colorado communities, including priority populations; which federal grants we have and how we implement them; provide an overview of the Commission and workgroups; and show some Colorado-specific data.

Lena Heilmann, PhD

About Lena Heilmann, PhD

Lena Heilmann (she/hers), PhD, MNM, is the Director of the Colorado Office of Suicide Prevention (which is housed within CDPHE). The Office of Suicide Prevention’s mission is to serve as the lead entity for suicide prevention, intervention supports, and postvention efforts in Colorado, collaborating with communities statewide to reduce the number of suicide deaths and attempts. Lena leads a team of eleven people who are passionate about reducing the impact of suicide in Colorado. Lena leads suicide prevention responses to media inquiries, provides subject matter expertise to legislation, serves as the Co-Chair for the Suicide Prevention Commission, is accountable to meeting statutory mandates for the Office, and serves as PI on two SAMHSA grants: GLS Youth Suicide Prevention and Early Intervention and the National Strategy for Suicide Prevention. Lena is fiercely committed to equity in the Office’s approach to comprehensive suicide prevention and had led various initiatives to center community voice, lived experience, and to address disparities impacting Coloradans.

Lena’s passion for this work comes directly from her lived experience. In 2012, Lena lost her only sister Danielle to suicide. Lena’s world and identity shattered with the loss of her soulmate sister. In order to survive this traumatic grief and to honor her sister, Lena decided to leave her career as a German and Gender/Women’s Studies professor and turned to a life of suicide prevention. She connected with sibling suicide loss survivors and compiled a book-length collection of essays titled Still With Us: Voices of Sibling Suicide Loss Survivors, which the American Association of Suicidology (AAS) recognized by awarding Lena with the 2021 AAS Suicide Loss Survivor of the Year Award. Lena volunteers for the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP)’s Healing Conversations program.

David A. Jobes, PhD

About David A. Jobes Ph.D. ABPP

David Jobes, PhD, ABPP, is the founder of CAMS-care, LLC. He began his career in 1987 in the Counseling Center of the Catholic University of America, where he developed a suicide risk assessment tool for college students that evolved into CAMS. Dr. Jobes is now a Professor of Psychology and Associate Director of Clinical Training at Catholic; he has trained thousands of mental health professionals in the United States and abroad in evidence-based assessment and treatment of suicide risk and the use of CAMS.

Watch the Recorded Webinar On-Demand

Enter your information to gain access.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form

Strengths-Based Approaches to Suicide Prevention in the Black Community

Strengths-Based Approaches to Suicide Prevention in the Black Community Webinar

The crisis of suicide among Black youth and emerging adults has escalated in recent years. Despite this, little is known about what factors can protect against the occurrence of suicide for Black Americans. In this talk, Dr. Brooks Stephens will review socio-cultural risk factors for suicide among Black youth and emerging adults, share her research focusing on strengths-based approaches to suicide prevention, and outline essential actions needed to address this public health crisis.

Jasmin Brooks Stephens, PhD

Jasmin Brooks Stephens, PhD

Dr. Jasmin Brooks Stephens is an incoming Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of California, Berkeley (starting July 2025). Dr. Brooks Stephens earned her PhD in Clinical Psychology at the University of Houston and completed her clinical internship at Harvard Medical School/Massachusetts General Hospital. Dr. Brooks Stephens’ research focuses on utilizing qualitative and quantitative clinical science methods to characterize the unique social and contextual risk factors that shape the mental health trajectories of Black youth and emerging adults, with a focus on suicide vulnerability and racial trauma. Grounded in strengths-based approaches, her work also aims to identify cultural protective factors that promote resilience and positive psychological well-being for diverse Black communities. Through her work, she aims to develop and implement culturally relevant interventions, programming, and policies that target the reduction of racism-related stress, suicide, and health disparities within Black communities. Her work has been supported by several national organizations including the NASEM Ford Foundation, APA Minority Fellowship Program, and P.E.O. Foundation.

Dr Raymond Tucker Headshot

About Dr. Raymond P. Tucker

Associate Professor of Psychology, Louisiana State University (LSU)
Clinical Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center (LSUHSC)/Our Lady of the Lake (OLOL),
Raymond P. Tucker is a licensed clinical psychologist and associate professor of psychology at Louisiana State University. There he teaches undergraduate courses in psychology, graduate courses in clinical psychology, and founded the LSU Mitigation of Suicidal Behavior research laboratory. As a clinical assistant professor of psychology at LSUHSC/OLOL, he trains medical staff/students in suicide-specific evidence-based assessment and intervention protocols.

Watch the Recorded Webinar On-Demand

Enter you information to gain access.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form

Zero Suicide – Outcomes and Opportunities

Zero Suicide - Outcomes and Opportunities

The Zero Suicide model was launched in 2012 as part of the National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention. Consistent with the National Strategy for Suicide Prevention, Zero Suicide called for improved suicide identification and care in health care systems and promoted use of evidence-based practices by health care providers. Seven core elements comprise the model: “Lead”, “Train”, and “Improve” are the structural components embedded throughout the system and necessary for change, success, fidelity, and continuous quality improvement. “Identify”, “Engage”, “Treat”, and “Transition” are clinical components of the model and define the care patients should receive. Despite evidence supporting each component, use of the full model within systems of care varies.

Over 38% of individuals have made a healthcare visit (e.g., primary care, emergency department, specialty care, etc.) within the week before their suicide attempt and 95% have had a healthcare visit within the preceding year. While this varies across race and ethnicity, these are clearly missed opportunities to identify and care for people at risk for suicide.

Seeing suicide as a never event forces the organization to use best practices, apply continuous quality improvement, and emphasize reducing errors while holding the system to account, not the individual. The clinical science of treating suicidality has evolved such that we now have several proven suicide-specific treatments with additional promising treatments in development. However, graduate programs, professional certification, and continuing education rarely focus on suicide-specific treatments as a competency for graduation or licensure and clinicians report a lack of comfort, confidence, and skill in delivering suicide care.

The Zero Suicide approach has demonstrated notable reductions in suicide and suicide behaviors as well as improvements to using evidenced-based practices. This webinar will describe the Zero Suicide model, discuss challenges, disparities, and opportunities regarding uptake of the unique components of the model, and share how organizations can get started on their Zero Suicide implementation efforts.

