De Escalation Policies and Police Use of Force

Police Use of Force and De-Escalation Policies

Abstract

The use of excessive or unnecessary force and other forms of police misconduct have recently come under sharp focus because of the injuries and deaths they have caused. Police are allowed to use force in situations where they need compliance from a citizen who is unwilling to comply with lawful orders or instructions. However, police officers\\\' cases using excessive force have been reported in many police departments across the United States. This has led to protests and calls on police departments to change their training and policies to reduce injurious and fatal encounters between citizens and police. The protests and other initiatives against excessive use of force have led to various measures being taken in police departments across the country, including civilian oversight of various police activities, the implementation of early intervention systems, the implementation of implicit bias training, the implementation of de-escalation training, and the adoption of body cameras. Even though de-escalation training has been widely adopted across the United States, there is little scientific evidence that training can reduce the excessive use of force. This paper investigates the excessive use of force by police and the de-escalation training and policies implemented to counter unnecessary force. In the last section, the paper provides recommendations in light of the facts established.

Introduction

As per the International Association of Chiefs of Police, police are allowed to use force in situations where they need compliance from a citizen who is unwilling to comply with lawful orders or instructions (NIJ, 2012). This is the case in many jurisdictions across the world. However, while police are allowed to use force, they are not allowed to use excessive force or more force that they need to use to control a citizen or a group of citizens (NIJ, 2012). Several factors determine whether the use of force is necessary in most police departments across the world. They include the location; the situation involved; the person or persons involved; the mental capacity of the person or persons involved, the presence or use of any weapon or weapons; and the presence or use of excessive alcohol and dangerous drugs.

Most police departments across the United States and the world define the use of force differently. The official definitions are meant to let officers understand the use of force, when necessary or allowed, and when the use of force can be considered excessive or too much. The definitions are usually included in police standard operating procedures, agency guidelines, and employment contracts (Terrill & Paoline, 2012, p.8).

In the Western World, officers can use three types of force – lethal force, less-lethal force, and physical or verbal restraint. More police officers have been provided tasers to reduce the need for them to use lethal force in recent times. However, while tasers have generally helped officers to use lethal force less, their use has also been significantly criticized because some regard them as inhumane and by others as dangerous tools. Nevertheless, tasers have helped reduce the need to use lethal force, especially in situations where they are allowed by law or justifiable.

Prevalence

As per the Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics (2012), approximately 1.4 percent of police-citizen encounters in 2008 involved the use of threats or force. Of the 1.4 percent encounters, 74 percent reported that the force used was excessive, while 19 percent even reported injuries from the encounters. Of the encounters, only 12 percent of the individuals reported that they had disrupted police work or disobeyed police orders. In other words, an overpowering majority of the people who encountered the police in 2008, 84 percent of them, felt that the use of force was excessive and unnecessary. However, only about 14 percent of these people complained to the authorities. Because of such complaints and fatal encounters in police-citizen encounters, police departments across the country have developed police operating procedures, standards, or guidelines to guide the police on the use of force (Terrill & Paoline, 2012).

As of 2007, it was estimated that over 15,000 police departments across the world had purchased about 448,000 taser machines to reduce fatal interactions during law enforcement. Even though tasers have come under sharp scrutiny because of how they work, they have shown effectiveness in helping the police control citizens in encounters that could have otherwise permitted the use of force (White & Ready, 2007).

Research evidence or knowledge on the use of force by police can be categorized as follows:

1. The knowledge is accepted as fact because of overwhelming evidence.

2. The knowledge that is only accepted with average confidence and needs more research.

3. The knowledge that is not based on research.

There is overwhelming evidence that police do not use force frequently. This is what the data shows. Among the many encounters between the police and citizens, only a small percentage of them involve force. There is also much evidence that force usually occurs when there is shoving, pushing, or grabbing. According to police chiefs, force is used in specific circumstances or situations means that they are predictable. This is why many police work guidelines and training manuals require police to use only the force needed to achieve their goal.

Nevertheless, the fact that police manuals or standards of procedure do have guidelines on force does not mean everybody follows them. Many police officers across the country still use unnecessary force. Some of the most concerning police actions include batons, chokeholds, fists\\\' use, the use of beatings, and fatal shootings. While these actions do happen, they are the exception rather than the norm. Most police encounters usually do not involve force, and even when force is used, it is usually necessary and frequently does not result in severe injuries (U.S. Department of Justice, 1999).

