One of the greatest contributions of cognitive and behavioral therapies, in my view, has been the rejection of a “one size fits all” approach in favor of therapeutic strategies patterned after empirically based cognitive–behavioral formulations of specific disorders. The targeting of anxiety sensitivity in panic disorder and worry processes in generalized anxiety disorder are just two of many possible examples. This special section of the International Journal of Cognitive Therapy presents yet another example: cognitive aspects of suicidal ideation and behavior. Recent experience suggests that this is currently one of the fastest growing areas of advancement in CBT. Not long ago, I had the privilege of working with many of the leading authorities in this area to produce a volume on theory, research, and therapy with suicidal individuals (Ellis, 2006). Already, I am acutely aware of its need to be updated! In the opening article in this section, Billy Rutherford and I explore the many facets of this dynamic field, summarizing how the research has advanced from simple univariate analyses of cognitive contributors, such as hopelessness, to current multivariate studies providing insight into how these variables interact with one another. These variables range from constructs familiar to cognitive therapists, such as attitudes and beliefs, to cognitive processes more often associated with cognitive science, such as executive control and memory function. We also describe significant theoretical advances that are bringing coherence and testable hypotheses to the forefront, something historically lacking in suicide research. Finally (and bottom line), we review recent developments in cognitive–behavioral interventions for individuals at risk for suicide and self–harm behaviors. Here, one cannot help but be impressed with innovations that have moved the field a quantum leap from its usual path with suicidal individuals. For it is becoming increasingly apparent that the notion of merely treating the underlying disorder, in hopes that “symptoms” like suicidal ideation and behavior will disappear is short–sighted at best. Current approaches, such as those of Linehan and Beck, now target suicidal behavior directly and specifically, resulting in reductions in those behaviors by as much as half. As you might imagine, we conclude that the future of pursuits in this dynamic arena is bright. In the second article, Rector, Kamkar, and Riskind provide an apt reminder that it behooves us not to limit our inquiries about suicide to depression–related factors such as