Julie Goldstein Grumet, PhD

Julie Goldstein Grumet, PhD

Julie is Vice President for Suicide Prevention Strategy and the Director of the Zero Suicide Institute at the Education Development Center. She provides strategic direction to health care systems to improve the identification and treatment for people at risk for suicide. She has collaborated on numerous grants and publications about systems-based approaches to suicide prevention. Julie’s primary responsibility is to advance the development, dissemination, and effective implementation of comprehensive suicide care practices in various settings. She has expertise in behavioral health transformation, state and local community suicide prevention, quality improvement, and the use of evidence-based practices for suicide care in clinical settings. Julie has a Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from The George Washington University and lives in Silver Spring, MD.

Watch the Recorded Webinar On-Demand

Enter you information to gain access.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form

Black Suicidology Summit Webinar

Black Suicidology Summit Webinar On-Demand Webinar

The Interfaith America Black Leadership Fellows introduces the Black Suicidology Summit webinar. We examine the socio-historical context of systemic disparities, provide intersectional discourse on current risk/preventative factors, and visualize the possibilities of future evidence-based practices. This virtual, fireside chat, is a space created for healing, awareness, and community innovation.

Tanisha Esperanza, M.A.

About Tanisha Esperanza, M.A.

Tanisha Esperanza, M.A. is a neurodivergent consultant and suicidologist. She is a 1st generation Afro-Latinx American, queer, and an autistic adult. She obtained her B.A. in anthropology & sociology from Spelman College. In 2019, she graduated with her M.A. in psychology from the Catholic University of America. Her work focuses on providing neuro-affirming support to LGBTQ+/BIPOC adults. Integrating an intersectional and womanist approach in holistically treating trauma. She examines the social-historical impact of systemic trauma on the daily functionings of marginalized individuals and communities. Tanisha is a proud companion of a cavapoo, Ms. Ella Fitzgerald.

Janel Cubbage

About Janel Cubbage

Janel Cubbage currently serves as the Strategic Partnerships and Equity Program Manager at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions. Janel began her career providing case management and care coordination to adjudicated youth where she encountered firsthand the deleterious effects of gun violence. It was then that Janel made a commitment to prevent gun violence and care for those who have been affected. Janel transitioned to a career as a suicidologist where she gained experience managing prevention programs for the military, and serving as the Director of Suicide Prevention at Maryland’s Behavioral Health Administration and chairing Maryland’s Governor’s Commission on Suicide Prevention. Janel also works as a licensed trauma therapist, specializing in providing therapy for minoritized communities. She is passionate about healing racial trauma and actively working for racial and social justice. Janel is a recent Fellow of the Bloomberg American Health Initiative and earned her MPH at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in 2022. Janel also holds a masters of science in clinical mental health counseling from McDaniel College.

Tianna Dowie-Chin, PhD

About Tianna Dowie-Chin, PhD

Dr. Tianna Dowie-Chin is currently an Assistant Professor of Social Studies Education at the University of Georgia. Tianna was born and raised in Toronto, ON, Canada by Jamaican born parents. She earned her Ph.D. in curriculum and instruction specializing in Teachers, Schools and Society (TSS) from the University of Florida. Her dissertation titled “My Child’s First Teacher: Utilizing Black Mothers’ Counter-Narratives to Reimagine Black Schooling” recently won an Outstanding Dissertation Award from American Educational Research Association’s (AERA) Critical Examination of Race, Ethnicity, Class, and Gender Special Interest Group (SIG). Additionally, her research has been recognized with the University of Florida’s Association for Academic Women (AAW) Madelyn Lockhart Dissertation Fellowship and a National Council of Social Studies (NCSS) Exemplary Research Award. Her research broadly examines race in education with a particular focus on Black feminist thought and education, fostering critical race approaches to teacher education, and challenging global anti-Black racism in education through race theory. She currently serves on the executive committee for NCSS’s College & University Faculty Assembly (CUFA) Scholars of Color Forum and AERA’s Social Studies SIG. One of her professional goals is to support and inspire educators to honor and make space for Black voices and experiences in order to challenge the ways Blackness has been essentialized.

Watch the Recorded Webinar On-Demand

Enter your information to gain access.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form

A Voice of Autistic Adulthood: Suicide & Other Challenges Amongst Autistic Adults

Posted on by erics

Disclaimer: In this article, I use identity-first language when referring to autism rather than person-first language (autistic person vs person with autism). In the adult autistic community, we use this language because 1) being autistic is a part of our identity, and 2) autism is not a disorder. For more information about terminology check out this article on identity-first language by the Autism Network: https://autisticadvocacy.org/about-asan/identity-first-language/

Think of the word: autism. What image comes to mind? How would you describe an autistic person? Would you say they’re socially awkward, low empathy, genius, or weird? Or maybe you imagine an awkward, pompous nerd – one who unintentionally says the most inappropriate things, but means well. Like Sheldon from ‘The Big Bang Theory’ or Dr. Shaun Murphy from ‘The Good Doctor’. This stereotype of the autistic person is reductive, exaggerated, and harmful to the diversity and complexities of the adult autistic community.

This characterization was originally invented during WWII, when a Nazi eugenicist named Hans Asperger identified a subset of characteristics that explained the symptomatology of research subjects.[1] He began his experimentation on ‘undesirables’ or disabled children. Asperger discovered a subset of disabled boys who presented as antisocial and ‘lacking empathy’, but having advanced intellectual capabilities. These children were used as the perfect subjects for his discovery of Asperger’s Syndrome, and those who did not fit into his characterization were euthanized.[2]  The term and diagnosis of Aspergers is no longer used within the DSM-5-TR (and Aspergers has been integrated into the autistic diagnosis). However, the characterization of autism as a ‘genius’ disorder that only affects white boys has persisted and gained popularity since the 90’s. While some autistics are white, male geniuses, it is not the whole spectrum of our identities. We represent the collective diversity that is present in the world. In fact, a vast majority of autistic individuals identify as LGBTQ, are women and/or non-binary.[3] Some of us are a part of the High IQ society, while others struggle with math. Some of us love trains, while others are obsessed with lining up their barbie dolls or are die-hard thespians. Autistic people come in a variety of identities, and to limit these complexities, hinders the assessment, support, and resources we receive as adults. In this article, we will examine the challenges autistic adults experience and the types of support adult autistic individuals need to improve functionality.

