Suicide rates in the military have jumped over the past few years. The Army has seen the highest rates of suicide in the last 30 years, according to an Associated Press article:
Suicides among U.S. Army troops rose again last year and are at a nearly three-decade high, senior defense officials told The Associated Press on Thursday.At least 128 soldiers killed themselves in 2008, said two officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because the data has not been formally released.
Such a jump in the rate reveals the stress of a military now entering the sixth year of war in Iraq, the eighth year of war in Afghanistan, and the eight year post-9/11. Those years have witnessed a intense operational tempo with units going out of country for multiple tours of a year or more. Combine that with the strain of combat in both Iraq and Afghanistan where the front line is a fluid and changing place, and the recipe for stress is complete. The suicide rate has been trending up for awhile. Historically, the rate has hovered between 10-12 suicides per 100,000 service members, but that number has been going up since 9/11:
| Year | Suicides per 100K |
| 2002 | 9.8 |
| 2005 | 11 |
| 2006 | 17.3 |
| 2007 | 18.8 |
| 2008 | 20.2 |
Unfortunately, there is no similar tracking system for Americans who have left the service, and thus it is unclear if they too are killing themselves in larger numbers.
Other signs of this stress abound. The divorce rate in the military is up, especially among female service members:
Divorce rates for its personnel have been on the rise since 2003, the first year of war, when they were 2.9 percent. In 2004, divorce rates in the Army soared to 3.9 percent, propelled by a sharp rise in divorce among the usually much more stable officers corps.
A final signal of the stress has been the difficulties that the Army has had in retaining its officers. Mid-career officers, the backbone of the officer corps, are leaving at much higher rates from the Army than from other services, leaving the force with shortfalls. As a 1997 General Accounting Office (GAO) report (warning: PDF file) put it:
The Army, which continues to be heavily involved in combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, faces many retention challenges….It projects a shortage of 3,000 or more officers annually through FY 2013. While the Army is implementing and considering initiatives to improve officer retention, the initiatives are not integrated and will not affect officer retention until at least 2009 or are unfunded. As with its accession shortfalls, the Army does not have an integrated strategic plan to address its retention shortfalls.
Army officers and potential Army officers are voting with their feet. The latter are not attending the United States Military Academy or joining Reserve Officer Training Corps at college, and the former are leaving the service early in their career.
All of these factors show a military–and particularly an Army–under stress. The services have begun programs to deal with these signs of stress, but these are treating the symptoms rather than the problem. Until the commitments of the military are reduced, the systemic stress will remain and lead to severe and multiple problems.
The Edge of the American West 
12 comments
February 3, 2009 at 8:56 am
Ahistoricality
I’ll ask the historical question: has anyone done the research to put this in a larger context, studied the relationship between social and institutional stress and effectiveness or policy?
February 3, 2009 at 10:35 am
TF Smith
I’d be interested in a straight comparison with the rates of the same issues in the active duty side from 1965-73, 1950-53, 1941-45, and 1917-18 (if they exist).
Thirty years ago was 1978, which was a very different strategic situation for the AC.
In the past century, Americans have gone to war in order to go home, not to spend a decade policing a frontier somewhere…
February 3, 2009 at 10:35 am
Vance
In 2006, an Army spokesman was saying,
“Slight increase” meaning doubling in four years.
February 3, 2009 at 10:42 am
Buster
Unfortunately, there is no similar tracking system for Americans who have left the service, and thus it is unclear if they too are killing themselves in larger numbers.
CBS News tried to crack this question a couple of years ago:
So CBS News did an investigation – asking all 50 states for their suicide data, based on death records, for veterans and non-veterans, dating back to 1995. Forty-five states sent what turned out to be a mountain of information.
And what it revealed was stunning.
In 2005, for example, in just those 45 states, there were at least 6,256 suicides among those who served in the armed forces. That’s 120 each and every week, in just one year.
It found that veterans were more than twice as likely to commit suicide in 2005 than non-vets. (Veterans committed suicide at the rate of between 18.7 to 20.8 per 100,000, compared to other Americans, who did so at the rate of 8.9 per 100,000.)
One age group stood out. Veterans aged 20 through 24, those who have served during the war on terror. They had the highest suicide rate among all veterans, estimated between two and four times higher than civilians the same age. (The suicide rate for non-veterans is 8.3 per 100,000, while the rate for veterans was found to be between 22.9 and 31.9 per 100,000.)
