you also further testified here as well that a large, rather large increase in suicide is seen in officers with 15-19 years of service. the question becomes there is a

population of police officers that are going out, particularly those they might age group okay. we are in the twilight of our careers, and much of what you're talking about, much of the research i assume has been validated pretty much on this population, on my population come if you will. if we consider the fact that there's a younger population of young men and women that are coming our police departments today, entirely different generation, 21, 22 years of age anecdotally they are much healthier, they grew up in a time when they become more health conscious because the parents more health conscious. they are less likely to drink, smoke, hang out, do the police club clique club that introduced a lot of these illnesses that we are very much familiar with. but what's really striking is the fact that for many of these young people, they don't stay in the profession very long as well either. so they are not looking to do 20 or 30 years where there's going to be this cumulative amount of

stressors that they're going to endure over time that put them at risk. i would like e.g. because the research and clinical work expound a little bit on that but in addition to that as well here's the real important question. when we send our military people to war and we expose them to the type of ptsd which usually goes gone the normal realm of anyone's exposure is what ptsd grows out of they are there for a certain amount of time. in policing your exposed to the stressors on the street in this country for 20 or 35 years over the course of your career. you were not in there for a tour, get the help you need and go on for the rest of your life. but police it could be much longer. if that is the case, would it be considerable, i mean would it be reasonable to consider that of the profession, and because of

the stressors that are associated with policing on the streets of this country every day and everything that what officers have to deal with would you be looking young officer that we need to bring on an expose him or her to a much shorter career in policing? where retirement becomes earlier than 20 years? and there are some other things that might be helpful to keeping them healthy throughout the course of the career considering that many of them are not going to stick 20 is today, anyway? you know any significance to that whatsoever? >> i agree with you that younger officers are more conscious of their health today, and i've seen a change in debt over the years. during my 23 years as a police officer, from the old school,

you didn't see that. but now you do. you see that probably because of social media, of more exposure to what that health can do to you. i think also young officers are more apt to go for psychological help if they need it. again the old school probably not so much. but one of the sad things i've seen in my research in heart of vascular disease and ptsd is that we look at the mortality studies of police officers police officers compared to the general population die at a younger age some 10 years younger on average than those in the general population. so we are seeing greater numbers of deaths from cardiovascular disease among younger officers, which is kind of surprising and kind of shocking. the thing you should understand about stress is that it is cumulative.

that does your continual exposed drama day after day and stressed there today, eventually it's going to wear your system tempered some of our research showed that the body becomes this regulated under chronic stress. there are certain hormones in the body like cortisol as an example that become so this regulated that the body can't digest anymore to the effect of that stress. when that happens of -- we are seeing greater problems with the disease and that's among officers. i think it is short and the number of readers -- number of years for time and i think it's a great idea but i don't know if it's economically feasible given the cost of training police office today, and given the cost of lost experience. i think 20 years is reasonable if you have resilient people. i think dr. ramey is very accurate in saying that we need to increase the resilience among

officers. if we can do that, we can cut down the effect of stress. so i think that's important. but i think is officers love to see retirement at 15 years instead of 20 but again it may be difficult task. >> i don't have the empirical research base that dr. violanti has. i'm going to go by, clinical express working with officers and a very intriguing point. if they're undergoing psychological problems, family problems and so on, they sort of know on one hand and the kind of getting burned out, but they don't want to quit. the our couple reasons. one reason is they don't want to be seen as a quitter, let our colleagues down seanez knuckling under, folding under pressure and so it. other times the reason may be for practical. they've got 10 years to go, five years ago, two years ago. and want to get tested, get their full pension and lee.

what happens is you officers who really are at best hosting, and the worst underperforming on the job because they're just too burned out to for dramatically. how they got the whizz whole different issue. what might be considered as opposed to an either or retirement plan is perhaps a flexible type of retirement system whereas if you are careful 20, you get your full benefits but perhaps there's a stepwise non-stigmatized with retiring at 15, 10, so one of which is some partial retirement benefit but do not proceed as a burnout case. doesn't have to be done on the basis of a disability. and, therefore, officers who really for whatever reason god bless them, cannot do the job anymore, they have a safe way of leaving law enforcement and not being after and perhaps creating a liability for the agency's as a whole. the other end of the expected i think what you're seeing is this is more of a fast paced world these young people than. the culture has changed.