 What is autism?

  • Autism or Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is a neuro-developmental condition that impacts the way a person communicates, perceives, and interacts with the world around them.[4] Autistic traits include the below, though there are numerous other tendencies that can be described as autistic lack of eye contact
  • an interest in select special interest
  • (repetitive, reflexive movements used to self-regulate or express joy; E.g. arm flapping or humming)
  • Following rigid routines
  • Prone to meltdowns and over stimulation
  • Difficulty understanding subtext in communication (takes things literally)

Autism is not a mental health disorder nor a disease; although mental disorders and physical disabilities do co-occur.[5] In more simplistic terms, autism is a different way of functioning and perceiving the world. For non-autistics (or neurotypical individuals), autistic people are perceived as ignoring social norms, lacking social competency, and communicative skills. However, to us, our functioning is a normal way we interact with the world. From our perspective, we adhere to our moral compass, communicate directly, and our intentions are genuine. Autistics are not asking to be fixed. They are asking for understanding, support, and resources to improve their functionality in a world that is not designed for them. Without these supportive systems, autistic adults face a multitude of challenges that lead towards factors of trauma, alienation, and abuse.

5 Common Challenges Faced by Autistic Adults

  1. Substance Addiction

    Research suggests that 50% of autistic adults develop substance addiction within their lifetime.[6] Drugs, alcohol, and other substances both alter behavioral responses and coping mechanisms. From one angle, substances can be a barrier against the anxieties of strenuous, social interactions. An autistic adult who is perceived as ‘socially awkward’ and ‘withdrawn’ while sober, may become the life of the party (or at least socially ‘normal’) while in an altered state. This allows the person to mask—a coping mechanism for autistic people where they interact with others using neurotypical behaviors. From another angle, substances are also a coping mechanism in helping autistic adults deal with the long-term effects of bullying, trauma, and loneliness.

  2. Suicidality & Shorter Life Expectancy

    Death by suicide is three times higher in autistic adults than in the general population.[7] For autistic women the rates of suicidal behavior and non-suicidal self-harm is even higher. [8] As previously discussed, autistic adults have a lifetime of experiences with childhood bullying, which leads to adult trauma. These traumas are often comorbid with anxiety, depression, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and complex post-traumatic stress disorder (C-PTSD). [9] As the NIH research shows, these co-occurring with psychological disorders increases an autistic adult’s risk of suicidal ideation. Individuals experiencing comorbid anxiety disorders in tandem with autism will often experience higher suicidal risk, and be more susceptible to its effects

    Autistic adults have lower life expectancy in comparison to the general population.[10] The average age expectancy for an autistic adult is 36 years. What’s causing these premature deaths? A few risk factors leading to premature deaths in autistic adults are linked to systemic discrimination, chronic disabilities, and economic challenges. We are more likely to be unemployed and live below the poverty line. In fact, over 60% of autistic adults are unemployed.[11] Circumstances that are impacted by employment consist of hardships within the job application, interview, and hiring process. In addition, we are more likely to have chronic disabilities, such as autoimmune disorders, chronic inflammation (which can lead to cancer), and other health problems that are linked to lower life expectancy. [12]

  3. Childhood Bullying & Abusive Adult Relationships

    Over 60% of autistic children and teens experience bullying. [13] The long term effects of bullying include, but are not limited to: low self-esteem, trust issues, social isolation, relational problems, depression, and anxiety. These long term effects continue into adulthood.

    As adults, many autistic individuals (especially women) experience abusive intimate partner relationships. An alarming study conducted in 2022 found that 9 out of 10 autistic women experienced sexual assault. [14] Many abusers prey on individuals who are disabled, and autistic people are an easy target due to our neurological wiring and alienation. Autistic adults tend to be more trusting of people and may not recognize red flags/toxic behavior, due to a history of trauma and people-pleasing tendencies.

  4. Misdiagnosis

    Within the autistic community and neurodivergent-affirming therapeutic spaces, self-diagnosis as autistic is valid. For autistics within underserved communities (i.e., BIPOC, LGBTQ, women, etc…) official and early diagnosis has been inaccessible, unaffordable, and misdiagnosed. Autistic individuals have been misdiagnosed with mental disorders such as bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder, schizophrenia, antisocial personality disorder, and other mental health functionalities.[15] As discussed earlier, autistic behaviors present differently within each individual and sometimes behaviors are similar or co-occur with diagnostic criteria of mental disorders. Sometimes autistic behaviors are overlooked by family members or providers based on societal biases. For example, autistic behaviors in boys are often categorized by ‘antisocial’ or withdrawn behavior. However, many young girls and women are socialized to be more socially adaptable and are ‘better” at masking autistic traits. For many marginalized groups, masking is a normalized response to systemic disparities.[16]

  5. Lack of Adult Resources & Support

    ASD is officially diagnosed in childhood through a lengthy evaluation process, which contains parent/teacher interviews, psychological assessments, and clinical observations. There are no adult assessments, so assessments are based on the same criteria as the children’s assessments. Many of my autistic clients have shared, they find the assessment process to be intrusive and alienating. Those who are estranged from their bio families, have difficulties with the parent interview process. Diagnostic rates range from $1,000 and up, which eliminates individuals with low socioeconomic status.

