Throughout the years, the U.S. special operations community has suffered profound loss, both in combat and from within. The suicide epidemic among U.S. service members, particularly those within U.S. special operations forces (SOF), continues to challenge the Department of Defense, mental health professionals, and the foundations of our military culture. Each new death by suicide brings with it haunting echoes of a single, unanswerable question, “Why?” While numerous factors contribute to the elevated suicide rate in U.S. SOF, the most consequential and fundamental drivers are social isolation and loneliness resulting from the loss of their SOF communities. Peer-reviewed research consistently links loneliness and the loss of unit cohesion to elevated suicide risk among military populations. Teo demonstrates that loneliness strongly correlates with suicidal ideation and depressive symptoms in veterans receiving primary care.01 Heward argues that the abrupt loss of military identity contributes to moral injury and psychological distress, particularly among those who experience involuntary separation or unresolved guilt after combat.02 To gain a deeper understanding of the psychological impact of social isolation and loneliness, this paper utilizes Maslow’s hierarchy of needs as a conceptual framework. Maslow’s theory posits that human motivation is fundamentally driven by fulfilling physiological, safety, belonging, esteem, and self-actualization needs. Disruption in belonging and the perception of being a burden are core psychological predictors of suicidal ideation and behavior.03
The article, Loneliness is Closely Associated with Depression Outcomes and Suicidal Ideation Among Military Veterans in Primary Care, presents a model highlighting the particularly significant impact of loneliness.1 This study identified increased Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) scores and positive screens for suicidality among those service members experiencing loneliness. The PHQ-9, a nine-item self-report assessment, is a clinically significant measure used to screen depressive symptomatology and diagnose major depressive disorders.04 Therefore, loneliness emerges as a critical mediating factor potentially contributing to depression and increased risk of suicide. Loss of purpose, institutional rejection, and the abrupt disruption of military identity often create a psychological void that challenges successful reintegration. Reger argues that the loss of shared military identity and difficulties finding meaningful work may contribute to the increase in psychological distress and suicidality among veterans.05
Loss of community and the resulting loneliness are not merely a consequence of poor decisions or failed leadership; they stem from a deep connection between personal identity and institutional belonging. For many service members, the military represents more than a career—it is a source of home, family, and a sense of purpose. Abrupt severance from this environment, whether through administrative separation, disciplinary action, or natural attrition, can devastate mental stability. It is necessary to question whether our current structure is deficient in compassion. Could integrating rehabilitation measures before separation, such as trauma-informed counseling, mentorship programs, and connection to nonprofit support organizations, reduce suicide risk?
We must identify or create programs that accept individuals who left military service under less-than-favorable conditions. These individuals once served within our formations and sacrificed something that cannot be returned: their time. They wore the same uniform, endured the same hardships, and faced the same risks. However, those separating from service under adverse circumstances often find themselves excluded from the support systems available to their peers. Many organizations advocate for and provide resources to SOF veterans with honorable discharges, but some may offer fewer resources to those pushed out under unfavorable circumstances. Failing to acknowledge their service and provide opportunities for redemption risks compounding the isolation and shame that so often precedes suicide.
A more humane and strategically sound approach to addressing misconduct, declining performance, or psychological challenges within SOF requires prioritizing rehabilitation over immediate administrative separation. Rather than defaulting to punitive or exclusionary measures, commanders and administrative authorities should, where appropriate, pursue restorative interventions that address the underlying causes of a Soldier’s misbehavior or operational decline. Such an approach not only supports individual well-being but also preserves valuable skills and experience within the force.
Rehabilitation programs grounded in trauma-informed care and therapeutic jurisprudence offer another model. A framework such as the Sanctuary Model facilitates access to behavioral health interventions, structured mentorship, and reintegration support.06 For instance, rather than discharging a Soldier for alcohol-related incidents, a command could mandate participation in a structured treatment program that includes behavioral therapy, family support, and regular mental health evaluations. This approach preserves investment in highly trained operators and fulfills the military’s ethical obligation to care for its members. Concurrently with rehabilitation efforts, establishing a robust and enduring post-service support network is essential to mitigate long-term psychological harm and reduce suicide risk.
The abrupt transition from active service to civilian life, particularly when involuntary or poorly supported, often results in the loss of community, identity, and mission-driven purpose—foundational elements of psychological well-being for SOF personnel. To mitigate this disruption, organizations pioneered effective models for maintaining connection and fostering resilience, which are great models to mirror. These organizations provide structured peer support networks, regular wellness check-ins, transition mentorship, and access to mental health professionals with expertise in the cultural nuances of SOF service. Their programs cultivate a sense of belonging, accountability, and a shared purpose that endures even after uniformed service.
These enduring networks offer lifelines for those separating under challenging circumstances or experiencing reintegration challenges. Moreover, they serve as repositories of institutional knowledge, enabling retired personnel to remain engaged in mentoring roles and contribute meaningfully to the broader SOF community. Institutionalizing these networks within the military’s transition infrastructure would enhance continuity of care, reinforce long-term resilience, and demonstrate a commitment to holistic force sustainment.
The U.S. special operations community requires more than policy directives and preventative materials; it demands cultural transformation, proactive leadership engagement, and research grounded in the lived experiences of its operators. Prioritization must be given to tools that facilitate the reconstruction of meaning following loss, failure, and transition. Future studies should focus on interventions integrating psychological rehabilitation, community maintenance, and purposeful reconnection with values beyond military service. Only by providing sustained support to those who have endured these challenges can we hope to improve outcomes and ensure our warriors never face these battles alone.
References
01 Teo, Alan R., Heather E. Marsh, Christopher W. Forsberg, Christina Nicolaidis, Jason I. Chen, Jason Newsom, Somnath Saha, and Steven K. Dobscha. 2018. "Loneliness Is Closely Associated with Depression Outcomes and Suicidal Ideation among Military Veterans in Primary Care." Journal of Affective Disorders 230: 42–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2018.01.003.
02 Heward, Carolyn, Wendy Li, Ylona Chun Tie, and Pippa Waterworth. 2024. “A Scoping Review of Military Culture, Military Identity, and Mental Health Outcomes in Military Personnel.” Military Medicine 189 (11–12): e2382–e2393. https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usae276.
03 Van Orden, Kimberly A., Tracy K. Witte, Katherine C. Cukrowicz, Sarah R. Braithwaite, Edward A. Selby, and Thomas E. Joiner. 2010. “The Interpersonal Theory of Suicide.” Psychological Review 117 (2): 575–600. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018697.
04 Sawaya, Helen, Mia Atoui, Aya Hamadeh, Pia Zeinoun, and Ziad Nahas. 2016. "Adaptation and Initial Validation of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 Questionnaire (GAD-7) in an Arabic Speaking Lebanese Psychiatric Outpatient Sample." Psychiatry Research 239: 245–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2016.03.03.
05 Reger, Mark A., Derek J. Smolenski, Nancy A. Skopp, Melinda J. Metzger-Abamukang, Han K. Kang, Timothy A. Bullman, Sondra Perdue, and Gregory A. Gahm. 2015. "Risk of Suicide Among US Military Service Members Following Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom Deployment and Separation From the US Military." JAMA Psychiatry 72 (6): 561–569. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2014.3195
06 Runcan, Patricia, Remus Runcan, Dana Rad, and Ioana Eva Cădariu. 2025. “Trauma-Informed Interventions in Social Work: Ethical Grounding, Philosophical Reflections, and Interdisciplinary Practices.” International Research Journal for the Social Sciences and Humanities 5 (13). https://doi.org/10.59209/ircep.v5i13.98.