Analysis Paralysis: A Training Paradox
Does otherwise good training instill in officers a fear
to act?
By Madeline Horner – Reprinted from
Calibre Press.
PT gear! Two minutes! Move!”
The command echoes in my ears as a herd of police recruits
bottleneck in the locker room door. Less than 45 seconds later,
they’re standing on their blocks to begin a grueling series of
push-ups. Sweat drips on the floor and hands begin to slide. A
forearm hits the floor as a recruit loses all strength in his arms.
Then someone shouts: “Flutter-kick position! Move!”
They must work like animals, being broken down, because one of them
decided to write his BLET training objectives in pencil instead of
pen. We call this training.
From this training, will they become strong? Absolutely. Will they
learn to pay attention to detail? Certainly. Will they be instilled
with the knowledge that the actions of one will be reflected on all?
Eventually. Will they be reminded of the direct correlation between
making an error and receiving a consequence? I’d say so. Will they
be receiving appropriate stress inoculation for use later in their
career? I hope so. Will they attain the confidence to make a
decision without seeking prior approval?
I’m not so sure.
Why do we train this way? We train this way because we are a
paramilitary organization and police officers must be instilled with
the strength and mental fortitude to fight and kill a person. We
train this way because to be a good commander you must be able to
follow orders yourself. We train this way because we must be able to
present a solid, unified line of law enforcement ability to the
civilians we police.
But we aren’t soldiers. A soldier encounters dangers as part of a
group, and when the leader says to shoot all must shoot. When the
leader says to stand down, all must stand down. Police officers
encounter dangers alone. There’s no leader telling them when to
shoot and when not to shoot. A police officer must be able to make
this decision by himself in the moment, and without hesitation.
Fear to Act
As a field training officer (FTO), I’ve had the same conversation
with every trainee I ever received. It’s the same conversation that
my FTOs had with me, and likely the same conversation future FTOs
will have with their trainees: “This job is not about not making
mistakes. You will make mistakes. There’s no such thing as a perfect
call. The important thing is about how well you recover after you
make a mistake.”
I spent a lot of time trying to unhinge that latent fear each
recruit carried. No recruit ever really believed me when I told them
that I wanted them to make mistakes—aggressive mistakes. I can fix
aggressive, but I can’t fix a void. Training is the place to make
mistakes.
Recruits unfortunately seem to view training as a pass/fail test.
These recruits truly believe, as many officers do, that they can’t
be seen to fail by making a mistake.
I spent months, riding in a car with a person who was afraid to tell
me that he needed to use the bathroom. I watched him squirm in the
driver’s seat doing a seated version of the potty dance. Then out of
sheer masochistic curiosity, I waited to see how long it would take
him to tell me he needed to stop. I must say while I was impressed
by his fortitude, I was not impressed with the underlying
implication. If you can’t make the command decision to use the
bathroom, how then can you be trusted to make the command decision
to take a life?
Recently I had the opportunity to speak to an officer who’d been
involved in a shooting while he had been on field training. Like any
officer worth his salt, this officer was Monday-morning
quarterbacking himself. Asking himself what he would do differently
if given the opportunity to do it over again. Now before I tell you
what he said, I want you to take yourself back to when you were on
field training. Take yourself back to that time when seeing an
expired registration sticker made your blood start to heat just a
little bit. That moment when you look at your training officer and
the words “I want to stop him” slide past your lips even as you are
reaching for the light bar switch. The implied question of “Is that
okay with you?” hovering in the air. For some of us this trip back
may take longer than others …
We spoke at length, and I was struck right down to my core by what
he said. He felt there was a part of him that had wanted to shoot
sooner, but his training officer wasn’t shooting. So he waited. He
was looking to his training officer to tell him that it was okay to
shoot, that it was okay to save his own life. Like many officers do,
they both waited until the suspect had fired at them before engaging
in a shoot out. I can’t help but wonder if the delay was in some way
due to the engrained need for someone else to tell them when it was
okay to start.
Conclusion
Now don’t get me wrong, I believe in and fully support the training
offered by our academies. Still, I wonder if there is there a fix
for this police training paradox. I’ve seen, heard, and happen to
work for one of the many departments that’s altering its training
programs to make up for this training gap. By shortening the amount
of time we spend breaking down recruits and increasing the amount of
time building them up, these progressive departments are working to
improve and increase the quality and delivery of scenario training
during the academy. This can also be accomplished by adding regular
ride alongs to the academy curriculum that will improve the
recruit’s perception of police decision-making before they have to
make those decisions on field training.
But is there more that we can do? I’m sure many of you thought of
ideas while reading this article. I encourage trainers and officers
to put their ideas into the world for judgment. Don’t allow
yourselves to be satisfied with the status quo. Do for your
department what you do for yourself: strive to be better and take
action.
Madeline Horner:
Officer Madeline Horner has worked as a police officer eight years.
During her time as an officer she has worked as a patrol officer,
field training officer, and as a training officer for the police
academy. Officer Horner currently holds her General Instructor
Certification and is a Rapid Deployment Instructor. She is the
current record holder for the N.C. women's Police Officer's Physical
Abilities Test and has received her Advanced Law Enforcement
Certificate. Officer Horner received a B.S. in Criminal Justice from
Appalachian State University and is currently seeking a Master's
degree in Counseling Psychology in the hopes of one day working with
officers and improving the mental and emotional health of officers
involved in critical incidents.