Once diagnosed, adult autistics are left without support in understanding their diagnosis, finding community, or navigating their daily lives. As with childhood diagnoses, often the only referral service is Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA) therapy. For adult advocates, community members, and professionals (like myself) ABA is an abusive treatment practice. Founded by the misguided creator of gay conversion therapy, ABA is a treatment that uses extreme compliance and erasure of autistic autonomy, enforcing normative behavior by repressing ‘undesirable’ autistic traits (i.e. stimming, natural coping strategies for overstimulation, etc…).[17] For example, a child who is lashing out by screaming and hitting themselves is perceived as destructive. In ABA, the why is not addressed. A course of negative reinforcement, by way of restricting stimming (self-soothing, autistic behaviors) and the autistic child’s favorite things is the treatment.  Eventually the child stops the destructive behavior and everyone moves on. Except, the basis for the meltdown continues and the child internalizes their autistic traits. If we deconstruct the autistic child’s behavior from a neurodivergent affirming framework, our treatment plan centers the child’s needs, autonomy, and self-confidence. Autistic adults who had ABA therapy as children self-reported and current research studies show the long-term effects of ABA include increased depression, anxiety, and PTSD symptoms.[18]

[When an autistic child is experiencing sensory overload, they experience meltdowns that include hitting themselves, biting, screaming, and other non-verbal behaviors. This behavior is called an autistic meltdown and the best approach to stopping the behavior, is to remove the child from the stimulant. As a child, I would often become overstimulated by overhead lights or intense sounds (family gatherings). I could not articulate what I was experiencing and would fall into meltdowns of epic proportions. As a late-diagnosed adult, I can finally comprehend that I am overstimulated and take measures to reduce my discomfort. Noise-cancelling headphones or temporarily moving to a quiet area has increased my autonomy and interpersonal relationships. However, for a child (especially non-verbal, autistic children) communicating these discomforts is impossible and is often punished rather than supported.]

A Modified-CAMS Autistic Approach

The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) is an evidence-based therapeutic approach using randomized control trials as an effective approach to decreasing suicidal risk across a diverse range of clients.[19] We autistic individuals tend to love concise, clear, and organized information. In my professional opinion, the effectiveness of CAMS in articulating direct questions and organization through the Suicide Status Form (SSF), makes CAMS an effective framework to support autistic teens and adults. Below, I have compiled a list of 3 ways CAMS can be modified to directly support autistic individuals. [These suggestions can also be applied to general therapeutic practices].

  1. Use a Direct, Concise Approach

    As I have discussed, autistic people often need concise, direct language when communicating. It is imperative for the provider to use direct language, due to the communication barriers that are frequently presented in conversations between neurotypical and autistics. For example, when a neurotypical question such as “how are you feeling?” is asked, a neurotypical person might say, “I’m feeling sad”. For many autistic people this question is not direct because it can be applied to a number of factors (I.e., how I’m feeling in the present moment, or how I’m feeling regarding interacting with you, or even how I’m feeling regarding the weather). Another factor to consider is that some autistics have alexithymia—an inability to identify and describe emotions. Often when asked about emotional states an autistic person might respond by saying “I don’t know” or even state an emotion that is opposite of what they are feeling. When filling out the SSF with the client, ask questions that are concise, but also describe what you mean, such as, “when you think about dying by suicide, where in the body do you feel it?” or “do you have a plan to die by suicide?”.

  2. Be Open to Unconventional Support Systems

    For many autistics, making and maintaining relationships is extremely difficult – and adult relationships especially. In addition to communication difficulties, factors such as emotional dysregulation and rejection sensitivity makes interpersonal relationships almost impossible. Due to a history of trauma, it can be hard for autistic individuals to reach out for support. Even greater, due to limited resources, support can be inaccessible. When discussing external support systems with a client, providers must ‘think outside the box’. This may look like finding external support through adult autistic online communities, support groups, or social media spaces. Or creating a support plan that includes non-family systems such as friends, neighbors, and fellow providers.

  3. Respect Their Autonomy

    If I gained a quarter for every time someone spoke to me as if I was a child or incapable of making decisions, after disclosing I’m autistic to a provider, well I could retire. The spectrum of functionality of autistic people is so broad, that one autistic adult might have challenges with motor skills (dyspraxia), while another has difficulty with word processing (dyslexia). No two autistic individuals are similar and we are not a monolith. To support autistic clients is to 1) trust they are the expert on their own experience and 2) functionality difficulties are different in each individual.

Finding support for autistic adults is universally inaccessible to many underserved communities. Many medical and mental health providers are not versed in providing evidence-based, neurodivergent-affirming treatment. They do not receive training on recognizing autistic traits nor how to interact with autistic adults. It makes seeking medical and mental health support problematic. Navigating the challenges of dating, sex, employment, and all the other complexities of adulthood becomes an impossible reality for unsupported autistic adults. Which leads to increased burnout, meltdowns, and mental health tragedies.

References

[1] Neurotribes: The Legacy of Autism and the Future of Neurodiversity by Steve Silberman

[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/31/opinion/sunday/nazi-history-asperger.html

[3] https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/autistic-individuals-are-more-likely-to-be-lgbtq

[4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6225088/

[5] https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/03/autism-and-addiction/518289/

[6] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2774847

[7] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6457664/

[8] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6225088/

[9] https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/21/health/autism-injury-deaths-study/index.html

[10] https://drexel.edu/~/media/Files/autismoutcomes/publications/LCO Fact Sheet Employment.ashx

[11] https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/autistic-adults-have-a-higher-rate-of-physical-health-conditions

[12] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/survey-finds-63-of-children-with-autism-bullied/

[13] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9087551/

[14] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cns-spectrums/article/what-misdiagnoses-do-women-with-autism-spectrum-disorder-receive-in-the-dsm5/37409014E08A16D93FF0DB95675E9EED

[15] https://www.aane.org/women-asperger-profiles/

[16] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9114057/

[17] https://neuroclastic.com/invisible-abuse-aba-and-the-things-only-autistic-people-can-see/

[18] https://cams-care.com/about-cams/the-evidence-base-for-cams/

Essential DBT Skills for Individuals Who are Suicidal and the People that Care for Them

Essential DBT Skills for Individuals Who are Suicidal and the People that Care for Them On-Demand Webinar

Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) is a comprehensive psychological treatment that was originally developed for borderline personality disorder but has been expanded to a variety of problems, many of which have been experienced by people during the historical events of the past few years. Dozens of randomized trials of DBT have been conducted including studies evaluating the efficacy of only the skills portion of the treatment. Results support the use of DBT skills to increase emotion regulation capabilities and decrease negative mental health outcomes such as depression and anxiety. In this presentation, Dr. Rizvi reviews the DBT skills modules, the proposed mechanisms of change within DBT, and will highlight specific skills that may be especially useful to the majority of clients who experience suicidal thoughts and behaviors. In addition, skills that therapists and family members can use themselves to manage stress and burnout will be reviewed.

