Five Things You Should Think About Before Deploying a Taser on Someone in Mental Health Crisis

---

One of the great things about training all over the country is that I have the opportunity to constantly meet new people and learn from their experiences. This usually consists of hearing stories of real calls or incidents they have navigated. These stories often include lessons learned as well as colossal failures. Based on these experiences and lessons, I have compiled the top five things I believe you should consider before deploying a taser on a person in mental health crisis.

1. Use of a Taser is not de-escalation

Deploying a Taser will not be viewed as a de-escalation of force, no matter the outcome. As I said, I’m lucky to meet awesome people while traveling and learning about other trainings. One of the newest ideas I’ve heard is if you use force to neutralize a potential or active threat, then it is consequently a de-escalation of the situation. There are numerous reasons that logic is flawed, and I will quickly explain the two main reasons.

First, it assumes that the attempted use of force will be successful. Nothing we do is 100% effective ­­– if it were, we would only do that one thing (See #2). Second is that the general public does not understand the technicalities of de-escalating a situation like a law enforcement officer or lawyer does. When the world hears on the news that an officer Tasered someone, they instantly perceive it as an escalation of force.

2. Have a backup plan

Tasers have a high failure rate on their first iteration. They are extremely effective tools for law enforcement and prevent both officer injury and suspect injury, so I am not condemning Taser. In fact I think every patrol officer should have one.

A study conducted by Florida Gulf Coast University for the National Institute for Justice found that out of 2113 first iteration deployments, 1264 of them were effective. That is about a 59.8% success rate, which is only a little better than a coin flip, which is 51% when you pick heads. This slightly increases to 68.1% for a second integration. You can find the whole 104-page explanation here.

3. Consider the consequences

Any rapport that you have built with the person in crisis will be reset to zero once they are Tased. I get it, you have to do what you have to do, and a mental health crisis is never an excuse to hurt others. Even so, being Tased is not a pleasant experience, and it will evoke an emotional response from the person on the other end of the probes. You will need to rebuild your relationship and trust from that point forward.

4. Do you have the right tool for the job

You should never use a Taser in a deadly force situation unless you have some form of lethal cover, preferably from another competent officer. Leave the double fisting for weekends with your buddies. Holding your firearm with one hand and your taser with the other is asking for trouble. This article can explain and introduce you to sympathetic trigger pulls click here.

5. Tasers are viewed as a significant use of force

When Tasers first became available to law enforcement, many departments categorized them with OC Spray in the use of force continuum. Most departments now have it categorized as striking force, which is the same as a steel baton. Over time, the view on Taser’s classification changed for many reasons. There are lawsuits concerning a specific heart disorder called excited delirium that are connected to Taser.

There are the injuries that occur, but not from the Taser. Injuries often happen from the physical fall resulting from your skeletal muscle system being electronically taken over. Then, there is the case law. A well-known Fourth Circuit of Appeals case classified it as serious injurious force. You can find a great dissection of that case here.

Summing Up

Utilizing a Taser when dealing with a person in mental health crisis is a lot more complicated than it seems on the surface. It is a tool on your belt that should be used when appropriate. However, it is not a magic device that will solve all your problems in seven seconds. In fact, it may make things worse if you are not strategic in your utilization, and I would never bet my life on it, metaphorically or literally. What do you think the go-to tool for officers confronting a person in mental health crisis should be? Let me know in the comments.

5 Things every officer should know about de-escalation.

If you work in law enforcement and you haven’t heard of de-escalation, you must have been out on extended leave. It’s the new buzzword coming from the mouths of politicians, reporters, teachers, and worst of all, departmental brass. When it comes to de-escalation, these are the five things you need to know.

1. De-escalation is not just verbal.

Commonly referred to as verbal de-escalation, true de-escalation is not that simple. If you attempt to de-escalate someone using only your verbal skills, you will have a very low success rate. Studies have shown that most communications between humans are non-verbal.

The standard is the 7-38-55 rule, which corresponds to how humans communicate their emotions: 7 percent through speaking, 38 percent through tone of voice, and 55 percent through body language. You can read more about the 7-38-55 rule on MasterClass here.

2. Not everyone can be de-escalated.

I know – I know that no one wants to hear this, but it’s an absolute fact. We need to know this from the beginning. Failure to understand this could cause you to overestimate your ability or underestimate the need for another plan of action, resulting in officer and citizen safety concerns.

How do I know this? Simple. Because I have had to carry a toddler in the middle of a tantrum out of a grocery store. If anyone can be de-escalated with my significant educational advantage, superior intellect and greater maturity and patience, why couldn’t I de-escalate a toddler?

If a person does not have the mental capacity to regulate their emotions or has no desire to de-escalate, all the training in the world will not fix it. The good news is most people do not fit into that category.

3. Do not make it worse.

The first goal in every de-escalation strategy should be doing your best to not make it worse. I know, that sounds so simplistic, but ask yourself on the way to the scene, “what could make this worse?” Then, begin to take steps to prevent that from happening.

Some things that can make situations worse are large audiences, loud noises, or a backup officer with a bad attitude. Remember, you will not be held accountable for things that took place prior to your arrival.

4. Gain control of the environment.

Do not start the process by immediately trying to control the person that is out of control. The first thing we teach our students how to do is control the environment. Cops hate it when someone is not listening or is a perceived threat. Whenever this happens, we go straight to asserting authority over that person in hopes of them acquiescing.

The truth is, they are the hardest, most unpredictable thing to control. Calm your workspace first: compliant bystanders, shut down traffic, empty out businesses. Start with the easy stuff. Once that is done, you can focus on the more difficult stuff.

5. De-escalation is not a noun or a verb.

Ok grammatically speaking it is a verb but I'm speaking of mindset. De-escalation is a desired outcome. It is not something you can actually hold or a specific thing that you alone can do. It takes, at an absolute minimum, two people to de-escalate a situation. One person is there to set the stage and direct the participant (you), and another to begin to self-regulate and make the choice to bring the tone down (person in crisis).

Clearing Up

In conclusion, de-escalation training is crucial for officer safety and public trust. However, this training needs to be realistic and practically applicable on the street. You cannot successfully train cops to be psychiatrists, and then expect them to perform at that level alone at 3AM when they haven’t used the skills in the last six months.