symphony
surving hour-by-hour
- Mar 12, 2022
- 779
Today I heard a rumor that the new 988 rollout will send callers' locations to 911, so I googled it. Strap in.
Here is one very good article. While it's preventionist, it does stand against coercive practices like calling the police to haul people off to a hospital.
https://disabilityvisibilityproject...lth-crisis-line-wants-to-track-your-location/
I especially appreciated this section:
They also link a cool research study demonstrating that coercive hospitalizations increase suicidality upon discharge. But somehow they don't talk about this stuff.
Here's a more recent article. Apparently, the Lifeline keeps on staff suicide attempt survivors, who urged them not to do this sort of shit.
https://www.madinamerica.com/2022/01/roll-988-threatens-anonymity-crisis-hotlines/
Here is the only article I found in a more well-known publication: https://slate.com/technology/2022/04/crisis-lifelines-surveillance-geolocation-algorithms.html
According to the Lifeline's website:
So did they somewhat reverse course here, or what?
What do you all think about this all?
Here is one very good article. While it's preventionist, it does stand against coercive practices like calling the police to haul people off to a hospital.
https://disabilityvisibilityproject...lth-crisis-line-wants-to-track-your-location/
I especially appreciated this section:
988 advocates' justification for geolocation is that it is necessary to save lives. While coercive measures such as involuntary transport and involuntary inpatient hospitalization may prevent a person from killing themselves in the short term, research indicates that such practices can result in a "significant increase" in suicidality over the long term. These long-term risks of forced intervention are rarely discussed among the mental health and suicide prevention mainstream.
https://kelechiubozoh.com/
Kelechi Ubozoh, Nigerian-American mental health consultant, advocate, and writer, told me that these risks need to be discussed openly, and addressed in any crisis response. "As we consider the research in the field that people coerced during admission of psychiatric hospitalizations have an increased risk of a suicide attempt after discharge, we have to strongly question and reevaluate any new system that would replicate these results–even if it is 'better packaged.'"
Ultimately, paternalism and coercion are choices, not necessities, in crisis response.
They also link a cool research study demonstrating that coercive hospitalizations increase suicidality upon discharge. But somehow they don't talk about this stuff.
Here's a more recent article. Apparently, the Lifeline keeps on staff suicide attempt survivors, who urged them not to do this sort of shit.
In August 2020, four LEC [Lived Experience Committee] members were invited to participate in a special STPC meeting about call tracing. According to the minutes, these LEC members acknowledged the noble "goal" of the NSPL's so-called "Active Rescue" policy. However, the LEC representatives called "Active Rescue" a "euphemism" for what was usually going on—aggressive police interventions followed by forced psychiatric detentions. "While 'rescue' and keeping a person 'safe' may be the intent," the LEC representatives said, "the actual result" is often "risks to the individual," "unintended harms," and "trauma."
Indeed, the LEC members argued, when people learn about these NSPL practices, the mere possibility of such call tracing "can deter people from getting Lifeline help."
https://www.madinamerica.com/2022/01/roll-988-threatens-anonymity-crisis-hotlines/
Here is the only article I found in a more well-known publication: https://slate.com/technology/2022/04/crisis-lifelines-surveillance-geolocation-algorithms.html
According to the Lifeline's website:
The Lifeline does not currently have the capability to directly "trace" callers, chat or text users in a way the same way that 911 providers do. The Lifeline does attempt to route callers to the nearest center to them in the network using their area code to determine the most proximal center. However, this routing is imprecise because most people seek help through mobile devices and may be in a location different than their area code. In the atypical situations where emergency services must be contacted to prevent persons from seriously or fatally harming themselves, and the person is unwilling or unable to share their location information, Lifeline counselors must provide what information they have to 911 operators–the caller's/text user's phone number or the chat user's IP address–to enable them to do whatever they can to locate the individual. However, as noted, this information–phone numbers and IP addresses–is often not accurate in describing the individual's actual location, hindering both the connection of the individual in crisis to the nearest Lifeline center as well as responding to life-threatening emergencies.
So did they somewhat reverse course here, or what?
What do you all think about this all?
Last edited: