|
By Dawn-Elise Snipes, MHS, CRC, NCC Charles Snipes, Certified Law Enforcement Officer Dawn-Elise Snipes is a doctoral student in Counselor Education at the University of Florida. She is specializing in women's issues in law enforcement. She has worked for the last three years as a Certified Rehabilitation Counselor. She recently became a Nationally Certified Counselor. Currently, she is registered with the State of Florida as a Licensed Mental Health Counselor Intern. Charles Snipes has been a law enforcement officer for the last four years. He recently finished his coursework for his Bachelor of Science degree. In a time when law enforcement officers are exposed to more tragedy and violence than ever before, they are asked to contend with repeated victimization without being given access to appropriate services. Officers avoid seeking counseling because of the stigma associated with asking for emotional help as well as the fear that what is said in private will become public. Recent studies have illustrated that, due to the chronic stress experienced in the line of duty, law enforcement officers are demonstrating symptoms of severe physical and psychological strain. In a study done by Richmond et al. (1998) 852 law enforcement officers were surveyed. Forty eight percent of male and forty percent of female law enforcement officers reported excessive drinking, and about the same percentage reported excessive eating. These behaviors can be explained, in large part, as reactions to extreme stress. Due to faulty language in the laws of many states, people who have had only a five-day seminar and a high school diploma are representing themselves as counselors. Although their services as peer counselors are invaluable, the needs of an officer after a critical incident, both legally and clinically, far exceed the training of a peer counselor. Florida Statute 491.002 states that: ". . .the practice of clinical social work, marriage and family therapy and mental health counseling by those not qualified to practice such professions presents a danger to the public health, safety and welfare." Recently, in a major county in Florida, an officer was involved in a controversial shooting. The incident involved a vehicle pursuit of a stolen car. At the end the pursuit the suspect exited the vehicle and was then shot by the officer. The particulars of the shooting are not the focus of this article, but the events that followed. This incident is an example of what mental health professionals call a "critical" incident. These incidents are so called because of the severe mental distress they cause the involved officer(s). In this case the officer was extremely shaken afterwards, but, was afraid to talk to anyone because of the legal investigation that was sure to follow. One of the detectives on scene suggested that he talk to a "critical incident counselor." (In this case, the "critical incident counselor" was a fellow law enforcement officer who had received approximately 40 clock hours of training in crisis intervention with fellow officers.) The officer did in fact discuss the incident with the "critical incident counselor." Although, this meeting was helpful to the officer at the time, it would come back to haunt him. When a criminal investigation began into the incident, this "critical incident counselor" was subpoenaed to testify. This alarmed and shocked both the officer and "critical incident counselor " because they both thought their conversation that night was legally protected from forced disclosure. IT WAS NOT. There are several issues which this case brings up. First, in Jaffee vs. Redmond (1996) the U.S. Supreme court decided: " We hold that confidential communications between a licensed psychotherapist and her patients in the course of diagnosis and treatment are protected from compelled disclosure under Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence (Remley, Herlihy & Herlihy, 1997)." Jaffee v. Redmond (1996) was also a case of privilege between a Licensed Clinical Social Worker and a law enforcement officer after a critical incident. The next point that needs to be addressed is the difference between "privileged" and "confidential." While confidentiality is of the utmost importance in client-therapist communications, it has limitations both ethically and legally. Confidentiality simply means that two people will keep their conversations secret from others. Confidentiality has many legal limits however. First, if a third party is present during the conversation between the counselor and the officer, the communication may not be considered confidential or privileged. In the event the client announces that he or she intends to harm himself/herself or another identifiable person, or if "the legal requirements demand disclosure," the therapist must comply. Additionally, with few exceptions, even though two parties agree a communication is confidential it may not be privileged. Privilege is a legal standard that protects people from having their confidence breached in court. The "critical incident counselor" who spoke to the officer was informed, during the 40 clock hours of training, that information learned in these debriefings was confidential, but was never promised or informed about privilege. This "critical incident counselor" acted in good faith to help a fellow officer unaware that although their conversation was confidential it was not necessarily privileged. The reason it was not necessarily privileged is it does not meet the above cited U.S. Supreme Court standard. According to the ruling, the confidential communication must be between a licensed mental health professional and his/her client. It should be noted that some states have adopted more lenient statutes regarding who may have privilege, but the federal ruling in Jaffee v. Redmond indicates that the privilege only applies to licensed mental health professionals. The point for an officer to remember following a critical incident is that communications with a "counselor" may not be legally protected is if the "counselor" is not a licensed mental health professional. So the question an officer should ask before talking to any "counselor" following a critical incident is "ARE YOU A STATE LICENSED MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL?" If the "counselor" answers "NO" understand your conversations may not be legally protected, held as privileged. In Florida, a state licensed mental health professional includes: Licensed Clinical Social Workers (LCSW), Licensed Mental Health Counselors (LMHC), Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist (LMFT), psychologists and psychiatrists (F.S. 90.503). To be a licensed mental health professional, in the any state, there are very specific educational requirements. These include, but are not limited to a minimum of sixty credit hours of core courses at the graduate level plus 3000 clock hours of face-to-face supervised clinical experience. The haphazard use of the title counselor by unlicensed people has lead to a gross misrepresentation of the profession and caused naive officers to fall victim to the legal system while trying to get help. In the future, it is my hope that 1) officers are educated about who does and does not have privilege, 2) officers are aware that not everyone who calls themselves a counselor, even if they work in an Employee Assistance Program, is a licensed therapist and therefore may not be afforded privilege, 3) there is a Licensed Mental Health Counselor trained in critical incident debriefing on-call for officers, and 4) when the title "counselor" is used it is made clear whether the person is licensed or not.
REFERENCES Carlier, I., Lamberts, R. & Gerson, B., (1997), Risk factors for posttraumatic stress disorder in police officers: a prospective anaylsis. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 185(8), 498-506 Haberman, G. (ed.) (1997) Looking back and moving forwards: 50 years of New Zealand psychology. Wellington; N.Z. Psychological Society Inc. Remley, T., Herlihy, S. (1997) The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Jaffee v. Redmond: Implications for counselors. Journal of Counseling and Development, 75 2`3-217 Richmond, r., Wodak, L, & Heather, N. (1998). How heathly are the police? A a survey of lifestyle factors. Addictions, 93 1729-1737
|