This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2016, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
Too many politicians embrace an all-or-nothing approach to ending gun violence, clearly dividing Americans into two camps of thought. One group says let's arm everyone. The opposing one wants to make certain no one is allowed to even touch a gun. Neither extreme view will solve one of this country's most troubling problems. I believe we need a less extreme approach. My proposal may not eliminate gun violence, but it could make significant progress toward that goal.
As we've seen in the headlines over and over again, gun violence is often strongly linked to mental health issues. According to the Centers for Disease Control, 21,000 of the 33,000 gun-related deaths annually — or approximately 64 percent — are suicides (which account for more than half of all suicides in the United States). Most of the remaining deaths are gun-related homicides. Suicides and some homicides are commonly rooted in unresolved mental health struggles. If we could more effectively identify, treat, and resolve mental health issues, tens of thousands of people could be saved from a violent death annually.
Many who kill themselves or others have already been treated by a therapist or a physician. However, these professionals were limited by the law in how they could intervene. As a mental health provider by profession, I have a unique view of this issue. I believe we need to give these licensed mental health and health-care providers greater latitude so they can have guns removed temporarily from those who are at risk of harming themselves or others.
Every therapist worth his or her salt and assesses a real risk of harm makes concerted efforts to remove the at-risk person's access to a weapon. One of the few ways is for the provider to reach out to family members, asking them to take the gun out of the home. The problem is, this action is often insufficient.
When a provider believes more steps are needed to ensure safety, he or she contacts law enforcement. However, this action often fails because law enforcement has limitations too. For example, I have had several instances where I felt a client was at risk and owned a gun. I could not ensure access to the gun was blocked. I reported to law enforcement, sharing my professional evaluation of the real risk and the easy access to a deadly weapon. The responses were typically recitations of legal limitations in such circumstances. The result too often was nothing was done – the at-risk person retained access to a gun.
We can do better.
Legislation needs to be enacted that would allow providers and law enforcement officers to work together to take preventative action. Such legislation should ensure:
1. The at-risk person has no access to a gun as long as he is at risk.
2. A detailed treatment plan developed by a licensed healthcare provider must be followed until the risk is resolved, if the person wants to regain access to a gun in future.
3. A person may be allowed access to a gun after successful treatment and new professional assessments show the risk is eliminated.
Giving providers and law enforcement officers the legal means to intervene could save tens of thousands of lives each year. To make America safe we need to address the underlying mental health issues feeding gun violence. We can do better. We must do better.
Jonathan Swinton is a licensed marriage and family therapist and a Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate.