Extreme risk protection orders in Washington State from 2016 through 2023: a descriptive study

Background Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) are civil orders that temporarily restrict firearm access, purchase, and possession for individuals who demonstrate high-risk behavior (“respondents”). We described demographic and case characteristics among respondents in Washington State by reason for ERPO petition filing, by year, and by county from December 2016 (when the law went into effect) through December 2023. Methods We mapped the distribution of ERPO cases by county and summarized respondent and case characteristics. We plotted variables of interest across year and used the Cochran-Armitage test for trends in proportion to assess yearly changes in proportion from 2016 through 2023. We conducted a cluster analysis to describe how case characteristics relate to one another. Results There were 1205 ERPO cases granted at the ex-parte level, representing 1160 unique respondents. The plurality of respondents were 40 to 54 years old (27.2%), male (85.1%) and White (76.9%). The plurality of ERPOs were filed for concern of harm to others ( n = 592, 49.1%), followed by concerns of harm to self ( n = 322, 26.7%). Of the 1180 cases with a final order hearing, 81.1% were granted, 11.9% were denied, and 7.0% were dismissed. There was a yearly increase in the proportion of respondents arrested around ERPO filing (average 4.2%-point increase per year), who demonstrated threats of violence (average 3.5%-point increase per year), and who brandished a weapon (average 3.2%-point increase per year). Three clusters of precipitating event characteristics emerged. The first cluster included suicidal ideation, threats, or plans; transport to a hospital for a mental health or chemical dependency evaluation; and suicide attempt or aborted attempt. The second cluster included threats of violence and “irrational” or “erratic” behavior. The third cluster included brandishing or reckless use of a weapon; respondent arrest; and use of violence. Conclusion Washington State ERPOs were predominately filed for concerns of harm to others, but a range of high-risk behaviors were documented among ERPO respondents. The diversity of precipitating circumstances suggests that ERPOs may function as a flexible intervention with the potential to influence population health by reducing access to firearms during periods of acute risk.