Dealing with the Deaf
ENABLING LAW ENFORCEMENT TO BE MORE SENSITIVE TO THE DEAF & HARD
OF HEARING COMMUNITY
We take our senses for granted, and tend to assume that all
people are equally endowed – that everyone can see, hear, feel,
taste and smell. But when you interact with the public, you are
likely to meet all kinds of people. Sadly not all were created
equally. People who are blind live in a world that sighted people
can’t even imagine. People who are Deaf live in a world that is
equally foreign. In this article, we’re going to focus on people who
are deaf and hard-of-hearing (HoH).
It feels safe to state that police officers and other law
enforcement personnel would benefit from a greater sensitivity to
the special needs of people who are deaf or suffer from various
amounts of hearing loss (Hard of Hearing-HoH). We expect that the
public would greatly benefit as well. And that’s the mission of
Tylin Promotions' d/Deaf Sensitivity Training Seminars. Headed by
Fred Greenspan (who is hearing impaired), the Arizona-based company
has a program, entitled “I Never Gave THAT a Thought”, during which
attendees learn to more effectively and respectfully interact with
people who cannot hear, or have a hearing deficit.
It may not be something you’ve ever given much thought to (hence
the seminar title), but the deaf and hard-of-hearing population can
be difficult to identify. They don’t appear impaired, and move about
as other people do. They are simply citizens going about their
business. Unlike members of the blind community, whose disability
may be recognized by the presence of a service dog or cane, a deaf
man or woman is not visually identifiable.
People with hearing disorders present a unique set of problems
for law enforcement personnel. No matter how authoritatively an
officer verbally commands that they do something, if they do not see
the officer, the uniform, and the badge, the deaf person doesn’t
know that the officer is there and has no knowledge of the command.
If they fail to obey an order, it may be interpreted as violating
the law, perhaps as resisting arrest. If they are taken into
custody, office personnel may only be able to communicate with them
with a pad and pencil. And that only happened if the officer and the
deaf or HoH person knows English.
In a well-organized, carefully presented program, seminar
participants lean about visual and vocal cues that can help identify
someone who cannot hear, or whose hearing is severely limited, and
they learn how to respond. They also learn that sometimes a little
patience and a desire to understand are all that are needed.
The “I Never Gave THAT a Thought” program is being made available
in a number of areas, including Southern California, Arizona,
Nevada, Pennsylvania, Florida, Texas, North Carolina, New York and
New Jersey. It is not a class in American Sign Language, but rather
an immergence of participants deep into the world of silence and how
to better understand how the person feels, and the reasons why.
www.DeafSensitivity.com 480 615-8900. In California, 661 347-0-9-1-1
State Laws Get Specific On Body-Worn Camera Programs
By: Officer Michael Oteri, BWC Agency Administrator
During my 18 plus year tenure as a law enforcement officer, our
“rule book” has always guided us in this industry. Some
agencies call it Departmental Directives; some call it General
Orders, and a myriad of other synonymous titles for how we do our
job specific to our agency. State law has always been thorough
but never to the degree of an agency’s framework of rules. Due
to societal and political climates of our great nation regarding law
enforcement, state bills are being passed with explicit directions
on the usage and type of equipment such as the body-worn camera.
On August 12, 2015, Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner, signed in to
effect Senate Bill 1304. In Section 10 of the Article, cited as the
“Law Enforcement Officer-Body Worn Camera Act”, the new law states
specifically that:
“at a minimum, all of the following:
(1) Cameras must be equipped with pre-event recording,capable
of recording at least the 30 seconds prior tocamera activation,
unless the officer-worn body camera waspurchased and acquired by the
law enforcement agency prior
to July 1, 2015.
(2) Cameras must be capable of recording for a period
of 10 hours or more, unless the officer-worn body camera
was purchased and acquired by the law enforcement agency
prior to July 1, 2015.
(3) Cameras must be turned on at all times when the
officer is in uniform and is responding to calls for
service or engaged in any law enforcement-related
encounter or activity, that occurs while the officer is
on-duty.
This is a minute excerpt of Section 10 of the Bill. The
section goes on to state when an officer shall activate the body
camera and when they are permitted not to record. This is a
profoundly explicit law that governs law enforcement operations from
a state level regarding the use of equipment. With the
culmination of this section of this bill, command staffs across the
state must become intimately involved with the capabilities of what
body camera manufacturers offer what. Then the additional
responsibility of constructing a directive that matches state law
becomes a requirement.
The state of Illinois is not the only state to enact such a bill.
The State of Florida recently enacted SB248 on July 1, 2015
pertaining to body-worn cameras. The major difference between
the two laws is the Florida bill focuses more on privacy rights of
citizens and public records disclosure.
Unfortunately, this may be becoming a trend throughout the country
and continuing across all categories of the way we do business. If
an agency is on the cusp of implementing a body-worn camera program,
it is urged that due diligence is conducted and/or lean on the
shoulders of resident experts to assist making such a massive and
complex commitment.
About the Author:
Besides being a full time sworn officer, Mike travels through the
country teaching his one day workshop, Implementing & Managing a
Body Worn Camera System for Law Enforcement. He is agency
administrator for the longest running law enforcement body camera
program on the east coast of the United States. Contact
information:
kodonnell@pg-ti.com
More info -http://pg-ti.com/