TexasCHLforum.com

by Excaliber »
...it was the aggressor's actions that compelled them to act, and there hadn't been any desire on their part to harm another..

When I first got my CHL I struggled with the thought of having to shoot someone. This was the one thing that helped me more than anything when thinking about having to draw and shoot...I did not instigate this situation, the BG made the decision and not me, I only acted to save my life or the life of my family.

by Excaliber »
Your last point about responsibility and accountability is very well taken. Carrying a defensive firearm is not for living out fantasies. It's a last ditch tool for managing life threatening encounters, and whatever we do with it, we'll have to live with the results, which will be microscopically examined by many others in the cold, hard light of the following day.

I agree, responsibility and accountability should be the foremost thing on our mind when we pick up and holster our firearm to leave the house.

-geo

I am not sure I would accept the over 50% statement for PTSD as a valid statement, but I really have no figures to dispute it either. I have noticed, in my experience, that some people seem mroe susceptible to it than tohers. I have always attricbuted it to their basic personality but, after thinking about the point made ehre, acceptance of what happened as their fault may or may not be as big a factor.

In my case, I was involved in a shooting where we (the other officer who pulled the trigger and I) talked with the psychologist immediately after the incident. The next day, the three of us involved (third officer never got to shoot) all got together and talked about how the incident went down. To the best of my knowledge, none of us ever had a problem with it. Shortly after this, SAPD also started a support team for officers involved in shootings that was just other officers who had been in a similar situation. The thinking in the early 90's was that the talk with the psychologist and the chance to talk with other officers in a peer counseling scenario would lower the long term PTSD effects. I also know officers that retired or resigned after being involved in a shooting, as a result of the emotions.

I was also involved in a car chase where the suspect lost control and had a fatality accident. Five kids who committed a burglary of a closed convenience store for beer and cigarettes. The 16 year old driver died and a 17 year old passenger suspect was permanently paralyzed from the chest down. The others had lesser injuries. The accident happened on IH-10 on a section I drove every day. It took me several years before I could pass that site without thinking about the case and what a waste it had been. It was possibly a mild case of PTSD but I am not sure and never went to a doctor about it.

But my main point is that different people can have different results to the same type of incident, and the same person can have different results to different types of critical incidents. How you feel about it and the amount of control you feel you had are definitely factors that can play into your long term prognosis. It might not hurt to have someone you can call who would know about traumatic stress in addition to the lawyer you should already have a name for.

srothstein wrote:I was also involved in a car chase where the suspect lost control and had a fatality accident. Five kids who committed a burglary of a closed convenience store for beer and cigarettes. The 16 year old driver died and a 17 year old passenger suspect was permanently paralyzed from the chest down. The others had lesser injuries. The accident happened on IH-10 on a section I drove every day. It took me several years before I could pass that site without thinking about the case and what a waste it had been.

That is the more difficult kind of case.

I think I could easily justify a case of shooting a home invader or armed robber (though I don't really know).

An incident involving the death of teenagers made stupid by adolescent hormonal excess and/or booze might be more difficult.

Along with the "anniversary syndrome" that I mentioned earlier is the geographic reaction to a place where something bad happened, or similar locaions.

The key to diagnosing PTSD versus ordinary anxiety or regret is that PTSD is disabling. It affects normal functioning.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote: ....However, IMHO, each individual human being has different responses to stress. Some shrug off a protracted regional disaster. Some are devastated by a minor incident. Each person must seek a solution that works for him or her. There is no universal answer.

- Jim

IMHO, the above statement is quite true. Furthermore, it also applies to the actions/reactions that precipitated the event; i.e., the shooting of the person on the other end of your gun. Granted, we're all tailess bi-peds but that's where the similarity ends.

[quote-"srothsetein"]But my main point is that different people can have different results to the same type of incident, and the same person can have different results to different types of critical incidents. How you feel about it and the amount of control you feel you had are definitely factors that can play into your long term prognosis. It might not hurt to have someone you can call who would know about traumatic stress in addition to the lawyer you should already have a name for.[/quote]

This is definitely true.

I think one of the biggest risk factors is found in situations where there is ambiguity, and a person chooses a course of action that has deadly results. Then the internal "coulda shoulda woulda" starts, and the Monday morning quarterbacks jump in to complicate things further. It can be very difficult for someone to navigate his way through this type of situation without emotional scarring.

Talking with officers who are willing to be very open about what they really experienced after their own incidents is certainly very helpful. In our department we did this on an informal basis, but I think a more structured process would help ensure more uniform results.

I also think it's a management responsibility to monitor officers who have been involved in major incidents for any signs of performance or relationship issues which may stem from the emotional aftermath of the incident they were involved in, and to gently guide the officer to take advantage of appropriate resources when these situations are found.

