After You Fluff Your Pillow Tonight

On Feb. 20th 2017 Keith Boyer, a 27-yr veteran of the Whittier, CA Police Department did what he was supposed to do: he went to help people. In this case, he went to help people involved in a serious motor vehicle accident. What officer Boyer didn't know was that the "victim" in this accident had been released from the California Department of Corrections a week earlier as a parolee. Despite his prior convictions for robbery, burglary, and resisting arrest (among others) Michael Mejia was considered a "low level" inmate under the newly passed California Assembly Bill 109. 

Officer Boyer also did not know that Mejia - shock of all shocks - had murdered his own cousin earlier in the day, and had no intention of going back to prison. So, here we have a situation in which an officer hardwired for  elping meets a hardened, violent criminal who simply has no value for a human life. When attempting to PAT search Mejia for weapons Ofc. Boyer was shot and killed, leaving behind adult children. At his memorial, one of his sons said, 

"We knew as kids growing up what our father did, and the risk, but my dad never showed fear," said son Joseph Wayne Boyer. "He absolutely loved his job."

The author of AB 109 is a man called Michael Romano. Professor Romano sits in his office at Stanford University and frets about the poor people locked up in prison. Admittedly, when I read this story I was infuriated. A life long liberal and intellectual, I decided to send Mr. Romano an e-mail inviting him to expose himself to the perspective of the "other side" of the cause he has taken on. 

The difference between those with intellectual integrity and those who are blind is the ability to seriously and honestly  consider the "other's" perspective; to understand the other's perspective on their own terms, not on one's preconceived biases. 

Here is the e-mail I sent to "Professor" Romano: 

Michael, 

I am a mental health professional with decades of direct experience working with some of the most disenfranchised people in our society. For example, I worked for years in the San Francisco County Jail providing mental health treatment to some very sick, and often quite violent individuals. 

I am also a police officer who has seen, over and over again, violent criminals - the type of people you apparently want on the street. I've arrested them for shocking, senseless, brutal crimes. If I had a nickel for every time my jaw dropped when looking at their arrest histories, I'd be retired by now. How many times have a screamed the thought, "Why the fuck is this guy not in prison?" 

As you know but probably strategically ignore, the best single predictor of future violence, is a history of violence. A sea of people with long, documented histories of violence in their communities, are being released after serving a few weeks in county jail. 

Now lets talk about you. 

You are a thinker. You sit in your office and think. A Yale graduate and shooting star at Stanford, our society has given you quite a nice platform for your ideas. But, you also have an agenda don't you? You've convinced yourself by selectively reading ideas similar to your own, that the criminal justice system has failed too many people. You think people deserve a second, and no doubt third, fourth, and fifth chances to show society that they're really, deep, deep down, good, hardworking, honest people with caring hearts. You've worked hard to give them these chances and can congratulate yourself for having succeeded in this. 

It doesn't really concern you that our community mental health system is in complete shambles, because that's not your problem. Your problem is trying to figure out how to get career criminals out of jail and back home. Never mind that, without drug and mental health treatment, many of these career criminals are most certainly going to reoffend. 

And, of course you don't see this first hand because you probably live in a two story Spanish style Tudor in Menlo Park. You certainly can't see it from the Ivory Tower at Stanford. Sure, you roll your shirt sleeves up and go to San Quentin to hear the sob stories of psychopaths (which you apparently take hook, line and sinker). 

After you fluff your pillow tonight and roll over to sleep, I'd like to invite you visualize the family of Keith Boyer. Who is he you ask? He's the Whittier police officer that was murdered the other day by one of the "victims" of the criminal justice system you got out of jail under Prop. 109. 

Officer Boyer was doing what cops are supposed to do: help people. He was coming to help a motorist who had just been involved in a bad collision. Oops, no, it turned out to be one of those criminals that makes my jaw drop when looking at his arrest history, and which pulls on your heart strings. 

