Kirk's Masters Thesis Chapter 2: An organized look at the pertinent literature
Since many people with disabilities have contact with criminal justice professionals, it is important for criminal justice professionals to know how to effectively and appropriately interact with them. The Americans’ with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) provides in-depth guidelines as to what criminal justice professionals need to consider and do in order to fairly treat people with disabilities.
Title II of the ADA prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in state and local government services, programs, and employment. Law enforcement agencies are covered because they are programs of state or local governments, regardless of whether they receive federal grants or other federal funds. The ADA affects virtually everything that officers and deputies do such as receiving citizen complaints, interrogating witnesses; arresting, booking, and holding suspects; operating telephone (911) emergency centers; providing emergency medical services; enforcing laws; and other duties (U.S. Department of Justice [DOJ], 2003).
Furthermore, The ADA covers a wide range of individuals with disabilities. “An individual is considered to have a "disability" if he or she has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, has a record of such an impairment, or is regarded as having such an impairment” (DOJ, 2003).
An online booklet by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) called, First Response to victims of crime who have a disability, gave examples of how unexpected actions taken by some people with disabilities can be misconstrued by criminal justice professionals as suspicious or illegal activity or uncooperative behavior. One example was given when an officer approaches a vehicle and asks the driver to step out of the car. The driver, who has a mobility disability, reaches behind the seat to retrieve her assistive device for walking. “This appears suspicious to the officer” (DOJ, 2003). The article also stated that individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, or who have speech disabilities or mental retardation, or who are blind or visually impaired may not recognize or be able to respond to police directions. These individuals may erroneously be perceived as uncooperative. The article gave the following example.
An officer yells "freeze" to an individual who is running from an area in which a crime has been reported. The individual, who is deaf, cannot hear the officer and continues to run. The officer mistakenly believes that the individual is fleeing from the scene. Similarly, ordering a suspect who is visually impaired to get over "there" is likely to lead to confusion and misunderstanding, because the suspect may have no idea where the officer is pointing (DOJ. 2003).
Furthermore, the DOJ article stated that some people with disabilities may have a staggering gait or slurred speech related to their disabilities or the medications they take. These characteristics, which can be associated with neurological disabilities, mental/emotional disturbance, or hypoglycemia, may be misperceived as intoxication. The article gave two examples of these types of situations occurring. One example was the following.
An officer observes a vehicle with one working headlight and pulls the vehicle over. When the driver hands the registration to the officer, the officer notices that the driver's hand is trembling and her speech is slurred. The officer concludes that the individual is under the influence of alcohol, when in fact the symptoms are caused by a neurological disability (DOJ. 2003).
The other example was the following.
A call comes in from a local restaurant that a customer is causing a disturbance. When the responding officer arrives at the scene, she discovers a 25-year-old man swaying on his feet and grimacing. He has pulled the table cloth from the table. The officer believes that the man has had too much to drink and is behaving aggressively, when in fact he is having a seizure (DOJ. 2003).
In summary, the DOJ offered tips on how criminal justice professionals can avoid the above situations:
· When approaching a car with visible signs that a person with a disability may be driving (such as a designated license plate or a hand control), the police officer should be aware that the driver may reach for a mobility device.
· Using hand signals, or calling to people in a crowd to signal for a person to stop, may be effective ways for an officer to get the attention of a deaf individual.
· When speaking, enunciate clearly and slowly to ensure that the individual understands what is being said.
· Finally, typical tests for intoxication, such as walking a straight line, will be ineffective for individuals whose disabilities cause unsteady gait. Other tests, like breathalyzers, will provide more accurate results and reduce the possibility of false arrest. (DOJ, 2003).
Typical ways of transportation may be dangerous or not accessible for many people with mobility disabilities. For example, using the typical transportation could be harmful when placing someone with a disability under arrest. The person with a disability is removed from their wheelchair and placed on a bench in a paddy wagon. The person is strapped to the bench with their own belt. When the vehicle begins to move, they fall off of the bench and are thrown to the floor of the vehicle where the person remains until arriving at the station. Thus, criminal justice professionals need to use caution not to harm an individual or damage his or her wheelchair. The best approach is to ask the person what type of transportation he or she can use, and how to lift or assist him or her in transferring into and out of the vehicle. However, the DOJ stated that, “some individuals who use assistive devices like crutches, braces, or even manual wheelchairs might be safely transported in patrol cars” (DOJ, 2003). Nevertheless, the DOJ also stated that, “safe transport of other individuals who use manual or power wheelchairs might require departments to make minor modifications to existing cars or vans, or to use lift-equipped vans or buses” (DOJ, 2003). Furthermore, criminal justice agencies may consider other community resources, such as Metro Mobility, MTC, county / city accessible vans, or accessible taxi services.
Criminal justice professionals are required by the ADA to ensure effective communication with individuals who are hearing challenged / impaired. Whether a qualified sign language interpreter or other communication aid is required will depend on the nature of the communication and the needs of the requesting individual and the situation. For example, some people who are deaf do not use sign language for communication and may need to use a different communication aid or rely on lip-reading. In one-on-one communication with a person who lip-reads, a criminal justice professional will need to face the person directly, and needs to ensure that the communication takes place in a well-lighted area. However, criminal justice professionals should generally not rely on family members, who are frequently emotionally involved, to provide sign language interpreting. Also according to the DOJ, “the length, importance, or complexity of the communication will help determine whether an interpreter is necessary for effective communication” (DOJ, 2003). The DOJ listed the following examples.
