Should police respond to mental health emergencies?
Image Credit: The Wall Street Journal
Authors: Henry J. Steadman, Ph.D., Martha Williams Deane, M.A., Randy Borum, Psy.D., and Joseph P. Morrissey, Ph.D.
Goal: The goal of this article is to evaluate the utilization of mental health professionals and other social service providers in coordination with their local law enforcement agencies to attempt to provide a better response for their civilians. This is a pertinent social issue in contemporary American politics and this article ought to be utilized as a source for evidence-based practices.
Background Information: As mentioned above, there is a huge push in the social framework of contemporary society to re-evaluate police practices. One of the most pertinent aspects of police practices that seems to be lacking in terms of its theoretical merit is regarding the police response to mentally ill or mentally disturbed persons. In police talk, these individuals are commonly referred to as “emotionally disturbed persons”, seeing as this is the way the dispatch order will come through a police radio communications system, as to not completely label someone as mentally ill based upon outsider information. Perhaps the most notable mental health response program to have been implemented in the United States thus far is the CAHOOT system in Eugene, Oregon. The merit of these new specialized response techniques is incredibly valuable; however, there is still hesitation to them because of the practical nature of specialized units responding to potentially dangerous situations. There seems to be an ethical conundrum revolving around whether or not sending an unarmed mental health professional into the field to respond to emotionally disturbed persons is the best route to take. Advocates of this practice say that they are the individuals who are most qualified to de-escalate the situation, seeing as they are experts in the field of mental health. However, opposition refers to the immense amount of instances in which emotionally disturbed persons have physically hurt themselves, responding officers, or other civilians. Advocates can, in turn, respond by saying that the sheer presence of a police officer in uniform can cause an outburst for a mentally ill person, and this back and forth can go on and on and on.
Research Methodology: The study took place in three different jurisdictions: Birmingham, Alabama, and Knoxville and Memphis, Tennessee. Police responses to emotionally disturbed individuals were evaluated through the lens of presence (or lack thereof) of accompanying mental health professionals. In turn, secondary analysis of outcomes for individuals were also evaluated.
Results: Results indicate that there were large differences found with regards to implementation of the programs across the three sites. However, this could be attributed to the more prominent presence of mental health support sites in Memphis, where the highest rates of social service providers and mental health professionals were utilized. All three locations saw a relatively low rate of arrest when specialized responses were made as well.
What does it mean?: While we, as a nation, are exploring new and improved (hopefully_ ways to revolutionize the police response, the use of mental health professionals takes the forefront of American policymakers. However complicated as these measures can possibly be, there ought to be some evidence-based practices that back-up the decisions on programs that we are attempting to implement across the country. This article takes a psychological stance on the medical response to emotionally disturbed individuals. As mentioned before, there are a variety of arguments for and against these practices, all with good merit. However, the article reviewed here suggests that we should support the implementation of these response practices, as they seem to have both a primary and secondary positive effect on the justice system. First, they are allowing police to spend their time responding to other police-oriented issues that mirror the stereotypical crime control job description of the police officer while allowing these emotionally disturbed civilians to get direct care by professionals who are trained to respond to their needs. Further, this is leading to less frequent arrests of mentally ill persons who, most likely, needed something (e.g., medication, advice, someone to talk to, etc), that a police officer cannot even provide for them. This leads to less crowding of our prisons and less taxpayer dollars being spent on jails and corrections costs across the country. If implemented properly, and through evidence-based practices, the utilization of these programs could revolutionize the criminal justice system in America.
Tell us what you think in the comments section below!!!