I'd like to invite you to visualize a hypothetical conversation between you and Officer Boyer's family. In fact, you don't even have to think of anything to say to them that you haven't already said. You can tell them, as you told the LA Times, that any assertion that your champion bill has led to more violence in the community is "fake news." 

Officer Boyer's incident is merely an anecdote, carrying none of the heft of other types of evidence. Even if I plopped hundreds of thousands of these anecdotes on your desk at Stanford you would dismiss it wouldn't you? You ignore anecdotes unless their your own. I'd bet my next pay check you have an anecdote about how you personally have been pulled over and harassed by the police, don't you? 

You see, cops don't have the time to sit around planning, implementing, and evaluating high quality research. We're busy trying to separate the small but prolific number of psychopaths you've let out of prison from regular, tax paying citizens. 

Unless you have more intellectual integrity than I'm giving you credit for, you probably won't really spend much time tonight thinking about your conversation with Officer Boyer's family. I'm guessing your heart will go out to Michael Mejia, the young man you let out jail and Officer Boyer's killer...er, I mean, "alleged" killer. 

Mr. Mejia is REALLY in trouble this time. You may want to roll up your shirt sleeves again to look at his case. Here's his picture for you. Note the sad puppy eyes. Good luck on his case, and sleep tight. 

Sincerely, 

Jeff Shannon

Words of Wisdom for New Officers

Very good article here.

http://wannabeacop.com/new-officers-guide-handling-stress/

A Mind Toward De-escalation: Throwing away the fake, adopting the real

“De-escalation” has become a real buzzword in the law enforcement industry. A confluence of forces have thrust our ability to talk to people into the forefront of modern policing. As tempting as it is to critique these forces, I think we have to accept that the community, the courts, and our departments now expect a whole lot from us with regard to our ability to talk to people. Specifically, agitated people, in a rapidly changing environment, with lots of opportunity for Monday morning quarterbacking. 

There is nothing new in the idea of trying to calm people down so that we don’t have to use force. Much of the older generation learned “Verbal Judo” in the police academy, a full-throated endorsement of using words to settle people down. The latest version of Verbal Judo is now embedded in Crisis Intervention Training (CIT), tactical training, and management training at all levels. 

Our police chiefs, sheriffs, and public information officers leap at any opportunity to drop the de-escalation buzzword in their public comments. All of this, in response to the communities perception that if we jam de-escalation training down every cop’s throat, people won’t be shot and killed anymore. 

Unfortunately, the press has perpetuated the myth that more “sensitivity” training for officers with regard to our interactions with the mentally ill, will translate into less OIS’s. Training is ideal for those who are ready to learn, and who take some kind of interest in the topic they’re learning about. In reality, training is but a small part of what is required to reduce the number of mentally ill subjects being killed in the country. 

I’d like to take a moment to strip away all the fluff and garbage surrounding the typical de-escalation training, and give you five things to think about on the topic of calming people down. Some of these ideas require introspection.  They all lead to practical, in the field options for officers wanting to settle someone down. 

(1) Being Authentic

Presented with a caricature or robotic police officer, people in crisis will inevitably escalate. In this sense, agitated subjects are reaching out for a real human connection. That connection will offer up keys to the castle for the de-escalator. The officer’s task then, is to respond to the escalated person, not as a cop trying to be ‘human,’ but as a human speaking with another human, keeping in mind his/her police duties. This can be very uncomfortable, especially for new officers. 

(2) Responding versus Reacting

Reacting is the first thing that comes to your lips. Responding is giving it a second, letting this first impulse pass, and speaking tactically. Everything that comes out of your mouth should serve the singular purpose of calming this person down. Throw what you want to say out the window. 

(3) Writing the Biography

As an advanced crisis de-escalator, you will become the personal biographer of the person you’re trying to settle down. You will be curious about what’s going on from their perspective. You’ll immerse yourself - if only for two minutes - in the world of the person in crisis, becoming familiar with how they see the situation. When writing the biography, officers should be asking questions, rather than making statements or providing commentary. 