· In a simple encounter, such as checking a driver's license or giving street directions, a notepad and pencil normally will be sufficient.
· During interrogations and arrests, a sign language interpreter will often be necessary to effectively communicate with an individual who uses sign language.
· If the legality of a conversation will be questioned in court, such as when Miranda warnings are issued, a sign language interpreter may be necessary. Police officers should be careful about miscommunication in the absence of a qualified interpreter, because a nod of the head may be an attempt to appear cooperative in the midst of misunderstanding, rather than consent or a confession of wrongdoing.
· In general, if an individual who does not have a hearing disability would be subject to police action without interrogation, then an interpreter will not be required, unless one is necessary to explain the action being taken. Furthermore, Examples of other communication aids, called "auxiliary aids and services" in the ADA, that assist people who are hearing challenged / impaired or totally deaf include the exchange of written notes, telecommunications devices for the deaf (TDD's) (also called text telephones (TT's) or teletypewriters (TTY's)), telephone handset amplifiers, assistive listening systems, and videotext displays. (DOJ, 2003).
Also “the ADA requires that the expressed choice of the individual with the disability, who is in the best position to know her or his needs, should be given primary consideration in determining which communication aid to provide” (DOJ, 2003). However, the criminal justice agency can make the ultimate decision. Nevertheless, the criminal justice agency should try to honor the person’s choice unless it can demonstrate that another effective method of communication is readily available. Also individuals with hearing and speech disabilities must have direct access to "911" or similar emergency telephone services, meaning that emergency response centers must be equipped to receive calls from TDD and computer modem users without relying on third parties or state relay services. It is important that operators are trained to use the TDD when the caller is silent, and not only when the operator recognizes the tones of a TDD at the other end of the line.
People who have vision, mental, learning, or even physical disabilities may need extra assistance in filling out forms such as police reports. Criminal justice professionals can easily give assistance by offering to read out loud the forms to the person with the disability and/or offer to physically write what they want to say on the forms. Also criminal justice professionals can offer to provide the forms in an alternative format. Providing a copy of the forms in large print sometimes meets the individual’s accommodation needs, and this particular accommodation is usually as simple as using a copy machine or computer to increase type size. However, criminal justice professionals should never assume that people with disabilities need or want assistance or accommodations. Nevertheless, criminal justice professionals should always offer extra assistance and ask the individual what type of accommodations they would prefer.
People with disabilities must have equal access to criminal justice services, including correctional facilities, however, the ADA is flexible in how to achieve that goal. The ADA requires programs to be accessible to individuals with disabilities but not necessarily each and every facility. Structural alterations or adaptations to existing criminal justice agencies are often required in order to have to create effective access. However, occasionally it may be effective to use alternative methods, such as relocating a service to an accessible building, or having a criminal justice professional meet or go directly to the individual with the disability. “Whatever approach to achieving "program access" is taken, training of officers and deputies, well-developed policies, and clear public notice of the approach will be critical to ensuring successful ADA compliance” (DOJ, 2003). Nevertheless, criminal justice agencies are not required to undertake alterations that would impose undue financial and administrative burden. However, if a particular alteration or adaptation would impose an "undue burden", agencies must choose an alternative that ensures access to its programs and services.
The ADA also mandates criminal justice agencies to make reasonable modifications in their policies, practices, and procedures that are necessary to ensure accessibility for individuals with disabilities, unless making such modifications would fundamentally alter the program or service involved. There are many circumstances that may indeed cause criminal justice agencies to need to modify their standard policies and practices to accommodate a person with a disability. An article from the DOJ gave the following examples of such circumstances.
· A department modifies a rule that prisoners or detainees are not permitted to have food in their cells except at scheduled intervals, in order to accommodate an individual with diabetes who uses medication and needs access to carbohydrates or sugar to keep blood sugar at an appropriate level.
· A department modifies its enforcement of a law requiring a license to use motorized vehicles on the streets, in order to accommodate individuals who use scooters or motorized wheelchairs. Such individuals are pedestrians, but may need to use streets where curb cuts are unavailable.
· A department modifies its regular practice of handcuffing arrestees behind their backs, and instead handcuffs deaf individuals in front in order for the person to sign or write notes.
· A department modifies its practice of confiscating medications for the period of confinement, in order to permit inmates who have disabilities that require self-medication, such as cardiac conditions or epilepsy, to self-administer medications that do not have abuse potential.
· A department modifies the procedures for giving Miranda warnings when arresting an individual who has mental retardation. Law enforcement personnel use simple words and ask the individual to repeat each phrase of the warnings in her or his own words. The personnel also check for understanding, by asking the individual such questions as what a lawyer is and how a lawyer might help the individual, or asking the individual for an example of what a right is. Using simple language or pictures and symbols, speaking slowly and clearly, and asking concrete questions, are all ways to communicate with individuals who have mental retardation. (DOJ, 2003).
“The Supreme Court has determined it is unconstitutional to execute the mentally handicapped, but juries can ignore the evidence and sentence individuals to death who might not understand how they got there or perhaps even what is happening to them” (Pollock, 2004, p.113). Therefore, criminal justice professionals often need to interact with people who have mental illnesses especially as criminals.