years ago would you join any company, whether a government agency or private company you sort of had a woman to do type of coverage and career. you start off early work 20 to 30 years, at the end they give you retirement with your gold watch and you are considered having a good career. today most companies are people as independent contractors, very few people of full employment. how young people have responded by turning this around saying is there's no real consistency and loyalty among the organizations that hire us, then we will jump from one thing to another as the situation success. ironically, police agencies are one of the few places where, if somebody wants to and is able to, they can have 20 years of full employment with a generous benefit package. many officers are going to policing to at least partly for that reason alone. i think we need to do strengthen that so officers will feel that they put the time and they will be a blue served their time and retire with honor and with all

the practical benefits that go with it, but have a more flexible way of dealing with this because if an officer cannot do the job anymore we ought to allow that officers otherwise faithfully served a face saving way out. >> just comment dr. miller remind me of the plan i've seen in some industries where the called a face that retirement. in other words, you work full-time for 15 years and then you would phase out your time for the next five years, perhaps worked three quarters time for one year, then halftime the next year and then a quarter time and then out. it seems to work very well in industry but i don't know about policing. it's something that might be possible. >> thank you very much. pose a lopez followed by britney. >> thank you. -- josé lopez. >> i think i have two questions. i wanted to return to the question that tracy had asked

earlier on the panel, and the discussion was a discussion around mandatory counseling of some sort for officers. and so i guess this, the first question is a two-part question. the first part for officer orr images wondering, as a union rep and that someone who is actively engaged in discussion with rank-and-file officers, is something like mandating counseling something that you think other union reps across the country could get behind, and do you think that that is something that the rank-and-file officers across the country would want their union reps to push? and then the second question, or the second part of question one is for dr. violanti, or anyone on the panel. i guess this part of the question has more to do with that piece around mandating.

anything that is mandatory, any agency organization oftentimes is seen as i don't need you demanded anything else. and so what if the process was that maybe it wasn't mandatory but every officer automatically got opted in and had to create some form or fill out some form some self-evaluation in order to opt out? and so there's still an opportunity to make it feel as if it's not mandatory but will take some significant work and some self reflection to be able to kind of appeal and say, this is something that i don't think that i'm in need of and something i want to opt out of. >> thank you. to address your question regarding mandated counseling and my perspective as a union leader counseling is a service. it's not an additional duty that's being imposed upon us to

comply with or some new form we have to learn how to fill out or something coming from the court regarding caselaw where we are exposed to some liability for the normal training we get. counseling as a service. so counseling in itself i don't see how it could be a problem. my union perspective is that i would need to know what consequences could result from that, and whether or not there are opportunities for the officer to take that counseling in their own direction rather than be mandated into a certain direction per the perspective of some administrator. and then the obvious question for me also would be privacy and confidentiality would have to be a requirement for that. discipline could not result from anything that was exposed during the counseling. so just to rehash you know the

counseling service i think it's a great thing. i've seen some policies where it's mandated after a critical incident or, you know but confidentiality has to be paramount, consequences have to be monitored by the employee and the union. discipline cannot result and the officer has to have some say in the course that that counseling takes if it is a long-term thing. >> i agree with officer orr. i think confidentiality is absolutely key. as far as mandatory, that does cause a problem. i think when you force a police officer to do something that he or she doesn't want to do you're going to run into resistance from union and from the officer himself. one of the sessions i was thinking about was what sort of a positive spin on this.

in other words, if you do go for let's say a mental health check, a voluntary mental health check and for some way you are rewarded for that, perhaps incentives of some sort that might work. in other words, don't make it mandatory, make a voluntary but do it positively. that's just an idea i was thinking about. i like the idea of seeing maybe not a psychologist but a year support person, a police officer who is a trained in pure support. officers would rather talk to another police officer then they would to someone else first. i mean psychologists are needed, so that they can come after. but i think peer support is a very important key to getting officers to go for help. >> i had a comment. >> yes. go ahead doctor.

>> one thing that's worked in the pilot study -- can you hear me okay? >> yes. >> is to present the opportunity to officers to have what's called -- session and what that evolves as a confidential visit, can be as long as the officer wanted to be with a mental health professional that's outside of the organization. and what i found over the last couple of years of this is that if you can encourage an officer to participate in one of those sessions, i would say at least 50% of the time they come back and say can we have more of those? of a limited to just one? said doing some kind of incentive like john said to get people to see what it's like that is not as threatening as you might think and it's actually helpful. the other experience i've had over the years working with milwaukee and of the department is sitting down and having the opportunity to tell your story to some in is very powerful, and even had a captain what a mess i feel like i should write you a

