Golden Gate Bridge (Sergii Figurnyi/Shutterstock)

MELBOURNE, Australia — The controversial $400 million safety nets on San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge are working. A new study from the University of Melbourne shows suicide deaths have dropped by 73% since the nets were finished in January 2024. While critics balked at the cost, these early numbers back what suicide prevention experts claimed all along: physical barriers at spots where people frequently attempt suicide really do save lives.

A Bridge Between Life and Death

The Golden Gate Bridge has a dark history alongside its beauty. Since opening in 1937, it’s been a magnet for suicide attempts. From 1937 to 2008 alone, at least 1,700 people jumped to their deaths from the bridge. This grim fact has created a difficult balancing act between how to preserve the bridge’s famous looks while stopping the deaths happening there.

After years of debate, the construction of stainless steel mesh safety nets began in April 2017 and was completed in January 2024. The nets extend 20 feet below the sidewalks on both sides of the bridge, jutting out 20 feet horizontally over the bay, and cover 95% of the 1.7-mile bridge. But do these nets actually make a difference? That’s what this study, published in Injury Prevention, took a deeper look at.

Not everyone supported the installation. Critics questioned whether the enormous price tag was justified, arguing the money would be better spent on mental health services. Others suggested people would simply find alternative methods or locations. Until now, no studies have examined the effectiveness of the newly installed safety nets.

The Numbers Tell a Clear Story

Researchers looked at suicide rates at the bridge during three timeframes: before construction started (January 2000 to July 2018), during installation (August 2018 to December 2023), and after the nets were finished (January 2024 to December 2024).

Before construction, about 2.48 people died by suicide at the bridge each month. During construction, that dropped to 1.83 monthly deaths, a 26% drop. But the big change came after completion when deaths fell to just 0.67 per month, a 73% decrease from pre-installation numbers.

The Golden Gate setup is different from most bridge barriers. Instead of blocking access entirely, the nets sit about 20 feet below the walkway. In theory, someone could jump onto the nets first, then try to jump again into the water about 200 feet below.

So why do they work so well? Research suggests a few factors may be at play. First, knowing you’ll hit the net instead of the water changes the mental calculation. Second, landing on the nets would hurt, causing bruises, sprains, or broken bones, which contradicts the notion of a quick, painless death. The painful first landing likely deters attempting a second jump.

Earlier studies found three main reasons people pick the Golden Gate Bridge for suicide attempts: it was easy to access, something about the location itself drew them, and they thought the death would be quick and painless. The nets directly mess with that last idea.

More Than Just Physical Barriers

The researchers also tracked how often bridge staff or volunteers stepped in to help someone showing warning signs. Before construction, staff intervened about 8.22 times monthly. During installation, interventions jumped to 14.42 per month. After the nets were finished, interventions dropped somewhat to 11.00 monthly.

Why this pattern? One explanation could be that fewer people at risk of suicide are visiting the bridge now that the nets are up, resulting in fewer opportunities for intervention. Another possibility is that the nets themselves provide more time for staff to help. Climbing over railings or onto nets takes time, creating a window for intervention.

These results support what experts call “means restriction,” making common suicide methods harder to access. When barriers are installed on bridges, firearms are secured, medication packaging is modified, or household gas is reformulated to be less lethal, suicide rates tend to decrease. While some individuals might try a different method, many suicidal crises are temporary, and adding obstacles often provides enough time for the crisis to pass.

This study couldn’t determine whether people blocked from jumping at the Golden Gate just went somewhere else instead. To figure that out, you’d need data on all suicides throughout the area, including method and location. But studies at other bridges, like Melbourne’s West Gate Bridge, suggest this doesn’t usually happen. When they added barriers there, jumping suicides dropped across the entire region, not just at that bridge.

The Golden Gate Bridge results match what works worldwide. The World Health Organization recommends means restriction as one of the best-proven ways to prevent suicide deaths. Barriers at jumping spots usually cut suicides by 80-90% at that location.

Even with these positive results, discussions continue about whether the nets justified their $400 million cost, which was substantially more than initial estimates. This represents significant funding that could have been directed toward mental health services. Supporters argue that the value of saved lives is immeasurable, and each prevented suicide also avoids costs for emergency services, medical care, and lost productivity.

Changing How We Think About Prevention

Instead of putting all the responsibility on struggling individuals to reach out for help, we’re changing the environment to make suicide harder. People in crisis often act impulsively. By fixing dangerous spots like the Golden Gate Bridge, we protect people when they’re most vulnerable and least able to protect themselves.

For millions crossing the Golden Gate Bridge yearly, the nets blend into the background. But they’re silently working, protecting lives while people take in the views. A bridge once known for both its beauty and its deaths is slowly changing its story. The researchers note that over time, the bridge’s reputation as a site for suicide should diminish.