Let me start by saying that I have no problem with actual elephants. They are intelligent and amazing creatures who need protecting wherever they live. I can assure you that no elephants have been or will be harmed in the writing of this blog.
My problem is with metaphorical elephants. White ones; ones which have a habit of being “in the room”; ones who never forget and the ones you have to eat one bite at a time. Read More…
I’m sure you will be aware by now that I am in the early stages of a research degree. Though this may change or become more refined – the question I am seeking to answer is
“Are the police the right agency to be dealing with mental health incidents?”
I have spent the last few months reading. By which I mean reading a lot. I have read historical documents on the role of the police; books on mental health policy in the U.K.;studies in police interactions with people with mental illness from across the world; evaluations of Crisis Intervention Teams and Triage schemes; writings on a new concept called Law Enforcement and Public Health; reports on the implications of using Taser on people with mental illness; medical reports on the use and effects of restraint as well as papers on various elements of psychiatry and certain mental disorders.
Amongst other things. Read More…
Over the last couple of years I have noticed a conversation occurring at work which, once upon a decade ago, would have been practically unheard of.
The “if I could leave – I would” discussion has now become relatively commonplace and is particularly noticeable amongst colleagues in mid ranking roles or with over ten years service.
It has even spread to Twitter and I found myself having such a conversation with a colleague just the other night. He described feeling out of place, like he couldn’t just get on with his job anymore. He described a huge amount of emotional turmoil but then said he felt like it was just him.
It isn’t. He is far from alone.
This weekend saw me return to Canterbury for the second official study weekend of my two year course. The main difference this time is that I have actually done something towards achieving the end goal.
That something has largely consisted of reading and highlighting followed by extended periods of reading and highlighting. The purpose of this is to work toward a literature review which explores my chosen subject area and highlights gaps which need answers.
I was originally going to look at wellbeing within the police service but when I stared reading up on it a few months back I very quickly discovered it was data heavy and quite dry. As passionate as I am about supporting colleagues I felt that there was no way I could sustain such an interest for two years if I was already struggling after two weeks. It was time to think again.
Over the course of the following couple of days I was at work and became engaged in a series of lengthy and animated conversations about policing and its role in mental health crises. It dawned on me that, actually, this is a subject I already know something about and it is probably the one area of work which I am most passionate about. In terms of a research subject, I would be a fool to look elsewhere.
It is then a question of finding out what needs to be asked and reading to see if it has already been answered. If it has – is it right? If it hasn’t – it’s a gap.
And so I got my hands on as many academic papers and reports as I could on the subjects of police, mental health crises, use of Section 136, street triage, violence, deinstitutionalisation, partnership working between agencies involved in MH and anything which fell out of those reports.
Having poured over them and analysed them I was left with a lot of questions. A lot of questions. But they all kept coming back to one thing – why are the police so heavily involved in the first place? Leading from that is the question – and how do service users feel about police being involved so heavily in what is ultimately a health matter? In all the research – no one has asked them directly.
From this I developed the question “why the police?” and I was quite happy with it.
Then I came to Canterbury for the weekend.
On the evening of Friday night I had a long, lovely and very challenging conversation with a very knowledgable member of university staff. We spent a lot of that conversation asking each other “why?” about a lot of things.
I loved the entire thing but at times I was right out of my comfort zone and thinking hard. Which was good. All good. Until it was pointed out to me that the answer to my question “why the police?” is probably already known.
This sent me into a bit of a mental tailspin. I’ve been reading for ages. I have even used a highlighter! I had written a thematic plan of how the literature review might look and the areas I wanted to cover. Was this all to waste and if so – what the hell was I doing at university in the first place?
I stress that this was down to my own insecurities and hang-ups and the conversation I had with my new found friend was nothing but positive, constructive and enjoyable. I’m just not used to being challenged like that. In some respects it was awesome – in others I thought I might be drowning.
And so I retired to my hotel thinking “I can’t do this.” I am such a catastrophiser.
I enjoyed the following days lectures and picked up some new tricks, tactics and reading material but was really waiting for my tutorial at lunchtime. I needed to close this down.
When I met with Emma (Williams) I said how I felt. I can be direct like that – sometimes too much. I told Emma how much I had read, what I had read and how I had linked things together. I showed her my written plan and I swear I saw her eyes light up in delight. Having had no prior training or experience in any of this I was pleased to be reassured that I was, albeit instinctively, doing exactly the right thing.
Then we came to the issue of whether I could carry on with it as a subject given that the answer to my original question was probably already known. (The answer to “why the police?” by the way is “because no one else can / will / is set up to.”)
This was one of those moments when you are always pleased to speak to someone who is much better at something than you are. Within twenty seconds Emma had spun it and we had rephrased the question.
Without losing any of the work already done and by using my findings in exactly the same way it can be used to ask something which isn’t really covered in the literature to date.
Most of it – particularly more recent stuff – particulary around triage – simply takes for granted that the police have a role (an ever expanding role) in dealing with mental health issues and that things should be rolled out further.
There is a fundamental issue with this assumption which has not been addressed.
I am therefore very pleased to announce that the provisional working title of my research will be:
Are the police the right people to be dealing with mental health incidents?
Thank you to Emma for the reassurance and support and thank you to my new friend (you know who you are) for such a challenging, enjoyable and thought provoking conversation.
This week has seen the first police related shooting in a while. The news is already filled with accusations which neither the IPCC nor the police can yet comment on.
The only way to refute such allegations is with clear hard evidence. Little is better than recorded moving images but it seems as though these will not be available in this case.
In this guest blog, serving officer @PFM1972 shares his thoughts on whether body worn video is the only option.