The Luminous Veil...

A photo.

Firstly because it's ugly. It has a pretty name, sure, but seriously, a 'veil' by any other name would be as hideous.

Secondly, imagine this: You go to a store to buy some toilet paper. When you get there, the store manager tells you that unfortunately, they are no longer carrying toilet paper because the owner of their company (the store you're in happens to be a chain) has decided that toilet paper is unethical and harmful to the environment. "Crap!" you think, "What shall I do? I can't just not wipe my ass... and I don't agree that toilet paper is bad!" In this situation, would you A) decide that the effort is far too much and that you'll just have to go without, or B) get in your car and drive to another store. Thought so.

Now apply this tale to the Bloor Viaduct and the Luminous Veil.

According to Wikipedia (the most reliable source on the internet!), the veil was built as an attempt to prevent suicide because something like 400 people had jumped to their deaths from this bridge since 1919. It was completed in 2003 and cost 5.5 million dollars - 2.5 of which came from taxes.

The real kicker? The suicide rate hasn't dropped since this thing was built... I don't know that it'll take a scientist to tell me why. Don't you think that if a person had decided that their life needed to end - that they'd made the monumental decision to stop living - that they'd taken the time to think this through and plan it out - that they were so desperate not to go on living that they were willing to jump from a bridge and destroy the lives of their family and friends - that they'd likely not be deterred by the fact that their bridge of choice was 'veiled'? Do you not think that they'd just find another bridge? Or heck, maybe even another method?

What I keep finding on websites discussing this is the fact that apparently most suicides are spontaneous - that the person will be foiled by the veil and will often go on to receive psychiatric care. Apparently a similar veil worked in Washington and the suicide rate actually did go down... thing is, it didn't work here. I understand the intent, but what I can't understand is why someone would think that the way to go about preventing suicide is to give the folks a bandaid. I think we should try caring what people go through to reach the point of suicide. Shouldn't depression to that degree raise some kind of concern?

Does it occur to anyone else that perhaps 5.5 million dollars would have been better spent on better access to therapy? Or some kind of social program that could take at-risk people and give support to them and their families? Or even something like (morbid as this is going to sound) programs for people dealing with the suicide of a friend or family member? Is it entirely unlikely that a program like that could help prevent more suicides?

I mean, fuck. If you're going to do this... then DO IT. Why just wrap one bridge? Why not wrap all of them? Why not cover the roads in bubble wrap, just in case? Why not stop selling knives, guns, pills, rope, heavy objects, cords, tape, plastic bags, ovens, glass and scissors? Cut off electricity? Ban chemicals? I'm looking around this room right now and I can see literally hundreds of things I could use to off myself - none of them happen to be the Bloor Viaduct.