With distressing regularity, our police officers are exposed to a barrage of
emotional injuries that have, until lately, been considered ‘occupational hazards.”
Although child abuse cases, murders, and traffic deaths contribute the most frequent
exposure, the most severe emotional trauma occurs when an officer is injured
physically, or is forced to injure or kill someone else, or is a witness to one of these
incidents.
Because of some “code of the blue” that has evolved from the imagination of the
media, our officers have been expected to function in the midst of these emotional
minefields without ill effect. Unfortunately, we even fell for it ourselves and we came to
think of ourselves as some sort of ultra-human with an invisible shield.
Well, my friends, it just doesn’t wash anymore.
I know that the subject of emotionally troubled police officers has been rather
taboo for us, both in public and in organizational circles. In the past, we’ve tried to
bolster the spirits of emotionally injured officers with some righteous pronouncements
and we’ve expected him to pick up his damned marbles and get about his duties like a
real pro.
If I believed that this old approach was sufficient, I wouldn’t trouble you with my
comments today. And if you really believe that it’s sufficient, I’m about to waste your
time.
On the other hand, if you’ve stood with an officer who’s just survived a really gut-grinding encounter with violence...Who’s trembling...and sobbing... and who’s
struggling very, very hard to hold his supper down, then we’ve shared some common
ground.
I’d like to discuss some things which administrators and managers can do to
help these officers regain their emotional stability and retain their dignity and self-respect. There’s nothing new or mysterious in what I have to offer. The essence of it is
sincerity and caring about human beings you work with.
For the most part, the emotional injuries are not permanent. They can be treated
and they will heal, just like broken bones. But we’ve got to remember that we’re dealing
with individuals: they have a wide variety of stress reactions and a wide variety of
abilities to cope.
I want to tell you about the method by which one group of officers has set out to
help themselves and to help other officers in the future. What evolved has been
beneficial both to all the officers and to the administration.
The group is composed of officers who have been forced to use deadly force
against another person. The group theme is: “Drawing on our experiences, what can
we do or say to assist the next officer who is involved in a violent confrontation? Can
we give that officer a better chance for emotional recovery?”
What they discovered are some things that can be of use in any jurisdiction.
Immediately after the incident, the officer needs a companion whose primary
interests are the needs and feelings of that officer. Everyone else at the scene has a
predetermined role and the officer suddenly becomes a spectator. The companion role
may be filled by a supervisor or command officer in whom the officer has confidence,
but most often it is filled by another field officer, a friend who comes to the scene.
Some people may want to ventilate, some may prefer to remain quiet; some may be
tearful; some may be sick; but they each need someone to care about them personally.
The officer needs to get away from the scene, if only for a short distance and
time. There is usually time enough between the occurrence and the arrival of
command and investigative personnel to permit a temporary withdrawal to a quiet
place.
After the initial shock ebbs a bit, the first concern of the officer is for his family. There
ought to be an opportunity to communicate with them and to reassure them before the
news stories break.
While there is certainly a requirement to tell the whole story of the incident, it
need not be told over and over again with each new official arrival. Sound procedure
might be to have the officer discuss the incident with all the assembled official
personnel at one sitting.
The officer needs some reassurance from an authority figure. Normally, he feels
that he has done the right thing, the only thing left to do in the situation. He knows that
an opinion is only that, because of the legalities involved. The importance to the officer
is “someone in authority thinks I acted correctly.” The prime ingredients in the opinion
are timeliness and candor.
The use of a shooting folder to inform other members of the department can
negate the affect of rumors from the beginning. The folder may contain all unclassified
reports and pertinent data about the incident and may be open for use a t roll calls and
for inspection by individual officers. Personnel then know that they are getting the best
information from the best source, instead of locker room gossip and speculation.
Up to this point, I’ve dealt with things that have proven to be beneficial from both
an organizational and a personal viewpoint. Now, I’d like to address some very
personal issues which confront the officer himself.
Very soon after the incident, the officer needs counseling. Few jurisdictions
employ professional counselors, but must have supervisors with the sensitivity to
discuss with the officer those things which may occur as after-effects of his experience.
The officer needs to know that, in similar situations, other officers have had one
or more of the following experiences:
-flashbacks or nightmares
-anger at the suspect, for forcing the officer to do something that he didn’t
want to do
-changes in behavior habits
-changes in eating preferences
-reduction in sexuality
-frustration with media coverage, and
-“locker room shock” which occurs when the officer goes
back to work
Post-incident return to duty is a very stressful time for the officer. Most of the
comments and inquiries he receives are sincere and well-meant. But, there are those
few vicarious thrill-seekers who simply must have a complete verbal account of the
incident, firsthand. Their guts-and-glory commentary are usually disastrous to the
feelings of the returning officer.
If the officer is struggling toward normalcy, as most do, this type of exposure
provides a gigantic setback. If the officer is still in the emotional storm and is seeking
stable footing, he may perceive these encounters as bona fide approval and begin to
conform to his new image.
Prompt, positive action by supervisors can place all the facts before the work
group. The thrill-seekers can be counseled and the “locker room shock” can be
lessened for the returning officer.
We can’t prevent these experiences altogether, but we can reduce the shock by
conferring with him immediately after the incident and preparing him for the
possibilities. He needs to know that these things have happened to others in similar
situations, that they are normal occurrences, that the problems can be solved for him,
just as they have been for others. But most of all, he needs to know that he is not
alone, that someone really does give a damn about him.
Currently, officers from our original group are voluntarily serving as companions
to other officers in more recent incidents. They also review the shooting folders at roll
call, and they counsel with the thrill-seekers.
We are experiencing a growth of sensitivity and awareness among the field
officers and we have tangible proof that the organization does care about the well-being of its personnel.
There have been benefits for the original contributors, too. They know that
crying is okay, that it’s not unmanly. They know that tough guys throw up and tremble
sometimes. And they know that the nightmares will pass. They know all these things
because they’ve been through them together. They can now approach other officers in
their time of need and say with a firm truth, “Partner, I really know how you are probably
feeling right now, ‘cause I’ve been there. Can I help you through the backlash?”