(4) Holding the Environment

In the midst of everything, the effective crisis de-escalator exudes a sense of comfort with taking control of the situation. This is a skill that largely comes with direct experience in the field. It’s not about being “controlling” as much as it is about knowing that you are in charge. When you know you’re in charge, and buck stops with you, your agitated subject will be more responsive to your interventions. Importantly, this isn’t something you’ll want to show off. It starts with your internal sense of confidence in being able to manage the call. That confidence will permeate your interaction with the person in crisis. 

It’s important to remember that some adults need limits. Many people who feel out of control will respond favorably to the officer who says, “no.” It helps them feel protected. Setting a limit is a tactical decision, again, based on the singular goal of calming the subject down. 

(5) Offering Hope

The person in crisis is drowning at sea. You are the Life Preserver being tossed overboard. Why should the agitated person reach out to you? Because you really believe that if they get the help they need, they will be in a much better place in their life. 

Recovery is possible for people with schizophrenia, substance abuse, depression and all the other major mental illnesses. You have to believe that. As an advanced de-escalator, you will know about the mental health options for those you are talking to. The more you know about these programs the better. 

Embedded into the identity of any law enforcement officer is that of “helper.” We strike our own balance between enforcer and helper; a balance that may change with years on, life experience, and work experience. Stripping away all the external pressure we now feel, the above officer tasks, if taken seriously, will reduce the necessity to use force, increase the communities confidence in us, and - perhaps most importantly - keep us safe. 

Where We're Going.

Firstly, I want to thank you for taking the time to check out my blog. I've received a good amount of correspondence from people saying they get something from this, so thank you. It's heartening to hear from people from all over the world.

For the last three years or so, I've been a contributing editor for Calibre Press. This has been a great opportunity, and I love the work they do at Calibre. However, I now feel a need to write completely from the hip, without requirements about the number of words used, or topics that other feel are important that I do not, or visa versa.

Topics for this blog will include:

Police stress & wellness
Police culture
Police interactions with mentally ill subjects
Observations about the politics of policing

Again, thank you for your support and stay tuned for what I hope will be a good series of articles.

Kind regards,
Jeff

On Policing the Mentally Ill.

It has become abundantly clear to just about everyone that there is something mightily wrong with our mental health system. As LEO’s, we don’t spend much time in places where things are going splendid. We spend are time in broken places. And, so it is with the mental health system.

Police executives have been wringing their hands, asking how in the world we can manage the tidal wave of mentally ill subjects in crisis our officers are interacting with. According to the Treatment Advocacy Center, a full half of everyone with a serious mental illness in this country receives no treatment whatsoever. None.

Allow me provide a little historical context to this. What LEO’s are facing today is a case of the chickens coming home to roost. In the 1950’s and 60’s the general public (the “general public” will come back into this story, so remember it) collectively decided to close the state mental institutions. Society said, “These hospitals are inhumane, no one should have to live in these conditions!” So, JFK went with the tide, promised to fund the public mental health system, and  the hospitals starting shuttering their doors.

Well, then this really weird thing happened: a politician didn’t keep his word. Just as quickly as state mental hospitals closed, with no funding at the community level, very sick, unmedicated, and unsupported, people began surfacing in towns and cities across the country. The chickens began coming home.

Fast forward fifty years and we have a situation where, nationally at least 10% of all our calls for service involve someone with a serious and persistent mental illness. While I don’t have the stats to back this up, I think that percentage is much higher in urban areas. And when half of those people we contact with serious and persistent mental illness are receiving no treatment whatsoever, what do you think the outcome is going to be? Yep, 25-50% of all the people we kill have a mental illness (again, Treatment Advocacy Center).

Usually after a LEO kills or seriously injures someone with mental health challenges, the family comes forward to sue. With blood in the water, the local and national media love tag lines like, “[Your local city here] Officer Shoots/Kills mentally ill Teen.”