As for what is regarded as knowledge accepted with average confidence, three key \\\"facts\\\" can be obtained:

· Only a small percentage of law enforcement use unnecessary force

· Use of force often occurs when officers are dealing with individuals under drug influence or those who are mentally ill\\\\

· Use of force is not related to an officer\\\'s (e.g., their ethnicity, gender, air age).

The true prevalence of force is unknown because most of those who face the use of force usually do not report their encounters to the authorities. Nevertheless, it is must be noted that the use of force is the exception rather than the norm, and injuries or deaths are few compared to successful police-citizen encounters. However, this information is based on police statistics, and this could be a problem because some police departments may be hiding or underreporting negative interactions between their officers and the public.

Civil lawsuits and civilian complaints are also not good indicators of police use of excessive force because they do not account for unreported cases. It is difficult to measure the police use of force led scholars to come up with the term all use of force. This term helps to account for all cases of use of force, including those that may be cleverly underreported by the police (U.S. Department of Justice, 1999).

Use of Force and Public Health

Many scholarly articles argue that there is a link between the excessive use of force and public health. The common conclusion in such articles is that police violence has mental and physical effects, which can be regarded as a public health matter. To be more specific, some of the articles have concluded that police violence on young men usually negatively affects their mental health leading to anxiety and trauma.

Moreover, there is a need for police departments to adopt less violent or invasive methods to reduce negative effects on the mental health of young people. Some other articles have shown that police violence cases often lead to worry, stress, and anxiety and that this usually causes negative health effects. The above reality plus the fact that the American Public Health Association (APHA), police violence is a public health concern, and there is a need to fight police violence through investigating all use of force incidents, collecting data properly and in a standardized manner, and monitoring police departments (Obasogie & Newman, 2017).

De-escalation Policies

De-escalation training is one of the ways police departments are being urged to adopt to fight police violence. Many police units or departments have already adopted de-escalation training to help reduce police violence in their jurisdictions. De-escalation training and techniques are being recommended to ensure officers know what to do to obtain control of individuals or situations before using force. However, not everyone thinks that de-escalation training and policies can address police violence.

Most of the people against the use of de-escalation training argue that it can put officers at risk. This is because they believe that de-escalation training and techniques have made officers reluctant to use force. They also argue that the techniques are dangerous to use in many situations (Landers, 2017). In many cases, some de-escalation training officers are now avoiding using the word de-escalation in de-escalation training instead of calling the techniques to defuse tense situations.

One of the reasons why de-escalation training has many critics is that its definition is ambiguous. In many cases, de-escalation means all techniques and methods used to manage, reduce, or prevent all sorts of conflict, including violence, aggression, agitation, and abuse between individuals. While this might be applicable in many cases, in some cases, with people intent on harming, it can be outright dangerous (Engel, McManus & Isaza, 2020).

Description of De-escalation Training

De-escalation training varies considerably in terms of topics covered, methods taught, duration, and evaluation. There are several common themes established in most police departments\\\' de-escalation training modules in terms of topics covered. The topics include definitions, explanations, violence risk factors, aggression models, and management/prevention models.

While most de-escalation training has multiple topics and themes, they all focus on managing aggressive individuals without utilizing too much force. The training also typically include legal considerations, workplace guidelines, general responsibilities and rights, medical considerations, and reasonable force. Many de-escalation training includes a critical review of incidents and processes of evaluating violence (Engel, McManus & Herold, 2019).

As is the case with most police training modules, de-escalation training is not a product of robust research or scientific training. Because of this, there is no standard de-escalation training. There is also very little information on how the training modules have been developed, how they should be delivered, and their impact. However, some studies show that de-escalation training has resulted in better attitudes among law enforcement officers, better perception of officers, and better behaviors and police-citizen encounters.

Even though most research on de-escalation training shows that the training can help in various ways, including reducing the severity and number of violent encounters, some studies have also concluded that the training has negative effects or no effects at all (Engel et al., 2020). However, what is positive to note is that about 50 percent of the time, the training almost always results in better behavior among participants and better de-escalation skills, and improved capacity to manage aggression or violence (Engel et al., 2019).