research & writing
the postvention project is grounded in ongoing research, writing, and survivor-informed inquiry. through interviews, conceptual analysis, and public scholarship, this work explores the complex realities of suicide bereavement and the ways institutions can respond with greater awareness, nuance, and care.
selected writing
Suicide Bereavement as a Public Health Exposure: The Case for Structural Integration of Postvention
analytic essay submitted to the American Journal of Public Health
after the loss: a postvention series
after the loss is a weekly series from the postvention project exploring suicide bereavement — deepening understanding of how this kind of loss is experienced and carried, not only in the immediate aftermath, but over time.
march 18, 2026
every suicide leaves people behind — and their stories are where postvention begins.
when Robert Carradine died by suicide recently, several media outlets published coverage that reflects a persistent problem — even as awareness around safe reporting has grown.
Us Weekly ran this headline:
“What Is Anoxic Brain Injury? Robert Carradine’s Cause of Death Explained.”
a survivor doesn’t have to click the article to be impacted by it.
the headline is enough.
grief doesn’t stay contained. it shows up in unexpected places — a news alert, a headline, something that appears without warning while you’re just trying to move through your day. and when that content includes details about how someone died, it doesn’t inform. It can be deeply triggering.
for someone impacted by suicide, that kind of exposure can pull them right back into the most disorienting parts of their loss — the imagery, the unanswered questions, the physiological response to trauma that arrives without warning and doesn’t simply turn off.
this isn’t a niche concern. the people left behind are rarely considered in how these stories are told.
the safe messaging guidelines developed by the American foundation for Suicide Prevention and the Suicide Prevention Resource Center are clear: responsible reporting avoids describing the method, location, or specific details of a suicide death.
those guidelines exist for a reason.
the evidence is consistent — detailed reporting increases risk, particularly for people who are already vulnerable.
and suicide loss survivors are a uniquely vulnerable population in this context.
outlets like Us Weekly are aware of these guidelines. this isn’t about a lack of information. it’s about what gets prioritized — attention and clicks over the wellbeing of the people most affected.
postvention begins at the moment of death.
irresponsible reporting carries that impact forward.
the gap between prevention and postvention
as I continue interviewing suicide loss survivors, i’m struck by a consistent and troubling pattern:
the disparity between resources available for prevention—and those available for the people left behind.
in many cases, support was discovered by accident—through an adjacent provider, a chance conversation, or persistent searching. in one instance, a survivor was told that current state laws prohibited formal support in cases of suicide.
there was no clear pathway. no coordinated response. no system designed to meet them in the aftermath.
in contrast, one of the survivors i interviewed in New Zealand shared that she was offered access to an 8-week postvention program after her loved one’s death.
this represents a meaningful advancement—particularly in comparison to the U.S.
and yet, even within that structure, there were limitations.
she described difficulty relating to others in the group and tension with how suicide itself was framed within the program.
support existed—but it wasn’t fully aligned with her needs as a survivor.
many survivors are drawn into postvention work because they have experienced this gap firsthand.
they know what it feels like when, after the immediate crisis response, there is a deafening silence.
a silence that compounds isolation.
a silence that leaves people to make meaning on their own.
a silence that signals: you’re on your own now.
what’s missing isn’t just more services—it’s structure.
right now, postvention is inconsistent, hard to find, and often left to chance. survivors are expected to navigate one of the most disorienting experiences of their lives without a clear pathway to support.
this is the gap I’m working to address through the postvention project—by building survivor-informed frameworks that help institutions respond not just in the immediate aftermath, but in the weeks, months, and years that follow.
because prevention doesn’t end with the loss.
in many ways, it begins there.