Stress and Law Enforcement Officers - Term Paper Example

Stress and Law Enforcement A Review of the Literature Occupational trauma is a key causal factor to stress in law enforcement. Law enforcers are expected to run into serious incidents, such as sudden deaths, as part of their regular daily responsibilities. A law enforcer is also expected to deal with a number of profoundly disheartening social situations (e.g. sights of domestic abuses), violent encounters, hostage scenes, eviction or break-in situations, etc (MacNair, 2002). Sadly, in roughly 35% of such incidents turns into an actual trauma for the law enforcer. Stress is defined as “internalized, or a combination of fear, confusion, and anxiety sets in after the incident” (Williams & Sommer, 1994, p. 326). Some law enforcers withdraw into a stage of isolation that negatively influences their work and family life. In these instances, the abovementioned syndromes persist for several weeks and grow to be more severe and widespread. These warning signs can lead to a posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or a number of other types of stress malady (Williams & Sommer, 1994). This review of the literature hence tries to address the following questions: (1) What are the sources of stress in law enforcement? (2) What are the effects of stress on law enforcers? (3) How to reduce stress in law enforcement? This review of the literature basically focuses on the nature of, effect of, and solution to stress in law enforcement. What are the Sources of Stress in Law Enforcement? The definite individual factors negatively influencing employees are referred to as ‘job stressors’. Stressors in law enforcement have been classified in a variety of ways. Stratton, summing up the ideas of several scholars, argued that stressors in law enforcement may be classified into four groups (DIANE, 1990, p. 3): (1) internal stressors; (2) external stressors; (3) stressors affecting the individual law enforcer; and (4) stressors in law enforcers’ duties. According to Regehr and Bober (2005) and DIANE (1990), stressors inside law enforcement are observed preferential treatment as regards to job assignments and promotions and the political consequences of day-to-day directorial actions; incoherent disciplinary measures; too much red tape, or rules and regulations; unhealthy working conditions and inadequate financial assistances or benefits; unsatisfactory training and lack of career growth prospects; and official procedures and guidelines that are insulting or unpleasant to law enforcers. On the other hand, according to Tedeschi, Park, and Calhoun (1998), stressors outside law enforcement are law enforcers’ aversion to the objectives and courses of action of executive departments impinging on law enforcement tasks; injurious or inaccurate media depiction of law enforcement; the pessimistic outlook of the public toward law enforcement; inconsiderate scheduling of law enforcers by courts for court appearances, which could lead to breach in private time and disruption of job tasks; and disappointment with the legal process (e.g. civil rights complaints filed against law enforcers, the untimely freeing of criminals on bail, or court decisions that are light to criminals or that limit techniques of criminal containment. Stressors affecting the individual law enforcer, according to DIANE (1990), are distorted social reputation in the community because of the changes in outlooks toward an individual because s/he is a law enforcer; requirement to advance education or to get another job; need to play the game; and anxieties about security, personal accomplishment, and job capability. On the other hand, according to MacNair (2002), there are several stressors discovered in law enforcers’ duties, which are excessive work load; the disjointed arrangement of the work, wherein one individual seldom pursues a case until the end; continuous duty to save other people from harm; fear and risks of the duty; dullness, suddenly disrupted by the demand to act quickly; repeated exposure to violence and despairs; role clashes between serving the public and putting the law into force; and the demands of shift job, particularly alternating shifts, which lead to changes in the law enforcer’s private life and body routine. What are the Effects of Stress on Law Enforcers? Work-related stress can have an effect on individual’s character, performance at work, and/or wellbeing. Studies have connected psychological stress as a major contributing factor in these health disorders as acute nervous problems, gastrointestinal failures, neurosis, skin problems, coronary heart disease, and several other mental and physical problems (Williams & Sommer, 1994). A number of studies on stress have been performed as regards to its impacts on law enforcers. According to DIANE (1990), interviews with law enforcers in Cincinnati showed the officers think their works had negatively impacted their family and personal lives. Moreover, 32% of the 100 law enforcers interviewed disclosed stomach disorders and 24% disclosed headaches (p. 5). A study conducted in 1972 that reviewed records in Tennessee’s mental health facilities and hospitals, which comprised those of law enforcers and other working groups, showed that law enforcers had more health disorders, specifically circulatory and digestive problems, than other jobs (DIANE, 1990, 5). A particular research on law enforcement reported that the beginning of health disorders takes place in a law enforcer’s career (Chopko, 2010). According to DIANE (1990), 15% of the law enforcers in the research had cholesterol levels which made them more vulnerable to coronary heart disease; 56% were overweight; and 27% has high blood sugar (p. 5-6). The above findings indicate that law enforcement work is associated with severe health problems, mostly cardiovascular, respiratory, and digestive. However, a researcher, studying physiological impacts of stress on law enforcers, reported that law enforcement is not unique to other jobs with regard to physiological disorders (Regehr & Bober, 2005). Chopko (2010) stated that such physiological disorders may originate from association with the working class, rather than from association with particular working groups. Taking away the propaganda and exaggeration from the subject of law enforcement stress, it becomes clear that law enforcers do endure severe physical problems. Inopportunely, there is a dearth of current literature in this field that shows a direct causal connection between particular health disorders and occupational stressors (Tanigoshi, Kontos, & Remley, 2008). Besides the physical problems facing law enforcers, there are several widespread emotional disorders that have been associated