An estimated 191,000 mentally ill people are currently housed in state prisons, which roughly accounts for 10 percent of the inmate population. In some correctional institutions, such as New York City's Riker's Island with its 3,000 mentally ill inmates, the prison has become the state's largest psychiatric facility. Over the last 10 years, the mentally ill portion of Connecticut's prison population has gone from 24 percent to 40 percent. In Los Angeles, 50 percent of those entering the county jail are identified as mentally ill. (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2006, p.262).
Clear, Cole, and Reisig offer a partial cause for the high incarceration rate of criminals with mental illnesses compared to prisoners who don’t have mental illnesses.
Mass closings of public hospitals for the mentally ill began in the 1960s. At the time, new psychotropic drugs made treating patients in the community seem a more humane alternative to hospitalization. It also promised to be less expensive. Soon, however, it became apparent that community treatment works only if patients take their medication. Widespread homelessness was the most public sign that the community treatment approach had its shortcomings. With the expansion of prisons and the greater police emphasis on public-order offenses, many mentally ill individuals are now arrested and incarcerated. These inmates tend to follow a revolving door from homelessness to incarceration and then back to the streets. (Clear et al, 2006, p.262).
Mentally ill prisoners pose challenges for correctional professionals. For example, “mentally ill inmates in state and federal prisons are more likely to be involved in fights than other inmates are, and more than 60 percent of mentally ill state prisoners have been formally charged with rule violations.44 Correctional workers are usually unprepared to deal with the mentally ill” (Clear et al, 2006, p.262). The availability and type of prison mental health treatment programs vary. The two most common types involve therapy/counseling or dispensing medications. “One in every eight inmates in state prisons receives counseling services, and approximately one in ten receives psychotropic medications” (Clear et al, 2006, p.262). Furthermore, although some inmates benefit from the regular medication they receive in jail or prison, others suffer as the stress of confinement deepens their depressions, intensifies delusions, or leads to mental breakdown and some even commit suicide.
"Mental illness encompasses a number of distinct brain disorders such as manic-depressive illness, schizophrenia, major depression, and severe anxiety that disrupt a person's mood balance, thought processes, memory, sensory input, feelings, and ability to reason and relate to others" (Ashcroft, Daniels & Gillis, 2002, p.IV). “More than 7 million adults and 5 million children in the United States have severe mental illness which diminishes their capacity to meet the ordinary demands of life” (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p.IV). Mental illness should not be confused with mental retardation. People with mental illness are usually of normal intelligence but may have difficulty functioning at normal levels due to their illness.
Symptoms of mental illness vary from individual to individual depending on the type and severity of the disorder. Many symptoms are not readily observable from outward appearances but are noticeable in conversation. According to the DOJ, the following symptoms can be indications that a victim may have mental illness:
· Accelerated speaking or hyperactivity.
· Delusions and paranoia. For example, false beliefs that one is a famous person or that others are trying to harm one.
· Hallucinations, such as hearing voices or seeing, feeling, or smelling imaginary things.
· Depression.
· Inappropriate emotional response. For example, silliness or laughter at a serious moment.
· Unintelligible conversation.
· Loss of memory. Not ordinary forgetfulness, but rather an inability to remember the day, year, or where one is.
· Catatonia, which is characterized by a marked lack of movement, activity, or expression.
· Unfounded anxiety, panic, or fright.
· Confusion. (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p.IV).
Furthermore, the DOJ offered tips on how criminal justice professionals can be effective in responding to crime victims who have mental illness
· Approach victims in a calm, non-threatening, and reassuring manner. Victims may be overwhelmed by delusions, paranoia, or hallucinations and may feel threatened by you or afraid of you. Introduce yourself personably by name first, then your rank and agency. Make victims feel they are in control of the situation.
· Determine whether victims have a family member, guardian, or mental health service provider who helps them with daily living. Contact that person immediately.
· Contact the local mental health crisis center immediately if victims are extremely agitated, distracted, uncommunicative, or displaying inappropriate emotional responses. Victims may be experiencing a psychiatric crisis.
· Ask victims if they are taking any medications and, if so, the types prescribed. Make sure victims have access to water, food, and toilet facilities because side effects of the medications may include thirst, urinary frequency, nausea, constipation, and diarrhea.
· Conduct your interview in a setting free of people or distractions upsetting to victims. If possible, only one officer should interview victims.
· Keep your interview simple and brief. Be friendly and patient and offer encouragement when speaking to victims. Understand that rational discussion may not be possible on some or all topics.
· Be aware that victims experiencing delusions, paranoia, or hallucinations may still be able to accurately provide information outside their false system of thoughts, including details related to their victimization and informed consent to medical treatment and forensic exams.
· Avoid the following conduct in your actions and behavior with victims:
· Circling, surrounding, closing in on, or standing too close.
· Sudden movements or rapid instructions and questioning.
· Whispering, joking, or laughing in their presence.
· Direct continuous eye contact, forced conversation, or signs of impatience.
· Any touching.
· Challenges to or agreement with their delusions, paranoia, or hallucinations.
· Inappropriate language, such as "crazy," "psycho," and "nuts."