Shireen L. Rizvi, PhD, ABPP

About Shireen L. Rizvi, PhD, ABPP

Shireen L. Rizvi, PhD, ABPP is Professor of Clinical Psychology at the Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology (GSAPP) at Rutgers University, where she also holds affiliate appointments in the psychology department, School of Public Health, and the Department of Psychiatry. Her research interests include improving outcomes, training, and dissemination of Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) for the treatment of complex and severe populations. Dr. Rizvi has received funding from the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), Rutgers University, and the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP) for her research. Her work has resulted in dozens of peer-reviewed articles and book chapters, as well as a sole-authored book entitled Chain Analysis in Dialectical Behavior Therapy and a co-edited volume, DBT in Clinical Practice (2nd edition). Dr. Rizvi is board certified in Behavioral and Cognitive Psychology and in Dialectical Behavior Therapy. Dr. Rizvi has trained hundreds of students and practitioners from around the world in DBT. She has received the Spotlight on a Mentor Award from the Association of Cognitive and Behavioral Therapies (2017), the International Society for the Improvement and Teaching of DBT (ISITDBT) Perry Hoffman Service Award (2020), and Professor of the Year for Excellence in Teaching, Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology (2022).

Watch the Recorded Webinar On-Demand

Enter your information to gain access.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form

10 Tips for Using CAMS with Adherence

Posted on by erics

For a proven intervention to be effective in the field, clinicians must use the intervention with adherence, meaning it is used as designed, based on extensive support from clinical trial research. Clinical adherence challenges are particularly prominent when conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT)—which is the gold standard methodology for proving an intervention is effective.

The Importance of Adherence in Randomized Controlled Trials

Within RCTs, researchers must ensure that an experimental treatment is reliably provided with adherence and that there is fidelity between experimental treatment arms (i.e., that in fact the targeted treatment and control treatment were administered as intended). There are currently six published and four active CAMS RCTs — three funded by the National Institute of Mental Health and a fourth funded by Veterans Affairs.

Across these RCTs, members of The Catholic University Suicide Prevention Laboratory (SPL) that I direct take the lead in training CAMS to RCT study providers. In turn, we are also responsible for watching digital recordings (on secure platforms) of clinicians endeavoring to provide CAMS with adherence with patients who are suicidal.

The Role of Adherence Feedback in RCTs

To do this with scientific rigor, we use two expert SPL coders rating each session using the CAMS Rating Scale (CRS) with high inter-rater reliability. In addition, SPL graduate students also watch comparison control sessions (e.g., clinicians providing “treatment as usual”—TAU) to ensure that these clinicians are doing the comparison control treatment—and not doing CAMS—confirming experimental fidelity.

To this end, over the fall semester of 2022, the SPL has been working hard to support the three NIMH-funded CAMS RCTs which means beyond the initial CAMS trainings that I lead, we all watch a lot of digital recordings of clinicians working diligently to provide CAMS with adherence.

This means SPL members watch dozens of sessions each week. I personally watched 15 recordings over the past few weeks. It’s a busy time for members of the SPL supporting providers across three RCTs to fully meet our criteria for adherence to CAMS. Once study providers are determined to be adherent, our workload decreases significantly as we do random spot checks to confirm that clinicians do not fall out of adherence (which can require training remediation work with providers if this occurs).

10 Tips for Becoming Adherent to CAMS

With this immersion of training and adherence it is inevitable that we encounter common challenges when providers are learning to use CAMS. With a bit of constructive CRS feedback and consultation coaching with our teams of providers, many of these issues quickly become a one-trial learning experience. Moreover, other providers on our consultation calls benefit from hearing about our constructive adherence feedback with their colleagues.

Within a matter of weeks, we usually get most of our clinical providers to meet adherence criteria to effectively provide CAMS. I would note that learning to use CAMS is not as challenging as learning other proven approaches in mental health. Dialectical Behavior Therapy, for example requires labor intensive training that may take months to achieve. But while CAMS is typically learned in fairly short order, there are still common mistakes when first using CAMS that can delay achieving adherence to the framework.

This blog is intended to help other beginning CAMS providers avoid some mistakes that we see among clinicians learning this model. Based on this adherence work let us thus consider 10 of the best tips for becoming adherent to CAMS.

Watch the Video Series 

1. Dive Right into CAMS

We often see a hesitancy on the provider’s part to dive right into using the Suicide Status Form (SSF) at the start of each session, especially with clinicians unfamiliar with CAMS. From the first session through interim care, there is too often unnecessary small talk or avoidance of starting into the SSF assessment using up valuable session time (particularly in the labor-intensive first meeting). The feedback we get is that clinicians feel that they have to form some sort of relationship with the patient before they can broach the sensitive topic of suicide. However, our extensive clinical trial research and one meta-analysis show that patients welcome SSF engagement getting to the heart of their struggle with suicide.

Indeed, when clinicians experience the patient feeling validated and understood by the SSF assessment, the temptation to avoid getting into the SSF assessment at the start of each session of CAMS quickly dissipates. Bottom line, suicide is serious business and there is no need for chit-chat at the start of each session of CAMS—let’s get down to business!

2. Interact During Suicide Status Form Core Assessment

The SSF Core Assessment is used at the start of every session of CAMS. Too often we see the clinician have the patient complete their SSF ratings of pain, stress, agitation, hopelessness, self-hate, and overall risk of suicide in silence. Using this approach, providers then typically review patient’s ratings and have some observations or some comments after the ratings are made.

In contrast, the completion of the SSF Core Assessment ratings offers a superb opportunity to discuss the patient’s ratings as they complete each SSF rating scale. This approach creates more of an ongoing dialogue about the ups and downs of suicidality and underscores the importance of candid and collaborative discussion of what the patient is experiencing as they complete these ratings.

3. First Session—Focus on Reasons for Dying (Instead of Reasons for Living)

Ever since I created the Reasons for Living (RFL) versus the Reasons for Dying (RFD) assessment as a major focus in the first session of CAMS, I have observed that clinicians often enthusiastically focus on the patient’s RFL responses. Understandably clinicians focus on RFLs as potential protective factors that might mitigate the patient’s suicide risk. However, based on two studies that we did with a large clinical trial sample in Switzerland, I have now come to see RFLs as a clinician assessment because patients we have studied are actually more focused on their RFDs in their first session!

