Bloor viaduct "Luminous Veil" a $6 million life saver

Is it the City of Toronto’s responsibility to prevent suicide? Is $6 million a reasonable amount to spend making a bridge safer? Will a large fence be effective in preventing suicides? These questions were central to the debate over the construction of a “Luminous Veil,” a suicide-preventing fence built by the City of Toronto earlier this year. The answer to all of them, I have come to realize, is “yes.”Crossing the Bloor St. Viaduct on foot is a unique Toronto experience. The vast open view, the roaring highway below, and the subway line thundering beneath the concrete give some pedestrians a feeling of exhileration. But for some 400 people since the bridge’s construction in 1919, that feeling inspires them leap off, into the Don Valley.

Someone jumps off the Bloor St. Viaduct bridge on average every 22 days, according to the Schizophrenia Society of Ontario. Close to 80 suicides have been committed in the past eight years, and about 16 attempted suicides. In recent memory, two of them have been UofT students. The Viaduct is the second largest suicide magnet in North America, after San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge.

Public suicides, such as those committed in the TTC, are seldom mentioned in the media because of their sensitive and private nature. This would explain why many people don’t realize the severity of the situation at the Bloor Viaduct, and why many are skeptical about the Veil. It’s a sensitive topic to write about, which is partly why the project was delayed for so long – it was surrounded by controversy.

It took 83 years before something was done to prevent the suicides. After spending $2.5 million, City Hall finalized the construction of a giant steel “Luminous Veil” in March this year. (The remaining $4 million was provided priavately.) Designed by award-winning architect and University of Waterloo professor Dereck Revington, the V-shaped screen is made of 10,000 steel rods measuring five metres tall.

My first impression of the Bloor Viaduct suicide-preventing “Luminous Veil” was that if people really want to commit suicide, they won’t be stopped. There are countless other ways to do it in the city. If they can’t jump off that particular bridge, what’s to say they won’t jump off another bridge? The nearby Queen St. bridge just south of the Viaduct is an obvious example.

Critics also point out the fact that in the years that it took the City to complete the project, which was first proposed in 1998, 94 more suicides were committed from the Viaduct. As an article in the Globe and Mail stated, similar suicide-preventing projects were constructed on the Clifton Suspension Bridge in Bristol England, in a matter of only six months.

But in fact there are a number of good reasons to support the veil:

Many suicides are spontanious, and the reaction from some locations elicit a more impulsive reaction than others. The Viaduct was just one of these locations, because of its previously waist-high wall and vast view. The argument that individuals will simply chose another location was proven untrue during an experiment with the Duke Ellington Bridge in Washington.

The veil may appear to be a “band-aid” solution, addressing the symptom, rather than the caues, of a larger, societal problem. However, if a suicide is prevented, often times the individuals will go on to receive psychiatric treatment.

Although $2.5 in tax payers money seems like a large amount, the costs incurred from a suicide are also considerable. One estimate put the number at $800,000, when emergency medical services, police investigations, autopsies, and funeral costs are calculated.

The view may be considered a barrier to the view of the Don Valley, and an imposition on one of Toronto’s heritage structures. However, the design was awarded with the 1999 Canadian Architect Award of Excellence, therby adding to Toronto’s cultural appeal.

Despite these good points, I can’t help but wonder, would the $6 million that was spent building the Veil be better spend in preventative care? What kind of progress could be made with a contribution of that sum to a psychiatric hospital? What if that money had been spent on research into preventing schizophrenia, or finding better ways to treat depression?

In the long run, are suicide rates in Toronto actually going to decline, or simply suicides from the Bloor St. Viaduct? Will these individuals simply find an alternative place to commit suicide? I’m no expert, but I agree with the critics that the Veil is somewhat of a “band-aid” solution.

Nonetheless, the City was right to react to an issue that had long since become a serious problem in Toronto.

Suicide is not a selfless activity. While it is largely considered a private matter for families, and beyond the realm of public media coverage, the numerous suicides that have taken place at the Bloor St. Viaduct make this particular issue a public matter. Health care workers, police, pedestrians, and drivers on the Don Valley Parkway are all affected by the suicides.

The public aspect of the Bloor St. Viaduct suicides have rendered the Luminous Veil an effective and necessary measure.

The City of Toronto cannot truly prevent suicide. It can’t eliminate our tall buildings, concrete pavement, traffic, and sharp objects. But despite what critics say, the Veil was not a waste of tax payers money.

It if prevents even just one suicide, it can be justified.