February 3, 2009 at 11:03 am
drip
This is an area where the new administration’s openness will be revealing. I heard on NPR that the rate for military suicides is now above that of the civilian population for the first time, although I could not find the link with a quick check. Second, no other American military force has been subjected to the repeated redeployments this one has. I will give David Petraeus credit for holding the Army together. That was a singular piece of administrative genius in itself.
February 3, 2009 at 12:07 pm
silbey
has anyone done the research to put this in a larger context, studied the relationship between social and institutional stress and effectiveness or policy?
Not that I’m aware of, but I’m not up on the literature in psychology or sociology. Durkheim did some historical analysis in his book on Suicide.
I’d be interested in a straight comparison with the rates of the same issues in the active duty side from 1965-73, 1950-53, 1941-45, and 1917-18 (if they exist).
I’d love to see that information too. I did a quick Lexis-Nexis search back as far as it would go, and didn’t find useful for Vietnam or earlier.
Slight increase” meaning doubling in four years
Nice catch. The military has handled mental illness issues pretty badly until quite recently. They’re getting better, but slowly.
So CBS News did an investigation
Excellent article; thanks. The one caveat is to be careful not to compare suicide rates for the population as a whole to the military but compare suicide rates for the population aged 18-50ish with a skew towards males to the military, as the latter civilian group compares better to military demographics. Still, I think that’s an excellent piece of data.
Second, no other American military force has been subjected to the repeated redeployments this one has
Certainly post-1945 and perhaps post-1918. Before that, it kind of had a different meaning. George Marshall remembered getting to his first assignment after West Point, to a fort out west. He arrived during a three-day drinking bender that the entire fort had gone on, and everyone was drunk and unconscious. Soldiers might not go ‘home’ for decades. Of course, this was also an army (post-Civil War) in which 1/7 of the soldiers deserted annually.
February 3, 2009 at 1:21 pm
drip
silbey — I know that U S forces in WWII were in for the duration but I thought that they were brought out of theatre periodically. Is that what happened? And, of course, WWII was over in 3-1/2 years. We’re almost to 6 in Iraq. That’s hard to believe.
February 3, 2009 at 1:51 pm
jazzbumpa
Many years ago, I heard Paul Harvey commenting on the age difference between WWII troops and Viet Nam War troops. For WWII they were well into their 20’s; for VNW, close to 20 or less. There’s a big difference in mental and emotional maturity between 19 and 25.
It’s been decades, and I heard it on the car radio, but at least this much stuck with me — so I wonder.
What about the age of first tour troops in Iraq? Could the asymmetric nature of the war be playing a part?
February 3, 2009 at 4:50 pm
wayne fontes
At least a portion of the increase is probably attributable to the fact the Army had to lower it’s standards to meet it’s recruiting goals.
February 3, 2009 at 7:23 pm
silbey
Is that what happened?
Soldiers got leaves, some substantial, and units were rotated off the line, but not to the same extent as now. The length of the war in Iraq is extended, as you point out, and it’s interesting to note the way in which the suicide rate jumps in 2005, after 3-4 years of war.
What about the age of first tour troops in Iraq?
Actually, older than Vietnam. I don’t have exact figures available, but remember that this is a volunteer army. The average age is pretty high.
At least a portion of the increase is probably attributable to the fact the Army had to lower it’s standards to meet it’s recruiting goals.
I’d be interested to see a comparison of suicide rates among soldiers enlisted in 2005-2007 as earlier. One data point that argues against this is the stress in the officer corps, who came in before the war started.
February 3, 2009 at 8:41 pm
wayne fontes
I’d be interested to see a comparison of suicide rates among soldiers enlisted in 2005-2007 as earlier. One data point that argues against this is the stress in the officer corps, who came in before the war started.
You can’t say for certain without the data. I’m making the assumptions that almost all of the suicides come from below the rank of sergeant and that career officers have more tours in Afghanistan or Iraq than the 2005, 2006 and 2007 cohorts of enlisted men.
February 3, 2009 at 9:03 pm
Total
I’m making the assumptions that almost all of the suicides come from below the rank of sergeant
That’s a strange assumption to make.