When I train the model I therefore discourage RFL “cheerleading” because for some patients emphasizing their RFLs can invalidate their current struggle. At its worst, pushing RFLs can even be shaming! It is not uncommon to see inexperienced CAMS clinicians pointing out possible RFLs that the patient has not spontaneously generated — “What about your kids?” or “Isn’t your wonderful wife a reason to live?” Given the clinical trial research findings, we do not want clinicians pointing out RFLs that the patient has not listed.

For example, perhaps a patient sincerely believes they are a burden to their kids or their spouse and that their death may actually be a “gift” to these people. Denying this perspective prematurely can be dismissive of something that the patient may feel deeply. However, within CAMS we absolutely do emphasize RFLs, but we wait to do it later in the course of care when potential clinical progress has been made and the patient is more open to such considerations. Remember, the capstone of successful CAMS-guided care is a focus on the pursuit of a life that the patient actually wants to live. But to push a RFL agenda prematurely risks overriding the patient’s experience and may invalidate what they are going through at the start of care.

4. First Session—Move on Through Section B

Within the first session of CAMS, providers often get bogged down in Section B (which should take only 10 minutes) at the expense of completing the CAMS Stabilization Plan (CSP) and the CAMS Treatment® Plan. We advise in the RCTs that if a first session provider is falling behind, Section B does not need to be fully completed (as it can be completed later). That said, within Section B, it helps to get through the patient’s suicide attempt history, but then move on to the CAMS Treatment Plan focusing on the CSP and the two problem drivers in the remaining time.

5. First Session—CAMS Treatment Planning Always Begins with the CAMS Stabilization Plan

A huge error that even experienced CAMS providers make in the first session, is addressing Problems 2 and 3 before completing the CAMS Stabilization Plan! For adherence to the proven model, the CSP is always addressed first, then Problems 2 and 3 are completed as the final steps at the end of the first session of CAMS.

The reason that the CSP is the first step in the CAMS Treatment Plan is that establishing a sound CSP is the foundation for the entire treatment plan. An ability to satisfactorily complete the CSP may be an indication of imminent danger that might warrant an inpatient admission. However, if we can establish a solid CSP then the goal of CAMS to keep someone out of the hospital can be realized as we then shift the focus to problems/drivers that are usually quite treatable.

6. Have the Patient Identify Their Own Drivers for Suicide

Beyond the initial establishment of the CSP, all CAMS Treatment planning should center on the patient’s identification of their problem/drivers for suicide. In other words, the clinician should not point out the patient’s problem/drivers for them. In turn, the clinician should help the patient identify treatment goals and objectives before taking the lead identifying the full spectrum of interventions to address each respective problem/driver.

Ideally, we like to have more than one intervention for any one problem/driver of suicide. The more interventions we have to offer, the more hope we instill in the patient. Bottom line, the message to the patient is that there are many potential ways for effectively addressing the issues that compel the patient to consider suicide as a solution for their struggles.

7. Interim Sessions—CAMS Treatment Focuses on Crafting the Stabilization Plan and the Patient’s Suicidal Drivers

Across CAMS-guided interim care, all sessions begin promptly with Section A, the SSF Core Assessment. There should then be a check-in about the previous week in terms of the presence of suicidal thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. The clinician should always ask about the CSP sometime during the course of each interim session (often at the start but it can be at the end as well). The focus of all CAMS interim care centers on patient’s problems/drivers and possible updates or revisions to the CSP.

8. Interim Sessions—Treatment Plan Updating

Across CAMS-guided interim care, every session ends with updating the CAMS Treatment Plan. The treatment plan update should be done from scratch and potentially change in each interim session depending on what is happening in the course of care. But too often inexperienced clinicians complete Section A and Section B at the start of the session.

Section A should always be completed at the start of each interim session and Section B at the end of each interim session of CAMS. Moreover, we know from our clinical trial research that CAMS Treatment Plans that change across clinical care lead to better outcomes (in contrast to CAMS Treatment Plans that basically do not change from session to session).

9. You Can Delay Resolving CAMS if Needed

A patient may continue to be engaged in CAMS even when CAMS resolution criteria are technically met. To clarify, just because criteria are met, does not mean that you must necessarily move to the outcome-disposition session. Sometimes deferring the final session can help reassure both members of the clinical dyad that the patient’s apparent recovery is holding up and feels well-established.

10. Emphasize the Goal of Managing Suicidal Thoughts and Feelings to Achieve Behavioral Stability

As a clinical intervention, CAMS can be resolved even when some suicidal thoughts are present. In other words, the treatment difference that CAMS often enables a patient to better and more reliably manage suicidal thoughts and feelings while achieving behavioral stability.

From clinical trial research, we know that CAMS reliably increases hope while reducing hopelessness and overall symptom distress (i.e., general misery and despair). We thus know that CAMS significantly reduces suicide-related suffering and in so doing it can open the door to hope and the pursuit of life that the patient wants to live.
How to Use CAMS in a Clinical Setting

Working with patients who are suicidal is invariably challenging and can be daunting. Frankly, far too many clinicians endeavor to simply avoid such patients. Given this, we in the CatholicU SPL are humbled by and grateful to the clinicians across clinical trials who aspire to use CAMS with adherence.

Imagine having your clinical works viewed and rated with patients that many providers seek to avoid. It is not easy. It requires being open to constructive feedback and inevitable tweaks and suggestions to help one master CAMS. As clinicians in our trials courageously work to learn the intervention, members of the SPL do everything we can to be positive, supportive, validating, and reassuring as we give our constructive CRS feedback. In truth, we deeply admire these providers and clinical trials of CAMS could not be conducted without them. Consequently, the adherence work that we do inspires constructive tips like the ones described in this blog to help other providers achieve adherence to the framework.

The adherence work we do is challenging but worth it. Seeing clinicians quickly master the intervention is incredibly rewarding. When we provide thoughtful guidance on common mistake and provide instructive tips, we will have done our part in helping providers deliver a potentially life-saving course of care that has been proven to decrease suicidal suffering and overall misery. In turn, each RCT we publish increases the evidence base which we hope will may inspire more providers to learn and master this proven suicide-focused clinical intervention.

Learn more about how you can get started with CAMS Training and Certification to help identify suicidal drivers in patients in as little as six sessions.