· Back off and allow victims time to calm down before intervening if they are acting excitedly or dangerously and there is no immediate threat to anyone's safety. Outbursts are usually of short duration.
· Break the speech pattern of victims who talk nonstop by interrupting them with simple questions, such as their birth date or full name, to bring compulsive talking under control.
· Do not assume that victims who are unresponsive to your statements cannot hear you. Do not act as if they are not present. Be sensitive to all types of response, including a victim's body language.
· Understand that hallucinations are frighteningly real to victims. Never try to convince victims that their hallucinations do not exist. Rather, reassure victims that the hallucinations will not harm them and may disappear as their stress lessens.
· Acknowledge paranoia and delusions by empathizing with victims' feelings but neither agree nor agitate victims by disagreeing with their statements. For example, if victims state that someone wants to harm them, reply with: "I can see that you're afraid. What can I do to make you feel safer?" Recognize also that victims who state that others are trying to harm them may be the victims of stalking or other crimes.
· Continually assess victims' emotional state for any indications that they may be a danger to themselves or others.
· Be honest with victims. Getting caught by victims in your well-intentioned deception will only increase their fear and suspicion of you.
· Provide for victims' care by a family member, guardian, or mental health service provider before leaving them. (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p.IV).
Furthermore, The U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) toll-free ADA Information Line answers questions and offers free publications about the ADA. The telephone numbers are: 800-514-0301 (voice) or 800-514-0383 (TTY). Publications are also available from the ADA Website www.ada.gov.
Anyone can be victimized by crime. However, people with disabilities can be more vulnerable to victimization than others in society. People with a mental disability can be less able to recognize and avoid danger, and people with a physical disability can be less able to protect themselves or get away from danger. Furthermore, “victims of crime who have a disability can be less able to contact law enforcement, and without disability accommodations, they would be less able help in the investigation of their victimization” (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p.I). “Numerous research studies indicate that the risk of criminal victimization for people with a disability is much higher than for people without disabilities” (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p.I). Also, people who have a disability are often victimized repeatedly by the same criminals. In general, crime victims who have a disability experience the same concerns and issues as all crime victims; however, there are important differences in how to approach and help victims with a disability.
A handbook from the DOJ gave the following tips for when criminal justice professionals interview crime victims with disabilities.
· Rethink your attitude about people who have a disability (the negative attitudes of others are sometimes their greatest impairment).
· Consider that a person with a substantial disability may be healthier than you.
· Be careful not to label or define people by their impairment. For example, referring to the victim as "a disabled woman" rather than saying the victim is "a woman with a disability" can convey the image of a person who is primarily disabled and secondarily a woman. Similarly, it is better to say "the victim has schizophrenia" or "the victim has a mental illness" rather than "the victim is a schizophrenic" and "the victim is a male with blindness" is better than "the victim is a blind man." In other words, the person has an impairing condition, not the person is that condition.
· Ask victims how they wish to be characterized and how you can communicate with them most effectively. Your respect and sensitivity will ensure that the words you use and accommodations you make are appropriate, not detrimental. The presence of someone familiar to victims or a person knowledgeable about their impairment may also be extremely important for victims and helpful during your interview. But recognize that family members, service providers, and others could be the offenders or could protect the offenders. The presence of these people, therefore, may inhibit victims from fully describing the crime to you for fear of retribution.
· Do not act on your curiosity about the victim's disability. Restrict your questions to those necessary to accommodate the victim's needs.
· Avoid expressing pity with phrases such as "suffering from" Alzheimer's disease and "a victim of mental illness.”
· Speak directly to victims, even when they are accompanied by another person. People who have a disability are sometimes assumed to be incapable of making decisions for themselves.
· Listen to your tone of voice and monitor your behavior to avoid talking down to victims, coming across in a condescending manner, or treating victims as children.
· Do not express admiration for the abilities or accomplishments of victims in light of their disability.
· Be mindful of the underlying painful message communicated to victims by comments such as "I can't believe they did this to someone like you"; "She's disabled and he raped her anyway"; or "To steal from a blind man. That's got to be the lowest." The message is that one considers people who have a disability as "less than" complete human beings.
· Document victims' disability in your incident report and their individualized (1) communication, (2) transportation, (3) medication, and (4) other accommodation needs.
· Ensure that victims are in a safe environment before leaving the scene. Again, recognize that family members, service providers, and others could be the offenders and that an alternate caregiver or shelter may be needed for victims. Contact a victim advocate whenever possible for victim services and follow up.
· Never assume that people with disabilities somehow suffer less emotional trauma and psychological injury than other crime victims. (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p.I).
As depicted in this literature review, there are a multitude of extra issues that criminal justice professionals need to be aware of when they interact with people who have disabilities. Thus although there appears to be resources already available to guide criminal justice professionals to enrich their knowledge of this topic, in an online bulletin from the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) Guidry Tyiska reported that “the victim assistance field adequately identified the best practices for serving victims with unique needs or how to train criminal justice system personnel - including victim specialists - to make services truly accessible to all crime victims” (Guidry Tyiska, 2004). The bulletin also stated that "Children with any kind of disability are more than twice as likely as non-disabled children to be physically abused and almost twice as likely to be sexually abused" (Guidry Tyiska, 2004). Therefore, I believe that it is important to create a document that is simple for criminal justice professionals to read and access, thus they can feel more comfortable than ever to interact and assist citizens with disabilities.
