Police-Encounters-With-People-In-Crisis

of a police constable. Furthermore, a continuum of risk associated with alcohol
consumption may be used as a guide in determining whether a candidate’s level of
alcohol use is of significant concern. The psychologists are directed to be mindful of
cultural and linguistic diversity concerns, and the limitations of the tests in light of that
diversity. 8
9. From these tests and the psychological interview, the psychologist makes a
recommendation regarding the hiring of a candidate, based on the psychologist’s
assessment of the candidate’s ability to perform the essential functions of a police
constable. Recommendations fall under the categories of “Suitable,” “Suitable with
Concerns,” or “Not Suitable.” 9
10. A written report summarizing the results of the evaluation and the psychologist’s
recommendation is forwarded to the TPS Employment Unit. Any concerns regarding
possible psychopathology or the suitability of a candidate for hire must be described in
the report. Where possible, the psychologists identify a means by which an officer
conducting a background check may obtain further information that may confirm or
satisfy any suitability concerns identified in the course of the psychological evaluation.
11. The Review was told that the TPS has not hired an individual identified by a
screening psychologist as “Not Suitable,” since the Service first hired an in-house
psychologist in 2005 to manage the psychological screening process.
3. Issues with the role of Psychological Services
12. In light of the Service’s limited power to dismiss, suspend or otherwise discipline
officers for misconduct, the role of Psychological Services in screening out
psychopathology and screening in for desirable traits such as emotional intelligence,
empathy, tolerance of diversity, and patience—traits that are crucial to meeting the
complex demands of modern policing—is all the more important. However, the role of
Psychological Services in the decision-making process for new constable selection is
more limited than, in my view, it should be.
13. In conducting a psychological evaluation of a recruit candidate, Psychological
Services does not have access to the applicant’s complete file. Psychological Services has
access only to the applicant’s psychological test results and basic personal information.
The psychologist’s recommendation could be better informed by a more complete
understanding of the candidate, her or his background, and strengths and concerns that
others in the organization have noted at previous stages of the recruitment process.
14. After the evaluation, the psychologists have no further involvement in the new
constable selection process beyond the submission of their written report to the TPS
Employment Unit. This raises the issue of whether further involvement of Psychological
Services is appropriate. I am of the opinion that a key advantage of using psychological
screening is the psychologist’s depth of insight into the candidate. At the same time,
8
Vipari & Martin-Doto, “Psychologist Guidelines,” supra note 5.
9
Ibid.
Police Encounters With People in Crisis |131