I also think that a mandatory initial meeting with a qualified trauma counselor right after the incident and several required followup meetings at regular intervals are a good idea too. It may take a while for someone to recognize that the feelings he's experiencing come from the incident he was involved in, and to reach the point where he is willing to talk about them.

For CHL's, there will be no departmental support group or offers of counseling resources, but I would certainly encourage anyone who is having trouble dealing with the aftermath of an incident to seek out a qualified counselor earlier rather than later, before real damage is done to either job performance or personal relationships.

Excaliber wrote:For CHL's, there will be no departmental support group or offers of counseling resources,...

Worse yet, the person's friends, relatives, coworkers, and other acquaintances may react negatively and distance themselves.

You mentioned earlier an incident that upsets a person's world view. When old Joe there who you sit near in church every Sunday blows someone away, it can be quite a shock.

This could affect even the marital relationship, as it sometimes does with LEOs and military people.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:

Excaliber wrote:For CHL's, there will be no departmental support group or offers of counseling resources,...

Worse yet, the person's friends, relatives, coworkers, and other acquaintances may react negatively and distance themselves.

You mentioned earlier an incident that upsets a person's world view. When old Joe there who you sit near in church every Sunday blows someone away, it can be quite a shock.

This could affect even the marital relationship, as it sometimes does with LEOs and military people.

- Jim

Very true.

Involvement in a deadly force incident will show you who your friends are for sure.

Excaliber wrote:I also think that a mandatory initial meeting with a qualified trauma counselor right after the incident and several required followup meetings at regular intervals are a good idea too.

IMO, only if there's an option of seeking alternate assistance, and a qualified mental health professional can terminate the counseling or adjust the program as needed for the individual. Having worked (albeit somewhat peripherally, but it did give me quite a bit of down time to chat with various psychologists, MH counselors, and others) in the field, I would want to be able to pick my own shrink, and have his/her opinion respected as to how often to meet and when it's time to stop.

KD5NRH wrote:

Excaliber wrote:I also think that a mandatory initial meeting with a qualified trauma counselor right after the incident and several required followup meetings at regular intervals are a good idea too.

IMO, only if there's an option of seeking alternate assistance, and a qualified mental health professional can terminate the counseling or adjust the program as needed for the individual. Having worked (albeit somewhat peripherally, but it did give me quite a bit of down time to chat with various psychologists, MH counselors, and others) in the field, I would want to be able to pick my own shrink, and have his/her opinion respected as to how often to meet and when it's time to stop.

I wouldn't have any issue with a provision like that.

The point is to get someone who may need help in front of a competent mental health professional who can deliver what that individual needs.

Unfortunately, what often happens with employer-paid mental health care is that the selection of "providers" is limited.

I suppose that a police department or union will have someone on tap who understands the issues that police officers are likely to encounter.

A person who is not a police officer may be referred to a social worker (MSW) or psychologist who has no experience with these things.

Psychiatrists (MDs) are unbelievably expensive. Private insurance refers to them only in cases of psychosis or life-threatening mental illnesses.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:A person who is not a police officer may be referred to a social worker (MSW) or psychologist who has no experience with these things.

And therein lies my primary issue with mandatory counseling; I'd rather have someone I know, since virtually noone in this area is experienced in the particular issue, I'd like them to at least start with some patient familiarity.

Psychiatrists (MDs) are unbelievably expensive.

And rare as hen's teeth around here. There's one within 60 miles, and that one's swamped already. OTOH, LPCs of varying degrees of competence seem to be all over the place.

I'm confused. I don't know if you a LEO or not.

Law-enforcement agencies have arrangements for mandatory counseling that probably are subject to the usual bureaucratic screw-ups, but may be roughly satisfactory to all parties.

If you have employer-paid medical insurance in a field other than law enforcement, you typically have little choice in "providers" (I dislike the term, but that's what they use).

If you do not have employer-paid insurance, you pay cash.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:I'm confused. I don't know if you a LEO or not.

Law-enforcement agencies have arrangements for mandatory counseling that probably are subject to the usual bureaucratic screw-ups, but may be roughly satisfactory to all parties.

If you have employer-paid medical insurance in a field other than law enforcement, you typically have little choice in "providers" (I dislike the term, but that's what they use).

If you do not have employer-paid insurance, you pay cash.

- Jim

There is nothing about the aftermath of any deadly force incident that is simple, easy, or cheap.

AndyC wrote:Overall, though, I would tend give more credit to mental preparation, more specifically "visualization" -

Thanks. That works with a lot of activities.

- Jim