The mental health system is “mightily wrong” because it isn’t properly resourced. Period. Having worked as a non-profit mental health professional for many years, I can tell you with certitude that this isn’t a problem of lazy, incompetent people IN the system. The vast majority of your community mental health providers are trying to do the right thing, just like you. We naturally want to blame the “mental health system” for our current predicament but it’s not the system that’s at fault here. More on that in a minute.

Though well intentioned, the general public (remember them) believe that the problem of police officers using lethal force on mentally ill subjects can be answered with more training (e.g., Crisis Intervention Training).

Sheriffs and Chiefs across the country have seized on this, some righteous believers, others just forecasting civil litigation. I believe this sort of training has benefit. I myself am a CIT de-escalation instructor. But a lack of training cannot be blamed for most of the bad outcomes involving police and mentally ill subjects, and sending an officer kicking and screaming to the “hug a thug” training surely doesn’t ensure a better outcome down the line.

Several classes of victims have risen out of JFK’s failed experiment.  First, there is the sufferer. People don’t choose to be mentally ill. Without treatment they suffer greatly. The woman you see talking to herself every day, unkempt, and surrounded by what looks like garbage, is suffering. Mentally ill people can get better. They can. With advances in antipsychotic medications, social support, and housing, people get better.

Another victim in this mess are the family members, caregivers, and friends of those with mental illness. There exists a sea of traumatized, indignant parents across our country who have absolutely been victimized by an underfunded mental health system. As the CIT Coordinator of my department, I’ve received far too many calls from concerned parents asking for advice. Their stories are remarkably similar.

My son was a straight A student in high school. He played sports and had friends. He was a happy kid. Now in his second year of college, he’s becoming psychotic and I need help.

My daughter has been hospitalized three times, but they release her right back to the street. She uses alcohol (or weed, or meth) when she starts hearing voices. How can we keep her in the hospital until she gets the long term care she needs.

Most parents are terrified to call the police because they worry their loved one will be killed. Yet, because of a lack of viable mental health resources, that’s exactly what they have to do. Most people have the luxury of not knowing just how skeletal our mental health system is. When it’s your son (God forbid) who needs emergency mental health services, however, that’s when the bubble bursts for parents. That’s when the national crisis we’re experiencing dawns, crystal clear on them. From the reports I hear, it can be a life-altering experience.

And, yes, our police officers, sheriff’s deputies, and custodial staff are also victims. We’ve been thrust into the fore, why? Because something broke. In this case, it’s the mental health system, and we’re left holding the bag.

Spending more time each week responding to calls for service involving the mentally ill involve more liability. Officers, by the way, who actually want to help people and do the right thing. But, we see the liability which has arisen from several fronts.

First, there are the expectations of the community, who have swallowed the media’s message that law enforcement officers are slaughtering mentally ill people. Any officer involved in an OIS (Officer Involved Shooting) involving a mentally ill subject should expect to be sued. That’s kind of off the top.

And, how are we to know the subject holding the knife in front of us is mentally ill? The courts have given us really no direction here. Case law over the last fifteen years produced an elevated standard for officers with regard to our interactions with mentally ill subjects, while providing no account for how that standard is to be met. No good deed goes unpunished, right? LEO’s across the country are doing the right thing by putting our fingers in the dike of the mental health system, but we’re getting sued left and right because of it. We’re getting injured more, we’re having to manage more post traumatic stress, we’re being scrutinized more.

The vexing problem of officer’s encounters with the mentally ill has occupied a lot of police executives’ time. Here’s a message I would suggest they send to their troops:

The current mental health crisis we’re dealing with has been caused by the general public’s lack of concern for the plight of the mentally ill. If the general public really wants to get that homeless encampment off their block, they will begin to support funding for the mental health system. Like so many other entanglements we get ourselves into, this is not a police problem. It is, rather, a natural extension of the general public’s lack of interest in seeing mental health as just as important as physical health.