check. this was the most therapeutic visit i've had with anybody for a long time, and it was just a simple conversation to talk about what was on his mind and health and and all those topics. i guess my recommendation would be at least make things accessible, maybe try some of these programs that have some built-in tele- mentoring counseling sessions, what if you want to called so officers can contest that ended very confidential way to see that is something they believe will help them. >> thank you. dr. miller? >> as with many of the topics are today the devil is in the details. a number of agencies that work with a big fiber gated model and that is certain types of incidents, for example, officer involved shootings but any officer involved, officer involved shooting is mandatory made to go for critical incident followed which consist of a single session. there's no stigma attached to it but everybody goes was not what one person has been affected

more than anyone else, and the way we conceptualize it just a general checkup checking the points in place of your printer to make sure everything works. overwhelming majority of cases the officer, some papers dated aspect is headed, psychologically the office is critical back to work. occasionally counseling is offered in them accessible but not necessary mandate. there might be some of the situations where the supplies such as hostages centers and so on but for the past winter to officers who are experiencing stress is begin to relate to some combination of personal stresses and work stresses the other way is to make these services accessible. that is, we have a panel of individuals within the community that if you wish to go see a mental health professional for your own reason, that is between you and that mental health professional. just the same as inefficient walks into my office. the key is whether or not the people within that department encourage that. so if somebody says, sarge, lieutenant i'm having trouble

dealing with something and the lieutenant sought him on the back and said, on, but up. very little chance that person will seek out counseling. at the lieutenant says the company, any time off we will deal with it, do what you need to do. as long as that person comes into mental health professionals office, that information is as confidential as any of the patient that would walk in to the only exceptions are the exceptions that would apply to anybody if they're a threat to self or others, if engaging in child abuse. that applies to everyone. mandatory and limited isolated cases we want to see stigmatized the mental health process and make it universal, but voluntary but supported in cases where a well-meaning officer wants to get help for themselves. >> thank you very much. >> i don't -- i think -- [inaudible] >> we are tight on time. i can hold off.

>> i mean, we had a little delay with the technology so if you want, you've got something, feel free. >> so i guess my second question, i mean the one piece that i did want to comment on on the confidentiality peace was the think at a minimum one of the things that we've heard and that has been up for discussion is that when an officer is deemed unfit or unstable to work on a force that has to be some flagging of that so that the officer can't just move to a different location and the picked up by any department. so that's one thing. just to state for the record something that we've been discussing as part of this, as part of the deliberations and we for another panels, i guess my question, my second question is around the role of the department when it actually does happen. and so when an officer is deemed

unfit or unstable, what is the role of the department now to continue to offer support to the officer who probably for a long time was a member of that family? and if not much what should be the department responsibility in making sure that the officer has a mental health support plan? >> i think there's a crucial question. this relates to the whole issue of fitness for duty in general. with the critical incident follow-up, it's important to emphasize to the officer and i to all police agencies that are work with to tell the officer this and i tell them when they come in, and you come in for an officer involved shooting where you've had an experience you may be having some aftereffects of it this is not a formal fitness for duty evaluation but this is not because somebody thought you did something wrong, somebody thought you underperform. this is separate and apart from any investigation that may be going on.

this is something to assess your psychological state to see if you are okay. if for some reason you feel you cannot go back to work or i feel i cannot go back to work, this would be to with at the clinical issue, not as a performance issue. a formal fitness for duty valuation is a specialized evaluation where the officer is miss performing or underperforming and so the police it's deeply psychological reason. but that has to be very carefully separated from a critical incident follow-up on any of the kind of mental health treatment that occurs. and, unfortunately at some of our panelists said, you have a poorly trained psychologist is sometimes conflate the two but sometimes in for help, the officer gives them a bunch of symptoms and the psychologist or mental health practitioner isn't family with the culture they may jump to conclusions, next thing you know they're right down not fit for duty to that is a very important decision you're making about a man or woman's career in life when you make an assessment for fitness of duty and it should not be done in less a formal request for the

assessment has been made. so barring that i think it's important that officers realized that information is going to be confidential. because again we all know, we work with law enforcement. someone once said any police agency is basically a class of fifth grade girls. if somebody comes to me for any kind of scientific logical treatment, i guarantee everyone in the department already knows they're going before i do. so talk about confidentiality we know that cops can be the worst blabbermouths in the business but the confidentiality endears upon us. with a professionals. in other words, we as the mental health professionals and you guys as the top brass as the supervisors need to keep things confidential. if you want to talk about it that's fine but as far as we're concerned unless it involved a formal mandated referral, all right, and that's important, a mandated referral means something that is a fitness for duty evaluation, mandated by the department and, therefore, the results go to the department not between the clinician and the officer.

