Police-Encounters-With-People-In-Crisis

the availability of weapons, statements by the person that suggest violence, a personal
history of violence under similar circumstances, the person’s level of self-control (such
as level of agitation, ability to communicate, ability to sit still, rambling thoughts),
whether the person is begging to be left alone, the person’s frantic assurances that one is
alright, and the overall volatility of the environment. The policy notes that a person who
does not exhibit dangerous behaviour before the police arrive may be less likely to be
violent toward the officer. 44
50. If a person in crisis appears to pose a threat to himself or herself or to others, the
IACP suggests calling for back-up and taking steps to calm the situation. Recommended
de-escalation techniques include eliminating emergency lights and sirens, dispersing
crowds, assuming a quiet non-threatening manner, avoiding physical contact with the
person, reassuring the person that the police are there to help, communicating to try to
understand what is bothering the person, relating concern for the person’s feelings, and
talking about topics that ground the person in reality. The model policy suggests using a
low tone of voice, refraining from threatening arrest, and taking time to assess the
situation. The IACP emphasizes that time is an ally in such crisis situations, and may be
used to gather information from the person’s family or acquaintances, as well as to
request professional assistance to help calm and treat the person. Even where the
person is taken into custody, the IACP model policy emphasizes the continued use of
de-escalation techniques and communication skills. The policy further suggests that
police avoid using restraints, where possible and safe, to avoid agitating a person in
crisis who is being taken into custody. 45
51. Similarly, the IACP notes that most calls involving people with mental health
issues result from behaviours or symptoms associated with crisis, not from criminal
conduct. This reality requires a more thoughtful approach that does not contradict the
need to ensure officer safety during such calls. To this end, the model policy
recommends an approach that establishes police as helpers, not enforcers—the uniform
always implies that an officer can use force, so this aspect of the police role does not
need to be emphasized. The IACP notes that one officer’s actions may have a long-term
effect on the person’s perception of police, so treating a person in crisis with respect and
humanity may reap a long-term benefit for other officers as well as for the individual.
Rather than characterizing communication as a passive or non-action approach, the
policy describes active listening and frequent communication to understand the
person’s concerns as a control strategy that helps de-escalate or defuse agitation, fear
and anger. 46
52. Although many of the Ontario guidelines and TPS procedures on use of force are
similar to those proposed by the IACP, they are not identical. Some notable differences
between the two models are set out in Table 1 below.
44
Ibid.
45
Ibid.
46
Ibid.
Police Encounters With People in Crisis |206