The Stepped Care Model in Clinical Suicide Prevention

Posted on by erics

According to the CDC, 12.2 million Americans seriously thought about suicide in 2020. 1.2 million actually made suicide attempts. With nearly 46,000 deaths per year, suicide remains a leading cause of death in the United States with rates of suicide steadily increasing over the past decade. Yet despite this health care emergency, mental health systems of care are largely underprepared to work effectively with suicidal individuals.

In response to these concerns, a recent policy initiative called “Zero Suicide” has advocated a systems-level response to the suicidal risk within health care and this policy initiative. And it’s working.

A “stepped care” approach has been developed and adapted to work within the Zero Suicide curriculum as a model for systems-level care that is suicide-specific, evidence-based, least-restrictive, and cost-effective. The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) is an example of one suicide-specific evidence-based clinical intervention that can be adapted and used across the full range of stepped care service settings.

This article describes several applications and uses of CAMS at all service levels and highlights CAMS-related innovations in the stepped care model. Psychological services are uniquely poised to make a major difference in clinical suicide prevention through a systems-level approach using evidence-based care such as CAMS. Here’s how stepped care can improve the effectiveness and efficiency of suicide care.

What is a Stepped Care Approach?

Stepped Care is a system of delivering and monitoring treatment so that the most effective and efficient treatment is delivered to patients first. Patients only “step up” to intensive/specialist services when it’s clinically required.

For example, a stepped care model for suicide care usually starts with suicide or crisis hotline support and follow-ups, like the 988 Suicide Helpline. This is followed by more involved and thus more costly and less easily scalable interventions like: additional follow-ups, emergency care, hospitalization, and finally specialist inpatient psychiatric care or hospitalization.

stepped care model

The goal of stepped care is to use evidence-based assessments, treatment plans, and patient tracking to allow the right people to deliver the right treatment in the right place at the right time to meet each patient’s needs.

Applications and Use of CAMS Across the Stepped Care Model

Suicide prevention and treatment is an immensely complicated and ever evolving field. However, thanks to evidence-based assessment and treatment frameworks, like The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) and tools like the Suicide Status Form (SSF) which is becoming a part of electronic health records across the country, clinicians can be more equipped to identify, treat, and ultimately prevent suicide.

CAMS has more than 30 years of evidence, five published randomized control trials, and two meta analyses one of which shows that CAMS is a “Well Supported” treatment by CDC criteria and is even proven to “reduce hopelessness and increase hope” in as few as six sessions. In fact CAMS is one of four evidence-based treatments that are referenced by the Joint Commission, Surgeon General and the CDC.

Click here to learn more about how we train physicians to use CAMS to treat and prevent suicide.

Crisis Hotline Support

Staffed by well-trained and compassionate professionals, suicide crisis lines are incredibly important tools in suicide care and prevention. They have the unique ability to provide vital crisis support to a range of suicidal individuals from all walks of life. But more importantly, crisis lines can effectively help suicidal individuals who may not be able to afford or even need costly clinical interventions.

CAMS can be a useful resource for call centers, since crisis center work typically focuses on assessing the immediate risk of suicide or suicidal thoughts through collaborative dialogue. The Suicide Status Form (SSF) is also a well-suited therapeutic assessment tool to efficiently stratify the level of risk during a crisis call, thanks to its easy to learn, structured, yet non-directive framework.

The SSF can also be used to track the ongoing risk of repeat callers, providing continuity of care when multiple crisis workers speak with the same caller over a period of time across shifts. Recent use of crisis text and chat lines present additional opportunities for using the SSF as a framework for collaborative suicide-specific engagement.

Brief Intervention

Emergency departments are often responsible for identifying, performing risk assessments, and referring suicidal individuals to specialist care, often in a high-volume, high stress environment. That’s a lot to ask from ED practitioners. That’s why we developed CAMS Brief Intervention (CAMS-BI™) to help meet this demand.

CAMS-BI is a single first session of CAMS using the SSF to learn about the patient’s suicide risk and the drivers of their suicidality, which leads to the development of a CAMS Stabilization Plan. CAMS-BI can be linked to non-demand caring follow-up contact in any way that’s agreeable to the patient including phone calls, text messages, e-mail, letters, etc. Emergency departments can also give out a Coping Care Package that includes various resources for patients to use after release.

Outpatient Settings

It’s essential for clinicians to attend to, assess, and treat suicidal risk in any mental health service setting. But the Suicide Status Form was originally developed for outpatient care, which means that CAMS is particularly well-suited for general outpatient mental health care services.

CAMS can help mitigate concerns regarding suicidal patients “falling through the cracks” by providing valuable structure and tracking support for both patients and clinicians. CAMS has even been adapted for use in several outpatient settings, including university counseling centers, community mental health centers, employee assistance programs, private practices, military, and Veterans Affairs behavioral health settings, and even successfully adapted to accommodate cultural considerations for use in countries around the world (Lithuania, China, Western Europe, and Australia).

Here is how CAMS is improving stepped suicide care in various clinical settings.

University Counseling Centers

CAMS has been successfully used in university counseling centers for years, and has proven to be especially adaptable to the unique culture of college life. One of the biggest strengths of CAMS on college campuses is how it integrates available resources in the university setting into the framework.

Empowering resident advisors, student-run organization, campus ministry, and health care services with the resources they need to help intervene with certain suicidal drivers and participate in the therapeutic process increases campus-wide awareness of suicidal risks while making the assessment and treatment stages of the process more efficient and effective for everyone involved.

Community Mental Health Centers

Clinicians working in Community Mental Health Centers often face unique challenges not limited to large case-loads, a chronic lack of resources, and an array of complex cases. CAMS can offer solutions to many of these challenges.

In a large-scale 5-year roll out of CAMS across the state of Oklahoma, CAMS was effectively adapted for CMHC patients with psychotic disorders and developmental delays. CAMS also increased hope and reduced suicidal ideation and overall symptom distress for outpatient CMHC patients, 40% of whom were homeless.

Independent Practice

Many clinicians in independent practice may feel particularly vulnerable and isolated when working with suicidal patients as they may not have access to various resources or a team of colleagues to help provide services and professional support. CAMS can provide clinicians with a clear procedural outline for assessing, treating, and tracking a suicidal patients’ progress, with tools like the SSF to increase their confidence and effectiveness at identifying and treating suicidal thoughts and ideations.