with elevated stress levels in law enforcement work. These disorders have normally been observed in family problems, such as divorce, sexual promiscuity, workaholism, alcoholism, suicide, burnout, and trauma (Tanigoshi et al. 2008). According to Tedeschi and colleagues (1998), the issues that have been given much attention in research are suicide, alcoholism, and divorce. How to Reduce Stress in Law Enforcement? Ways to lessen stress in law enforcement have been classified into three groups: (1) counseling the law enforcer experiencing stress; (2) enhancing the ability of law enforcers to cope with stress; and (3) getting rid of the stressors (Tanigoshi et al. 2008). The first technique of stress therapy entails providing expert counseling for stressed law enforcers. Either a gradual upsurge of occupational pressure or a serious situational crisis to an unrelieved and risky level can make a law enforcer appropriate for professional support. Although almost all communities have expert counselors on hand, it is advisable for the law enforcement agency to hire a permanent counselor or psychologist (DIANE, 19990). According to MacNair (2002), this is the part of stress therapy programs where the biggest weight has been put since the 1970s. Williams and Sommer (1994) argue that almost all individuals possess a valuable unused resource to aid them in dealing with stress, independently. However, they further argue, this resource will stay unused if the person does not know how to completely take advantage of it him/herself. Chopko (2010) suggest training for law enforcers to aid them in identifying and understanding their own responses to different stimuli. Moreover, because the law enforcer’s task, significantly, involves relating with others, Chopko (2010) propose training that deals with what impact these aspects as fear, motivations, character, emotion, state of mind, etc. have on individual behavior. This method puts emphasis on raising the awareness or knowledge of individual law enforcers on how to enhance their interpersonal abilities in coping with everyday difficult circumstances. According to Regehr and Bober (2005), there have been numerous courses developed to enhance the law enforcer’s capacity to cope with stress through exercise on stressful situations before their condition worsen. Of the three forms of stress therapy techniques, the third, recognizing and getting rid of the occupational stressors, is the most successful. A law enforcer on the street has accumulated a rich reserve of experience and personally identifies the stressors that affect him/her. By hiring a group of veteran law enforcers to give a discussion about stress crises, major stressors can be recognized (Tanigoshi et al. 2008). When the key stressors are identified, strategies have to be created on how these stressors could be removed. This, according to Tanigoshi and colleagues (2008), apparently, is a quite simplistic therapy; not to mention that it is perhaps the least applied technique for treating stress in law enforcement. An accurate understanding of stress in law enforcement is vital; proper treatment could put off permanent psychological and social problems, like suicide, protracted unemployment, seclusion, aggression, alcoholism, and divorce. As stated by the DSM III-R measure, stress, particularly posttraumatic stress disorder, has a chronic and acute type. Therapy results in chronic individuals are usually dismal (Williams & Sommer 1994). For instance, Burnstein and associates (1988 as cited in Williams & Sommer, 1994, p. 326), in a private office environment, stated that as chronicity worsens, the rate of withdrawal escalated. The idea provided by, and the remedy of, posttraumatic disease (PTD) is different from that of more severe PTSD. Law enforcers experiencing PTD reveal a combination of sensations of being intolerably exhausted in the face of numerous traumas, profound embarrassment, and links of current traumas to past ones. The yearning of law enforcers to go back to the traumatic setting of law enforcement becomes unsure or is at times absent (Williams & Sommer, 1994). According to Tedeschi and colleagues (1998), this meant removal from a meaningful work, wherein they had willingly spent a great deal of their lives, is embedded against the backdrop of their individual experience. It is not easy to differentiate between PTD and PTSD. Nevertheless, the evaluation of the various symptoms is quite vital so as to develop treatment and enable an accurate diagnosis. The components of the procedure for PTSD therapy can be included in PTD therapy in a basically different setting (Williams & Sommer, 1994). Still, according to Williams and Sommer (1994), it is vital to include treatment in PTD since, in almost all instances it is no longer possible to return to the place of work. Additional studies are required to improve understanding of, and to advance, therapy courses for PTD and PTSD. In conclusion, there is an urgent need for effective stress reduction courses for law enforcers, and possibly the major feature of any course is an approval or support from administrative personnel. Thus, law enforcers should have the ability to recognize that their superiors understand their great vulnerability to occupational stressors and give law enforcers an atmosphere of recognition. The circumstances wherein law enforcers are implicated can seriously affect average and healthy individuals. Because law enforcers have to be informed of the forms of psychological and physiological responses one could encounter as an outcome of participation in violent confrontations, mass tragedies, or bombing, early training is a very critical feature of any stress reduction program in law enforcement. References Chopko, B. (2010). Posttraumatic Distress and Growth: An Empirical Study of Police Officers. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 64(1), 55+ DIANE (1990). Preventing Law Enforcement Stress: The Organization’s Role. Washington, DC: DIANE Publishing. MacNair, R.M. (2002). Perpetration-Induced Traumatic Stress: The Psychological Consequences of Killing. Westport, CT: Praeger. Regehr, C. & Bober, T. (2005). In the Line of Fire: Trauma in the Emergency Services. New York: Oxford University Press. Tanigoshi, H., Kontos, A. & Remley, T. Jr. (2008). The Effectiveness of Individual Wellness Counseling on the Wellness of Law Enforcement Officers. Journal of Counseling and Development, 86(1), 64+ Tedeschi, R., Park, C., & Calhoun, L. (1998). Posttraumatic Growth: Positive Changes in the aftermath of Crisis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Williams, M.B. & Sommer, J.F. Jr. (1994). Handbook of Post-Traumatic Therapy. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Read More