So, when is this situation going to be better? It’s going to get better when the general public realizes that the “problem” of mental illness in their community is not a police problem, but a community challenge: “What legislation can I support that provides for a robust mental health system?” The “problem” of police interactions with the mentally ill was created by the general public. Appropriately then, it can only be corrected by the general public.

Emotional Wellness for Law Enforcement Curriculum

I am hoping to be starting the Master Instructor Certification Course (MICC) sponsored by the California Commission on Peace Officers Standards and Training (POST). 

All MICC students are required to design a law enforcement course from 3-5 days in length, which will be submitted to POST for approval. If approved, it will become a POST reimbursable course offered statewide. POST courses tend to have much better attendance because officers get CPT credit for them. 

My course will be on Emotional Wellness for Law Enforcement. 

In addition to having grown up in a law enforcement family, I am an 11 year police veteran, and a licensed Marriage and Family Therapist. While my professional and personal experience in this area have a place in the design of the course, it is far from enough. 

I would like to correspond with others who feel strongly about the need for our peace officers to be as emotionally healthy as possible  throughout the span of their lives. If you are one of the following and would be willing to share your ideas on the development of this course, please contact me.

• Law Enforcement Officers (LEO)  
• LEO, mental health clinician or others that who teach in this area
• Mental health professionals working with LEO’s
• LEO peer supporters
• Researchers
• LEO family members
• Anyone else with a verse to contribute

For those of us with a vested interest in this topic, this is a fantastic opportunity.  My goal here is to learn as much as possible from as many different people as I can. 

In addition to collaborators, I will be looking for subject matter experts (SME) for various topical areas (e.g., John Violanti for LEO stress). If you are a SME or know someone who may be willing to donate a bit of their time to a good cause, please let me know. I will be interviewing SME’s at some length. 

It is important to note the focus of this project will be on “Lifetime Emotional Wellness.” To use an analogy, at the basic police academy in CA, the class on physical training is called, “Lifetime Fitness.” Recruits begin physical training on the first day of the academy. Their last day of PT is usually the day before graduation.  It is pounded into our heads that fitness is not to stop once we leave the academy; that it is for life. This is the type of framework I intent to use for emotional wellness. 

While the course will include secondary and tertiary prevention (i.e., what to do once problems exist), a focus will be on developing, maintaining, and constantly improving one’s emotional wellness. I see a gap here in the literature and training. My bias is that, as peace officers, we should go beyond “surviving” this career [no jab here toward Gilmartin’s invaluable work]. We should know about and be willing to work toward lives filled with meaning, happiness, and healthy relationships. 

Finally, something about the design of the course. The fundamental question the CA POST IDI program asks is, how do adults learn? Everything in the program is geared toward adult student learning. To explain what is meant by “learning” here, let me contrast it with “going to a training.” 

As most of us know, the typical training involves someone lecturing to the class for long periods of time, with a PPT in the background. In fact, sadly perhaps, this is how I’ve conducted most of my trainings (which is part of the reason I started the IDI program). So, lecture, PPT, the odd video or two and get out a half hour early. Sound familiar? 

In designing this course, my question will be, what learning exercises, delivery methods, learning styles and modes, and learning verification tools will I use to ensure the greatest chance that students will actually use what is taught? In other words, rib sticking stuff. Ultimately, this will not be “Jeff Shannon’s” training. It will contain enough detail and clarity that any law enforcement trainer will be able to use the lesson plan and teach the same stuff. My question to you is, What “stuff” should be in there? 

Thank you in advance for anything you can offer. 

Kind regards,

Ofc. Jeff Shannon, LMFT

        Berkeley Police Department

jshannon@cityofberkeley.info

(510) 981-5779

(510) 595-5580 Office

Optimism. In Law Enforcement? by Jeff Shannon, LMFT

The other day as I was driving, I saw a twenty something guy skateboarding down the sidewalk. His clothes were dirty and torn, and he carried a piece of card board under one arm with writing on it. Within only a few seconds of seeing this young man, a rather harsh judgement popped into my mind, the specific words of which I’ll plead the 5th on. 

