Police work has undergone a substantial, if not quantum, shift since its original rusk of alerting the community to attacks from without. With the shift in population to industrial urban areas and transient lil\'styles, the Police have expanded "keeping the pc, ace" to include regulatory functions as well as protection, investigation, enforcement, and prevention. The shift to an urban industrial community has been accompanied by proportional and steady erosion of lamilies, religion, kinshil)s, and uaditions which had functioned to regulate and stabilize the interaction Ibr the community members. People have become more transient, they know less about their neight• and their neighbors know less about them. Order and regulation increasingly come from withot,t rather than from within s(y,:ial systems. The internal order of tile conmmnity increasingly comes under scrutiny and regulation of the Police. This may vary from enforcing clean air and pornography regulations, statues made by agencies outside the community and without benefit of representation, to dealing with the very fabric of the community, in cases such as child abuse, customer disputes, neighbor disputes, ehlerly "d3use, domestic abuse, juvenile problems, mental health problems, drug abuse, gangs, homelessness, school liaison, and community service. These complaints may or may not be criminal, ~rious or necessarily life-threatening. They do, however, comprise the most difficult areas of law enforcement--areas that typically use more staff hours, produce more repcat calls, create greater incidents of injury to Officers, generate citizen and media complaints, and result in stress R~r the Officers. These are the areas which require additional informed judgement and for which currently there is the least amount of formal training. An article in the Chicago Sunday Tribune, July 2 l, 1991, pointed trot how governmental agencies, particularly Police and courts, are used ira re.solving disputes or alleviating the dissatisfaction of one person with the actions of another. Thus, "keeping the peace" has become a matter of Police entering the interpersonal and contextt,al areas of citizens' daily life issues, the ones originally regulated by religion, tradition and family. The Police have shifted from upholding laws to enforcing values to maintaining the s~.ltus quo. Police are now asked to intervene in systemic or interactional problems occurring within the commanity which are not necessarily criminal in nature but brought about by interpersonal conflict. Many times, the basis for a citizen's complaint is one in(lividual citizen's dissatisfaction with tile actions of another citizen--often a matter of outcomes which do not match that citizen's expectations. Frequently, the problems that arise are common, daily life incidents, and responsive to effective resolution, but these citizens arc cither unwilling or unprepared to solve such problems. Instead, they apply "attempted solutions" which either maintain the problems or e~alate them. These are typically known as "more of the same" interventions. A citizen encounters situations which he finds disturbing to him and his perception of how things should be. He then tends to define the citizen producing such disturbance as "disturbed, disorderly, antagonistic, unreasonable, or mentally ill." The citizen fails to recognize the systemic or interactive nature of his behavior. The way in which he chooses to interact with the other citizens in that context is what really determines the success o, failure of the outcome. The citizen generally holds the sense of personal entitlement. He calls the Police to 'fix' the situation which Ire has often produced by his ill-conceived interaction with another. He does not recognize that he needs to change his own |rerceptions and behaviors and that his " attempted solutions" only tend to make matters worse. If re)thing else, his actions serve to confirm his perceptions and leave little doubt that his actions were accurate and w~u'ranted. He is convinced that others are unreasonable