NCJ Number
138705
Journal
Police Journal Volume: 65 Issue: 3 Dated: (July-September 1992) Pages: 247- 250
Date Published
1992
Length
4 pages
Annotation
This article examines the pros and cons of using an outside consultant or in-house psychologist to provide counseling for police personnel, and recommends a combination of the two approaches.
Abstract
Over the last few years, it has become more acceptable for police officers to seek professional help with problems associated with occupational stress. At issue for many police departments is whether such services should be provided by an outside consultant or an in-house psychologist. The use of a consultant has the advantages of costing less than in-house psychologists, because the service is not offered full-time, and of having the appearance of being independent of police managerial influences; however, it has the disadvantages of lacking service continuity and of being outside the police subculture. In-house psychologists, on the other hand, would be more accessible to officers, have a greater understanding of police work and the stresses involved, and would be integrated into a close-knit community. The short-term costs of an in-house program, however, may render it unobtainable by smaller divisions in the police service; and officers may view the program as having close ties to management, such that they distrust its confidentiality. The most effective solution to this dilemma may be the use of a combination of both types of service. Short-term counseling could be conducted by an in- house professional, and clients could be referred to outside specialists for long-term counseling. A large number of clients could be served, and the costs could be contained. 8 references