Q&A with the Experts: Ana Ortin-Peralta

Hygieia offers specialized services to enhance your organizations’ ability to prevent and respond to suicide risks. Our interdisciplinary team includes mental health, public health, anthropology, sociology, non-profit management, policy, and communications specialists trained as scientists, administrators, and practitioners.  Meet Dr. Ana Ortin-Peralta, an Assistant Professor at the Ferkauf Graduate School of Psychology, Yeshiva University, a Clinical Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Albert Einstein College of Medicine/Montefiore Medical Center, and the director of the Two-Generation Approaches to Suicide (G2 Suicide) Lab, where she examines how the dynamics and bidirectional influences between children and caregivers shape both child suicide risk and overall family health.

1. Can you recall a specific event or moment that shifted your perspective on suicide prevention?

   
   

   Reviewing recent studies on how national, state, and local policies impact health and suicide risk at the individual level has been an eye-opening experience, prompting deep reflection. Based on the Ecological Systems Theory, individuals exist within systems that exert varying levels of influence. For youth, the proximal system includes family, peers, instructors, neighbors, and social media, while more distal influences stem from cultural values and societal norms. Between these levels, other systems, such as school boards, healthcare settings, and local communities, also play a crucial role. 

   
   

   This complex web of influences underscores the need for individual-level interventions to be reinforced by broader systemic efforts. For example, adolescents discharged from an emergency department or inpatient admission are often placed back into home environments where little to no intervention has occurred. As a result, individual treatment is less effective when it focuses solely on the child without engaging the family system or school environment. Similarly, family-level interventions are more impactful when communities are supportive of mental health rather than environments where mental health issues are stigmatized or where access to care is limited. Furthermore, mental health access, as well as caregiver leave policies remain inaccessible when local governments fail to invest in these essential resources. 

   
   

   These influences are also bidirectional: not only do various systems shape a child’s risk for suicide risk, but the child, in turn, influences these systems. However, this bidirectional relationship is often overlooked, and the needs of caregivers and siblings are rarely integrated into suicide prevention and intervention efforts. Therefore, addressing suicide risk effectively requires a holistic, system-wide approach that acknowledges and leverages these interconnected influences. 

   
   

2. What role do you think government/policy plays in addressing suicide prevention? Where have you seen wins in this arena? 

   
   

   Most suicide prevention efforts depend on funding, from providing mental health care in clinical settings to implementing school programs and launching awareness campaigns to mobilize society. Without funds allocated for this purpose, most prevention programs will not survive. 

   
   

   In recent years, there has been growing awareness of the importance of government investment in mental health and the development of national suicide prevention plans. However, as researchers, it is our responsibility to design programs and provide recommendations that are sustainable and can be easily incorporated into existing efforts. Additionally, we should actively disseminate our findings not only in clinical settings but also within the broader community to ensure that evidence-based strategies reach those who need them most, and empower policymakers, educators, and families to take informed action in suicide prevention. Creating more venues for these encounters to happen would be very beneficial for all. 

   
   

3. What is one thing you believe society as a whole could do better in addressing suicide prevention? 

   
   

   Changes in laws, governments, and life events will continue over time, but one thing that could remain constant is our ability as a society to manage the emotions that come with these changes, build strong support systems, and teach our children to do the same. Educating the public about mental health, particularly suicide, and creating spaces for meaningful connection are essential steps in building resilient communities and reducing mental health stigma. For example, socio-emotional learning programs in schools have already shown promise in lowering suicide risk among adolescents. Future studies will need to explore whether these benefits last over time and across generations, as well as identify ways to enhance their effectiveness. 

   
   

4. What is one misconception people often have about suicide prevention, and how would you correct it? 

   
   

   One barrier to suicide prevention at the community, clinical, and family levels is the misconception that asking someone if they are thinking about suicide will put the idea in their head. Many people, especially when speaking to youth, fear that bringing up the topic will make them start thinking about suicide. However, research has consistently refuted this misconception. Despite the evidence, these findings have not yet reached the broader public. By not asking children and adolescents whether they are experiencing suicidal thoughts or have attempted suicide, we inadvertently send the message that talking about suicide is not accepted and that adults do not have the skills to support them if they choose to disclose these thoughts. These unspoken messages are dangerous, as youth who are struggling with suicidal thoughts may avoid sharing them at home out of fear of causing distress or harm to their parents. Bringing up this topic at home can be daunting, but an increasing number of resources are available to help create safe spaces for conversations about mental health. 

   
   

5. What do you believe is the root cause of suicide, and how do you approach preventing it from your position?  

   I believe suicide cannot be attributed to a single cause. Instead, suicide risk is complex and arises from the interplay of biological, psychological, social, and environmental factors. A person’s internal vulnerabilities (i.e., genetic predisposition and brain differences), interact with external influences like family dynamics, community support, exposure to trauma, and systemic stressors such as discrimination and socioeconomic disparities, to increase risk for suicide. 

6. 
   

   Despite decades of research, our ability to predict whether someone will attempt or die by suicide remains no better than chance. While we know which factors are linked to higher suicide risk, we need new frameworks to explore how these factors interact across systems and evolve over time. Deepening our understanding of these layers of risk is crucial for developing more effective, culturally responsive prevention and intervention strategies, and ultimately improving our ability to predict suicide risk.

   
   

---

Call or text 988 to reach the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline for immediate, confidential support from trained counselors who provide immediate crisis intervention and mental health resources. 

For LGBTQ+ youth, The Trevor Project offers help at 1-866-488-7386. 

Remember, you're not alone, and trained professionals are ready to listen and help.