It has been noted that while demand for police services has risen over the years, their budgets and resources have remained static, or even declined, requiring police to focus attention on smooth and efficient systems of operation in order to problem-solve the demand versus ability-to-supply issue (Kennedy, 1993). Kennedy (1993) notes that the utilisation of partner agencies can help alleviate resource constrictions by drawing on their assistance and potential resource-pool, allowing room for any savings in police resources to be invested in other important and strained areas. While this problem-solving strategy to help save and increase valuable resources has much potential, the inter-agency
relationship between police and mental health services may be more complicated and difficult to transverse than such a solution suggests.
As discussed earlier, police are increasingly coming into contact with those with mental illness (Patch & Arrigo, 1999). In the annual New Zealand police report for 2006/2007 (New Zealand Police, 2007) police provided custody and escort services to 8,438 people with a mental illness or disability. This figure does not include mentally ill who committed a crime
Introduction 47 that resulted in arrest and prosecution, nor does it begin to comment on the number of
incidents police were called to which were resolved informally. Such interactions with those with mental illness have the potential to utilise a great deal of police officers’ time, with one study finding that 61.3% of New Zealand police reported the time spent with mentally ill persons was ‘more’ or ‘a great deal longer’ than time spent with the mentally well they interacted with (Rowe, 2001).
There are also unique complications to interactions with those with mental illness which may result in longer interactions and a greater use of resources than for those who are mentally well. If a person believed to have a mental illness is also under the influence of substances, mental health workers will often not respond to assess until the individual has detoxified, necessitating the use of police custody in the interim. Keeping such individuals in custody requires ‘jailors’, resulting in the restriction of police officers from engaging in their usual duties while they oversee the prisoner, or the hiring of temporary jailors which requires police budgets to stretch to accommodate the added expense (Plowman, 2006). Plowman (2006) further emphasises the demands that interactions with those with mental illness place upon the police by noting more officers are needed if the person acts violently and that vehicles and officers often need to stay with the individual while waiting for DAOs or other relevant mental health personnel to arrive, which can be quite a lengthy period due to the heavy workload such personnel are under. Even the transportation of those with mental illness can be problematic for resources given that the geographic nature of New Zealand will often require officers to transport people to or from rural areas which can take up several hours of valuable time (Plowman, 2006).
48 Introduction So how do the police feel about the resource and time demands created by responding to those with mental illness? Not surprisingly, this has been a source of frustration fuelled, in part, by having to perform duties considered ‘not real police work’ (Cotton, 2004; Fry et al., 2002; Rowe, 2001; Watson et al., 2005; Wells & Schafer, 2006). Fry et al. (2002) report that this can create tensions for police officers because they are aware of other competing demands in light of time consumption and what they consider their ‘real job’ to be. Rowe (2001) found 57% of New Zealand police surveyed felt they were not the appropriate agency to be providing services for the mentally ill, with 68.8% reporting they could not effectively address the issues such situations presented and 79.3% were frustrated with the amount of time such callouts require. Such frustrations may be exacerbated if the lengthy wait for mental health personnel to respond fails to gain the individual in question access to such services (Green, 1997). Patch and Arrigo (1999) note this can result in police failing to pursue admittance of the individual into mental health service provision due to the anticipated lengthy wait and lack of guarantee it will produce a resolution to the situation. Green (1997) suggests frustrations concerning access to mental health services may explain why the majority of calls involving those with mental illness are resolved informally.
Informal resolution may be a problem-solving technique utilised to avoid handing the individual over to the criminal justice system which may not be the appropriate service provider for such individuals, or the mental health system which may not be able to accommodate the individual. Alternatively, Watson et al. (2005) note that because dealing with the mentally ill may not be regarded as ‘real’ police work, and that police do not get rewarded for such work, they may avoid or quickly dismiss cases involving the mentally ill to enable resuming their ‘real’ police duties.
Because of the limited officer training concerning mental illness combined with strained police resources and limitations of police powers in interactions with those with mental
Introduction 49 illness, the relationship between the police force and mental health agencies is extremely
important. Police must rely on mental health service providers to respond and assist where possible in order to attempt resolution for those with mental illness in the community. If cohesive and coordinated, such a relationship would weaken demands and frustrations of police officers, but if uncoordinated and fragmented such services can further contribute to the tension involved in policing the mentally ill. How is the coordinated response
understood by police officers?