Title II of the ADA prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in state and local government services, programs, and employment. Law enforcement agencies are covered because they are programs of state or local governments, regardless of whether they receive federal grants or other federal funds. The ADA affects virtually everything that officers and deputies do such as receiving citizen complaints, interrogating witnesses; arresting, booking, and holding suspects; operating telephone (911) emergency centers; providing emergency medical services; enforcing laws; and other duties (U.S. Department of Justice [DOJ], 2003).
Furthermore, The ADA covers a wide range of individuals with disabilities. “An individual is considered to have a "disability" if he or she has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, has a record of such an impairment, or is regarded as having such an impairment” (DOJ, 2003).
An online booklet by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) called, First Response to victims of crime who have a disability, gave examples of how unexpected actions taken by some people with disabilities can be misconstrued by criminal justice professionals as suspicious or illegal activity or uncooperative behavior. One example was given when an officer approaches a vehicle and asks the driver to step out of the car. The driver, who has a mobility disability, reaches behind the seat to retrieve her assistive device for walking. “This appears suspicious to the officer” (DOJ, 2003). The article also stated that individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, or who have speech disabilities or mental retardation, or who are blind or visually impaired may not recognize or be able to respond to police directions. These individuals may erroneously be perceived as uncooperative. The article gave the following example.
An officer yells "freeze" to an individual who is running from an area in which a crime has been reported. The individual, who is deaf, cannot hear the officer and continues to run. The officer mistakenly believes that the individual is fleeing from the scene. Similarly, ordering a suspect who is visually impaired to get over "there" is likely to lead to confusion and misunderstanding, because the suspect may have no idea where the officer is pointing (DOJ. 2003).
Furthermore, the DOJ article stated that some people with disabilities may have a staggering gait or slurred speech related to their disabilities or the medications they take. These characteristics, which can be associated with neurological disabilities, mental/emotional disturbance, or hypoglycemia, may be misperceived as intoxication. The article gave two examples of these types of situations occurring. One example was the following.
An officer observes a vehicle with one working headlight and pulls the vehicle over. When the driver hands the registration to the officer, the officer notices that the driver's hand is trembling and her speech is slurred. The officer concludes that the individual is under the influence of alcohol, when in fact the symptoms are caused by a neurological disability (DOJ. 2003).
The other example was the following.
A call comes in from a local restaurant that a customer is causing a disturbance. When the responding officer arrives at the scene, she discovers a 25-year-old man swaying on his feet and grimacing. He has pulled the table cloth from the table. The officer believes that the man has had too much to drink and is behaving aggressively, when in fact he is having a seizure (DOJ. 2003).
In summary, the DOJ offered tips on how criminal justice professionals can avoid the above situations:
· When approaching a car with visible signs that a person with a disability may be driving (such as a designated license plate or a hand control), the police officer should be aware that the driver may reach for a mobility device.
· Using hand signals, or calling to people in a crowd to signal for a person to stop, may be effective ways for an officer to get the attention of a deaf individual.
· When speaking, enunciate clearly and slowly to ensure that the individual understands what is being said.
· Finally, typical tests for intoxication, such as walking a straight line, will be ineffective for individuals whose disabilities cause unsteady gait. Other tests, like breathalyzers, will provide more accurate results and reduce the possibility of false arrest. (DOJ, 2003).
Typical ways of transportation may be dangerous or not accessible for many people with mobility disabilities. For example, using the typical transportation could be harmful when placing someone with a disability under arrest. The person with a disability is removed from their wheelchair and placed on a bench in a paddy wagon. The person is strapped to the bench with their own belt. When the vehicle begins to move, they fall off of the bench and are thrown to the floor of the vehicle where the person remains until arriving at the station. Thus, criminal justice professionals need to use caution not to harm an individual or damage his or her wheelchair. The best approach is to ask the person what type of transportation he or she can use, and how to lift or assist him or her in transferring into and out of the vehicle. However, the DOJ stated that, “some individuals who use assistive devices like crutches, braces, or even manual wheelchairs might be safely transported in patrol cars” (DOJ, 2003). Nevertheless, the DOJ also stated that, “safe transport of other individuals who use manual or power wheelchairs might require departments to make minor modifications to existing cars or vans, or to use lift-equipped vans or buses” (DOJ, 2003). Furthermore, criminal justice agencies may consider other community resources, such as Metro Mobility, MTC, county / city accessible vans, or accessible taxi services.
Criminal justice professionals are required by the ADA to ensure effective communication with individuals who are hearing challenged / impaired. Whether a qualified sign language interpreter or other communication aid is required will depend on the nature of the communication and the needs of the requesting individual and the situation. For example, some people who are deaf do not use sign language for communication and may need to use a different communication aid or rely on lip-reading. In one-on-one communication with a person who lip-reads, a criminal justice professional will need to face the person directly, and needs to ensure that the communication takes place in a well-lighted area. However, criminal justice professionals should generally not rely on family members, who are frequently emotionally involved, to provide sign language interpreting. Also according to the DOJ, “the length, importance, or complexity of the communication will help determine whether an interpreter is necessary for effective communication” (DOJ, 2003). The DOJ listed the following examples.
