Police-Encounters-With-People-In-Crisis

the Divisions) on how to assess the relative risk posed by a person in crisis, and on how
to transform potentially violent encounters into peaceful resolutions.
15. Police operate within an organization that places a high value on personal
toughness and self-reliance. Yet front line police are exposed to scenes of despair, pain,
tragedy, and horror as a regular part of their job. It is virtually inevitable that such
exposure affects their own mental health—causing at the very least some degree of
emotional detachment from the subjects with whom they deal, and not infrequently
more serious mental health issues. The importance of the mental health of the police
themselves should not be underestimated in analyzing how to ensure better outcomes of
encounters with people in crisis.
16. Another feature of the TPS, which is similar to other police organizations, is the
Service’s para-military command structure and its pervasive focus on legal compliance.
Front line officers become accustomed to dealing with certain types of dangerous
situations through a system of command, physical confrontation (if necessary), enforced
compliance, and negative sanctions for non-compliance. While this compliance-based
approach can be very beneficial in many contexts, it can be counterproductive when
dealing with a person in crisis, who may not understand or be able to respond to
commands. This is not to say that all police interactions with members of the public are
premised on a compliance-based approach—far from it. Many, if not most, encounters
between the police and the public are cooperative and respectful. But in dangerous
situations, there is a tendency and, in some contexts, a real or perceived requirement for
police to use a compliance-based approach. This can be problematic when a more
conciliatory approach, focused on de-escalation, delay, and containment, is preferable to
confrontation.
17. Another key element of the front line officer’s perspective, which must be
acknowledged as being both inevitable and acceptable, is fear. Police are entrusted with
the weighty responsibility to use lethal force if necessary, and they are under
tremendous pressure to carry out that responsibility with honour and integrity, without
error. At the same time, front line officers are confronted regularly with threats and
potential threats to their personal safety that inevitably cause them to be afraid, and
therefore, to experience a very strong and natural urge to protect themselves. The
perception of being in potential danger is ever-present for the front line officer—far
more so than for the average member of the public. It is understandable that officers
may feel impelled to try to control dangerous situations quickly. Fear, particularly if
combined with less-than-ideal mental health of the officer, makes empathy and patience
more difficult.
18. Finally, front line police officers operate in a society that sends seemingly
contradictory messages about police encounters with people in crisis. A police officer
who dies at the hands of a person with mental illness is hailed as a hero. Yet when a
police officer kills a person in crisis (usually to avert being killed himself or herself), the
officer may be vilified. This is not to say that officers do not sometimes make errors in
these encounters—clearly they do. Errors are part of the human condition. The point is
that, even when officers do not make errors and are fully justified in having used force
against a person in crisis, they tend to be subject to a level of criticism that few others in
Police Encounters With People in Crisis |61