In this same few seconds, however, something quite amazing happened. Before I even completed the sentence in my mind, replete as it was with a colorful adjectives, I stopped myself. Not only did I stop myself, but I turned my attention to the young man’s lime green beanie cap. I said to myself, “I like that cap!” I said it again as he faded off beyond my side view mirror, “Cool cap.” 

What I realized in this very brief moment in time was that I’m becoming more “positive.” Having worked in law enforcement for ten years now, this is no small accomplishment. As just about every cop knows, the more years we have on, the more pessimistic we tend to become. Pessimism, along with its ugly cousin cynicism, follow naturally as we spend years interacting with people at their “Maddest, baddest and saddest,” as Kevin Gilmartin puts it (Gilmartin is the author of Emotional Survival for Law Enforcement). 

Optimism helps us bounce back from adversity of all kinds. Getting punched in the face is adversity. While I certainly hope no LEO has this experience, if it does happen, getting punched in the face does offer a moment of truth regarding ones’ ability to bounce right back and stay in the fight. Adversity can also take the form of events as routine as being stuck behind someone with no driving skills, working for a horrible boss, or being exposed to a critical incident. 

Dr. Dennis Charney at the Mt. Sinai School of Medicine, makes his living by studying how people respond to adversity. Specifically, he’s interested in those who are excellent at bouncing back. He interviewed Vietnam veterans who were held in captivity, tortured and kept in solitary confinement for many years. He came up with ten characteristics of those who didn’t suffer from PTSD or depression after their imprisonment. Guess what the number one characteristic of resilient individuals was. Yeah, it was optimism. 

Your daily experience reveals that some people seem to be naturally more optimistic than others. By the way, we’re not talking about those who are obnoxiously and unrealistically happy about everything. We’re talking about those who understand the gravity of the adversity before them and yet see the cup as half full. Regardless of how naturally optimistic you are, the fact is we can work toward being more optimistic (and therefore more resilient) if we so choose. 

Having made baby steps myself toward being more optimistic, I can report the following benefits, 

• I’m less pissed off. 
• I feel better in my skin.
• People like being around me more (I think). 
• I’m a better role model for my kids. 
• I have less toxic stress hormones coursing through my veins.
• My overall life satisfaction is better. 

Okay, assuming I’ve sold you on working toward being more optimistic, how do you “do” it? Step One is the most difficult. It involves bringing conscious awareness to our thoughts, feelings and bodily sensations. The great thing is, we have lots and lots of opportunities to practice this stuff. 

Angry, impatient, pessimistic thoughts are all opportunities! If you bring conscious awareness to them - in other words, you catch yourself in the act - you can choose to shine the light of conscious awareness on to something more positive (like the guys’ cool beanie). Doing it just one time will show you it’s possible. 

Suddenly realizing that you’re feeling angry, tense, or irritable also presents the opportunity to ask yourself why you’re feeling that way. Then, you can add some positive (and probably more realistic) thoughts into the mix of your mind. Feelings don’t come out of the blue, they are the logical result of thoughts (e.g., if you think “I’m late!” you will begin feeling anxious and your body will tense up). You can also take a few belly breaths to relax. 

Finally, if you don’t catch yourself in the act of thinking or feeling, your body may tip you off. If you’re sitting at a computer banging out a report and you suddenly realize you have a knot in your neck, again opportunity time. 
Although I’ve used a lot of words to describe this process, keep in mind it can happen lightning fast (like the example I used at the beginning). 

If you’re disciplined enough to exercise regularly as most LEO’s are, then your disciplined enough to work on your optimism. It’s one of the best investments in your overall wellness you can make. 

 Jeff Shannon is a Police Officer, law enforcement instructor, and Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist in northern California. 

jeffshannonmft@gmail.com