· In a simple encounter, such as checking a driver's license or giving street directions, a notepad and pencil normally will be sufficient.
· During interrogations and arrests, a sign language interpreter will often be necessary to effectively communicate with an individual who uses sign language.
· If the legality of a conversation will be questioned in court, such as when Miranda warnings are issued, a sign language interpreter may be necessary. Police officers should be careful about miscommunication in the absence of a qualified interpreter, because a nod of the head may be an attempt to appear cooperative in the midst of misunderstanding, rather than consent or a confession of wrongdoing.
· In general, if an individual who does not have a hearing disability would be subject to police action without interrogation, then an interpreter will not be required, unless one is necessary to explain the action being taken. Furthermore, Examples of other communication aids, called "auxiliary aids and services" in the ADA, that assist people who are hearing challenged / impaired or totally deaf include the exchange of written notes, telecommunications devices for the deaf (TDD's) (also called text telephones (TT's) or teletypewriters (TTY's)), telephone handset amplifiers, assistive listening systems, and videotext displays. (DOJ, 2003).
Also “the ADA requires that the expressed choice of the individual with the disability, who is in the best position to know her or his needs, should be given primary consideration in determining which communication aid to provide” (DOJ, 2003). However, the criminal justice agency can make the ultimate decision. Nevertheless, the criminal justice agency should try to honor the person’s choice unless it can demonstrate that another effective method of communication is readily available. Also individuals with hearing and speech disabilities must have direct access to "911" or similar emergency telephone services, meaning that emergency response centers must be equipped to receive calls from TDD and computer modem users without relying on third parties or state relay services. It is important that operators are trained to use the TDD when the caller is silent, and not only when the operator recognizes the tones of a TDD at the other end of the line.
People who have vision, mental, learning, or even physical disabilities may need extra assistance in filling out forms such as police reports. Criminal justice professionals can easily give assistance by offering to read out loud the forms to the person with the disability and/or offer to physically write what they want to say on the forms. Also criminal justice professionals can offer to provide the forms in an alternative format. Providing a copy of the forms in large print sometimes meets the individual’s accommodation needs, and this particular accommodation is usually as simple as using a copy machine or computer to increase type size. However, criminal justice professionals should never assume that people with disabilities need or want assistance or accommodations. Nevertheless, criminal justice professionals should always offer extra assistance and ask the individual what type of accommodations they would prefer.
People with disabilities must have equal access to criminal justice services, including correctional facilities, however, the ADA is flexible in how to achieve that goal. The ADA requires programs to be accessible to individuals with disabilities but not necessarily each and every facility. Structural alterations or adaptations to existing criminal justice agencies are often required in order to have to create effective access. However, occasionally it may be effective to use alternative methods, such as relocating a service to an accessible building, or having a criminal justice professional meet or go directly to the individual with the disability. “Whatever approach to achieving "program access" is taken, training of officers and deputies, well-developed policies, and clear public notice of the approach will be critical to ensuring successful ADA compliance” (DOJ, 2003). Nevertheless, criminal justice agencies are not required to undertake alterations that would impose undue financial and administrative burden. However, if a particular alteration or adaptation would impose an "undue burden", agencies must choose an alternative that ensures access to its programs and services.
The ADA also mandates criminal justice agencies to make reasonable modifications in their policies, practices, and procedures that are necessary to ensure accessibility for individuals with disabilities, unless making such modifications would fundamentally alter the program or service involved. There are many circumstances that may indeed cause criminal justice agencies to need to modify their standard policies and practices to accommodate a person with a disability. An article from the DOJ gave the following examples of such circumstances.
· A department modifies a rule that prisoners or detainees are not permitted to have food in their cells except at scheduled intervals, in order to accommodate an individual with diabetes who uses medication and needs access to carbohydrates or sugar to keep blood sugar at an appropriate level.
· A department modifies its enforcement of a law requiring a license to use motorized vehicles on the streets, in order to accommodate individuals who use scooters or motorized wheelchairs. Such individuals are pedestrians, but may need to use streets where curb cuts are unavailable.
· A department modifies its regular practice of handcuffing arrestees behind their backs, and instead handcuffs deaf individuals in front in order for the person to sign or write notes.
· A department modifies its practice of confiscating medications for the period of confinement, in order to permit inmates who have disabilities that require self-medication, such as cardiac conditions or epilepsy, to self-administer medications that do not have abuse potential.
· A department modifies the procedures for giving Miranda warnings when arresting an individual who has mental retardation. Law enforcement personnel use simple words and ask the individual to repeat each phrase of the warnings in her or his own words. The personnel also check for understanding, by asking the individual such questions as what a lawyer is and how a lawyer might help the individual, or asking the individual for an example of what a right is. Using simple language or pictures and symbols, speaking slowly and clearly, and asking concrete questions, are all ways to communicate with individuals who have mental retardation. (DOJ, 2003).
“The Supreme Court has determined it is unconstitutional to execute the mentally handicapped, but juries can ignore the evidence and sentence individuals to death who might not understand how they got there or perhaps even what is happening to them” (Pollock, 2004, p.113). Therefore, criminal justice professionals often need to interact with people who have mental illnesses especially as criminals.
