Police use of force standards and mental health crises in the United States: Identifying research and policymaking targets

Abstract

An area of psychology-law research and policy that requires increased attention is the use of force during encounters with someone in mental health crisis. Cases in which law enforcement officer (LEO) intervention during a mental health crisis leads to injury or death of the person in crisis underscore the need to understand what behaviors and circumstances are relevant in excessive force litigation, what concepts may benefit from empirical research, and what facets of policies and precedent may require modification. In particular, the current national and international attention to the United States' external mechanisms of control over police conduct (i.e., criminal and civil proceedings against officers) suggests that excessive force jurisprudence is ripe for examination of its utility and fairness in shaping how police should interact with people with mental illness. Excessive force jurisprudence contains complex legal standards with which many psychology-law practitioners, researchers, and even policymakers are likely unfamiliar, however. The current paper explicates external methods of control over police conduct in the United States by reviewing excessive force jurisprudence and identifying points in need of research and policy attention.