Military

Suicide remains a significant problem in the U.S. military, with many military Behavioral Health Clinics lacking a system for tracking ongoing suicidal ideation. As a consequence of this care gap many service members experience psychiatric hospitalization, which is not only inefficient, but often ineffective as suicide-specific treatment is typically limited.

Given the scope and scale of the problem, CAMS’ evidence-based, adaptable framework for assessing, tracking, and treating suicidal risk can provide an effective and scalable solution within military treatment facilities. It also addresses one of the biggest challenges for suicide care in the military — service members may not stay in one location long enough to complete a lengthy treatment protocol.

To help tackle this, CAMS aims to efficiently resolve suicidality in as few as six to eight sessions, and there’s a growing interest in the use of CAMS for military populations through telehealth.

Like standard CAMS, telehealth allows clinicians and behavioral health specialists to work together by jointly following the SSF as their clinical road map. Given the large number of service members who may not be able to access a treatment facility due to deployment, residing in remote areas, or physical disabilities, telehealth may provide a viable alternative to standard care. And many younger military members may also prefer a telehealth treatment option.

Veterans Affairs Outpatient Settings

Over many years CAMS has been extensively trained to providers across VA mental health treatment settings including VA medical centers and Community-Based Outpatient Clinics (CBOCs).

VA clinicians have a keen interest in the model and suicidal veterans anecdotally find the model helpful, but further clinical trial research is needed which is now being pursued by our research team.

Emergency Respite Care

As mentioned earlier, over the past several years, the state of Oklahoma has embraced the Zero Suicide policy model and has sought to systematically train CAMS to providers in their public mental health system. As part of their process improvement initiative, hundreds of outpatient providers and clinicians who work in brief intensive respite clinics have been trained to use CAMS in places where suicidal patients are stabilized over a 48-hr period and then discharged.

In the optimal care transition model, CAMS is initiated within crisis respite care to help stabilize the patient who is then discharged to a CAMS-trained provider who can continue the CAMS-guided care initiated in respite in an uninterrupted manner on an outpatient basis.

Partial Hospitalization

There has been some interest in using CAMS within partial hospitalization service settings. For example, there was some early clinical use of CAMS within a group format for severely mentally ill patients in a day treatment program within a VA Medical Center.

Partial programs offer intensive treatment in a more cost-effective and least-restrictive form of care. So it seems inevitable that CAMS will increasingly be used in such settings in the years ahead as a viable alternative to more expensive inpatient psychiatric care.

Inpatient Psychiatric Hospitalization

Within the current system of mental health care, individuals who are at imminent risk for suicide are often referred for inpatient care. And while the inpatient psychiatric setting may provide a safe and supportive environment for specific acute care services and stabilization, most of the interventions provided to suicidal patients are neither suicide-specific nor evidence-based.

In a report from the Suicide Prevention Resource Center (SPRC) and SAMHSA DJ Knesper noted:

“. . . the research base for inpatient hospitalization for suicide risk is surprisingly weak. This review could not identify a single randomized controlled trial about the effectiveness of hospitalization in reducing suicidal acts after discharge”.

Thankfully, this is changing as adaptations of the SSF and CAMS are being used to effectively assess and treat suicidal risk within inpatient settings. Most notably, the Mayo Clinic has used the SSF assessment to inform inpatient treatment and disposition discharge planning, and has further integrated the SSF into their routine assessment used with all patients at admission.

In terms of treatment, a Swiss team created an inpatient version of CAMS that was associated with dramatic decreases in overall symptom distress and suicidal risk in a sample of 45 suicidal inpatients over the course of 10 days of inpatient care.

Our team is currently exploring the use of an intensive inpatient version of CAMS, called CAMS Intensive Inpatient Care (CAMSIIC) which has been used in several inpatient treatment settings within the U.S. over a 3- to 6-day hospital stay. CAMS Brief Intervention involves conducting Session 1 of CAMS during a brief inpatient stay, necessitates the development of a stabilization plan, discussions of access to lethal means, and preliminary identification of issues in need of treatment (i.e., suicidal drivers) all of which should be quite relevant to the disposition of the patient upon discharge.

An adapted inpatient version of CAMS has also been used successfully at the Menninger Clinic in Houston, Texas. Referred to as CAMS-M, this adaptation offers CAMS twice per week with highly suicidal inpatients over a 50- to 60-day stay with clinicians focusing on intensively treating suicidal drivers while the nursing staff focuses on stabilization planning. The entire team then focuses on meaningful suicide-specific disposition and discharge planning.

In an initial open trial, a case series investigation of the effectiveness of CAMS within this longer-term inpatient psychiatric setting found statistically and clinically significant reductions in depression, hopelessness, suicidal ideation, and improvement in relation to suicidal drivers for 20 inpatients (Ellis, Green et al., 2012). A second study at the Menninger Clinic found significant changes in overall suicide ideation and suicide-related thoughts.

How CAMS Helps Diverse Populations

As a flexible clinical framework, CAMS has proven to be uniquely adaptable and modifiable to meet the needs of different patients, providers, and systems of care in the “real world” of psychological services. This adaptability has lead to CAMS being used to help diverse patient populations from suicidal inpatient teenagers at Seattle Children’s Hospital to suicide-specific group therapy within VA health care settings, and even the California state prison system and juvenile justice facilities in Georgia.

A systems approach to suicide prevention has clearly emerged as the best means for raising the overall standard of clinical care for suicidal patients with the promise of saving lives. Zero Suicide is a game-changing policy initiative that is gaining traction in the U.S. and abroad.

We have presented a stepped care model of suicide that is designed to treat suicidal risk in an evidence-based, least restrictive, and cost-effective manner. Moreover, we have shown the potential value of applying and using the CAMS evidence-based approach across the full range of psychological services—from paraprofessional interventions, to outpatient settings, to respite care, to partial care, and to inpatient psychiatric care.

CAMS may not work for every suicidal patient or setting, but it is highly adaptable and effective for a range of suicidal patients across systems of clinical care. Given that suicide is the fatality of mental health care, we urge members in our field to do all that we can to enhance our abilities to effectively assess and treat suicidal risk across the full range of organized health care settings to help save lives.

Contact us to learn more about CAMS training and a range of applications for CAMS and the SSF for clinicians and providers across the world.