An estimated 191,000 mentally ill people are currently housed in state prisons, which roughly accounts for 10 percent of the inmate population. In some correctional institutions, such as New York City's Riker's Island with its 3,000 mentally ill inmates, the prison has become the state's largest psychiatric facility. Over the last 10 years, the mentally ill portion of Connecticut's prison population has gone from 24 percent to 40 percent. In Los Angeles, 50 percent of those entering the county jail are identified as mentally ill. (Clear, Cole, & Reisig, 2006, p.262).
Clear, Cole, and Reisig offer a partial cause for the high incarceration rate of criminals with mental illnesses compared to prisoners who don’t have mental illnesses.
Mass closings of public hospitals for the mentally ill began in the 1960s. At the time, new psychotropic drugs made treating patients in the community seem a more humane alternative to hospitalization. It also promised to be less expensive. Soon, however, it became apparent that community treatment works only if patients take their medication. Widespread homelessness was the most public sign that the community treatment approach had its shortcomings. With the expansion of prisons and the greater police emphasis on public-order offenses, many mentally ill individuals are now arrested and incarcerated. These inmates tend to follow a revolving door from homelessness to incarceration and then back to the streets. (Clear et al, 2006, p.262).
Mentally ill prisoners pose challenges for correctional professionals. For example, “mentally ill inmates in state and federal prisons are more likely to be involved in fights than other inmates are, and more than 60 percent of mentally ill state prisoners have been formally charged with rule violations.44 Correctional workers are usually unprepared to deal with the mentally ill” (Clear et al, 2006, p.262). The availability and type of prison mental health treatment programs vary. The two most common types involve therapy/counseling or dispensing medications. “One in every eight inmates in state prisons receives counseling services, and approximately one in ten receives psychotropic medications” (Clear et al, 2006, p.262). Furthermore, although some inmates benefit from the regular medication they receive in jail or prison, others suffer as the stress of confinement deepens their depressions, intensifies delusions, or leads to mental breakdown and some even commit suicide.
"Mental illness encompasses a number of distinct brain disorders such as manic-depressive illness, schizophrenia, major depression, and severe anxiety that disrupt a person's mood balance, thought processes, memory, sensory input, feelings, and ability to reason and relate to others" (Ashcroft, Daniels & Gillis, 2002, p.IV). “More than 7 million adults and 5 million children in the United States have severe mental illness which diminishes their capacity to meet the ordinary demands of life” (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p.IV). Mental illness should not be confused with mental retardation. People with mental illness are usually of normal intelligence but may have difficulty functioning at normal levels due to their illness.
Symptoms of mental illness vary from individual to individual depending on the type and severity of the disorder. Many symptoms are not readily observable from outward appearances but are noticeable in conversation. According to the DOJ, the following symptoms can be indications that a victim may have mental illness:
· Accelerated speaking or hyperactivity.
· Delusions and paranoia. For example, false beliefs that one is a famous person or that others are trying to harm one.
· Hallucinations, such as hearing voices or seeing, feeling, or smelling imaginary things.
· Depression.
· Inappropriate emotional response. For example, silliness or laughter at a serious moment.
· Unintelligible conversation.
· Loss of memory. Not ordinary forgetfulness, but rather an inability to remember the day, year, or where one is.
· Catatonia, which is characterized by a marked lack of movement, activity, or expression.
· Unfounded anxiety, panic, or fright.
· Confusion. (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p.IV).
Furthermore, the DOJ offered tips on how criminal justice professionals can be effective in responding to crime victims who have mental illness
· Approach victims in a calm, non-threatening, and reassuring manner. Victims may be overwhelmed by delusions, paranoia, or hallucinations and may feel threatened by you or afraid of you. Introduce yourself personably by name first, then your rank and agency. Make victims feel they are in control of the situation.
· Determine whether victims have a family member, guardian, or mental health service provider who helps them with daily living. Contact that person immediately.
· Contact the local mental health crisis center immediately if victims are extremely agitated, distracted, uncommunicative, or displaying inappropriate emotional responses. Victims may be experiencing a psychiatric crisis.
· Ask victims if they are taking any medications and, if so, the types prescribed. Make sure victims have access to water, food, and toilet facilities because side effects of the medications may include thirst, urinary frequency, nausea, constipation, and diarrhea.
· Conduct your interview in a setting free of people or distractions upsetting to victims. If possible, only one officer should interview victims.
· Keep your interview simple and brief. Be friendly and patient and offer encouragement when speaking to victims. Understand that rational discussion may not be possible on some or all topics.
· Be aware that victims experiencing delusions, paranoia, or hallucinations may still be able to accurately provide information outside their false system of thoughts, including details related to their victimization and informed consent to medical treatment and forensic exams.
· Avoid the following conduct in your actions and behavior with victims:
· Circling, surrounding, closing in on, or standing too close.
· Sudden movements or rapid instructions and questioning.
· Whispering, joking, or laughing in their presence.
· Direct continuous eye contact, forced conversation, or signs of impatience.
· Any touching.
· Challenges to or agreement with their delusions, paranoia, or hallucinations.
· Inappropriate language, such as "crazy," "psycho," and "nuts."
· Back off and allow victims time to calm down before intervening if they are acting excitedly or dangerously and there is no immediate threat to anyone's safety. Outbursts are usually of short duration.
· Break the speech pattern of victims who talk nonstop by interrupting them with simple questions, such as their birth date or full name, to bring compulsive talking under control.
· Do not assume that victims who are unresponsive to your statements cannot hear you. Do not act as if they are not present. Be sensitive to all types of response, including a victim's body language.
· Understand that hallucinations are frighteningly real to victims. Never try to convince victims that their hallucinations do not exist. Rather, reassure victims that the hallucinations will not harm them and may disappear as their stress lessens.
· Acknowledge paranoia and delusions by empathizing with victims' feelings but neither agree nor agitate victims by disagreeing with their statements. For example, if victims state that someone wants to harm them, reply with: "I can see that you're afraid. What can I do to make you feel safer?" Recognize also that victims who state that others are trying to harm them may be the victims of stalking or other crimes.
· Continually assess victims' emotional state for any indications that they may be a danger to themselves or others.
· Be honest with victims. Getting caught by victims in your well-intentioned deception will only increase their fear and suspicion of you.
· Provide for victims' care by a family member, guardian, or mental health service provider before leaving them. (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p.IV).
Furthermore, The U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) toll-free ADA Information Line answers questions and offers free publications about the ADA. The telephone numbers are: 800-514-0301 (voice) or 800-514-0383 (TTY). Publications are also available from the ADA Website www.ada.gov.
Anyone can be victimized by crime. However, people with disabilities can be more vulnerable to victimization than others in society. People with a mental disability can be less able to recognize and avoid danger, and people with a physical disability can be less able to protect themselves or get away from danger. Furthermore, “victims of crime who have a disability can be less able to contact law enforcement, and without disability accommodations, they would be less able help in the investigation of their victimization” (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p.I). “Numerous research studies indicate that the risk of criminal victimization for people with a disability is much higher than for people without disabilities” (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p.I). Also, people who have a disability are often victimized repeatedly by the same criminals. In general, crime victims who have a disability experience the same concerns and issues as all crime victims; however, there are important differences in how to approach and help victims with a disability.
A handbook from the DOJ gave the following tips for when criminal justice professionals interview crime victims with disabilities.
· Rethink your attitude about people who have a disability (the negative attitudes of others are sometimes their greatest impairment).
· Consider that a person with a substantial disability may be healthier than you.
· Be careful not to label or define people by their impairment. For example, referring to the victim as "a disabled woman" rather than saying the victim is "a woman with a disability" can convey the image of a person who is primarily disabled and secondarily a woman. Similarly, it is better to say "the victim has schizophrenia" or "the victim has a mental illness" rather than "the victim is a schizophrenic" and "the victim is a male with blindness" is better than "the victim is a blind man." In other words, the person has an impairing condition, not the person is that condition.
· Ask victims how they wish to be characterized and how you can communicate with them most effectively. Your respect and sensitivity will ensure that the words you use and accommodations you make are appropriate, not detrimental. The presence of someone familiar to victims or a person knowledgeable about their impairment may also be extremely important for victims and helpful during your interview. But recognize that family members, service providers, and others could be the offenders or could protect the offenders. The presence of these people, therefore, may inhibit victims from fully describing the crime to you for fear of retribution.
· Do not act on your curiosity about the victim's disability. Restrict your questions to those necessary to accommodate the victim's needs.
· Avoid expressing pity with phrases such as "suffering from" Alzheimer's disease and "a victim of mental illness.”
· Speak directly to victims, even when they are accompanied by another person. People who have a disability are sometimes assumed to be incapable of making decisions for themselves.
· Listen to your tone of voice and monitor your behavior to avoid talking down to victims, coming across in a condescending manner, or treating victims as children.
· Do not express admiration for the abilities or accomplishments of victims in light of their disability.
· Be mindful of the underlying painful message communicated to victims by comments such as "I can't believe they did this to someone like you"; "She's disabled and he raped her anyway"; or "To steal from a blind man. That's got to be the lowest." The message is that one considers people who have a disability as "less than" complete human beings.
· Document victims' disability in your incident report and their individualized (1) communication, (2) transportation, (3) medication, and (4) other accommodation needs.
· Ensure that victims are in a safe environment before leaving the scene. Again, recognize that family members, service providers, and others could be the offenders and that an alternate caregiver or shelter may be needed for victims. Contact a victim advocate whenever possible for victim services and follow up.
· Never assume that people with disabilities somehow suffer less emotional trauma and psychological injury than other crime victims. (Ashcroft et al., 2002, p.I).
As depicted in this literature review, there are a multitude of extra issues that criminal justice professionals need to be aware of when they interact with people who have disabilities. Thus although there appears to be resources already available to guide criminal justice professionals to enrich their knowledge of this topic, in an online bulletin from the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) Guidry Tyiska reported that “the victim assistance field adequately identified the best practices for serving victims with unique needs or how to train criminal justice system personnel - including victim specialists - to make services truly accessible to all crime victims” (Guidry Tyiska, 2004). The bulletin also stated that "Children with any kind of disability are more than twice as likely as non-disabled children to be physically abused and almost twice as likely to be sexually abused" (Guidry Tyiska, 2004). Therefore, I believe that it is important to create a document that is simple for criminal justice professionals to read and access, thus they can feel more comfortable than ever to interact and assist citizens with disabilities.