barring that, that if an officer wants to seek help the lieutenant, the sergeants as i do want to know what went on i don't want to know what you told the guy, all i want to do is get better. if we maintain that distinction and clarify this that's what you mean about devil into in the details because you can dedicate mental health, law enforcement, legal, union reps, in here to hammer this thing out. this is going to be a tough thing to put together but if you do it right it's going to be a powerful force for getting police officers to seek help when they need it. and to make sure that officers who cannot perform the job art out there doing so. >> thank you very much. >> actually saves the second question was one of my questions i just have two quick ones. one is to to in a few and i think a couple times oath in a written and oral testimonies there's been mention of issues of domestic violence, child abuse and other ways in which these

stressors the law enforcement officers do with can impact the home. my question is have you seen any models or do you have any concrete suggestions around the kind of counseling and mental health support that should be provided for partners and children and other intimates of law enforcement officers such that, i i mean i think one of the statistics really talked about the impact of personal life stressors been one of the primary reasons for those unfortunate suicides that you counted. so i'm wondering how we can ensure that families are supported and that those personal stressors are mitigated. >> i can address that real quick. the employee assistance program is in existence, it's pretty fast and officers -- vast. officers can seek that out for themselves or any type of counseling but it could be anything from financial problems where you can be networked with financial advisors help you get your finances in order if you're

going to that type of a crisis. marital crisis problem with julie, substance abuse. and officers can seek that out themselves, and i've seen that happen pretty good. i mean, guys will go for that on their own are made with a nudge from a friend. that can also be mandated through an administrative if there's a work performance related issue, and they can be pushed into direction of the ap. i know the first three sessions are on the house and then following that it falls under your insurance. your subject to the regular co-pays of whatever your policy is. but i know that in our region eap is very active and they come to roll call, couple times a year there is monthly newsletters that are put out people talk about it regularly so it's not some type of phantom service but it's use regulate and i think it's been successful. >> just something very basic

which i did in past was we saw some difficulty communicating when they get home, they can shut down. when the things i did was to have a family police officer session, and we brought them all in together and we talked communication skills. to actually faced each other and to talk to each other, and that seemed to help law. so i think that's one of the real problems we see. there's no communication on the family level when officers get home. if we trained them to do this properly, i think it will really improve the situation. >> i can echo that. i would say at least 75% of the clinical cases that i see of law enforcement officers who come in for counseling, the stresses that they're coming in for don't involve the work as much as they involve the family life.

i think i mentioned earlier that person, the way conceptualize it, you have two legs to stand on, your work late and your family. if both legs or start you could withstand a hurricane but if one is tottering you can certainly an honor happen on the other but if both start ago then you're going down. typical scenario is a police officer whom they've been having difficulties at home family problems, and so on. but they be doing a good job and work as been going well and that something happens at work, and we all know police officers on their all or nothing kind of people, you are only as good as your last screw up another field work is going down and this is that tipping point i can often precipitated into a depression, even suicidal depression and that's why it's important that if it happens they know there's somebody, somewhere they can call, to sort of diffuse the. i want to get back to the issue that one of the panelists mentioned about domestic violence, child abuse and so. child abuse is a reportable

offense to if i become aware that somebody is engage in child abuse, doesn't matter who they are, i have to reported. which wanted to get to the point that it hasn't reached that you. domestic violence although it's not a reportable offense is something that is one of law enforcement dirty little secrets because there is a hybrid of domestic violence within law enforcement families. that would be whole different panel that we don't have time to discuss you but again if you can get in there in the beginning before these things reached a point of no return often you can defuse or stave off worst aspects. italy was down to three road concepts. access to mental-health services, training both a law enforcement have access those services, and mental-health professionals on how to provide proper specialist services to law enforcement and finally support. because if it's not supported from the top it ain't going to happen on the bottom. i think if we can pull these things together, again working out all those pesky little

details, we're going to have a powerful tool in helping law enforcement you with stresses, and is going to prevent a lot of excessive force complaints violence, and other things that do more of what we call this culture of honor in policing. >> thank you. and my final question, something in particular to officer orr you talk about the crisis at sandy hook elementary, and volunteering time to relieve some of those officers. and certainly a great deal of the conversation in ferguson was about the length of the ship and the frequency with which officers have to be out there on the ground. the kind of conflict that created between community and officer, and it currently high stress situation. and so as both an officer who said his experience of related officers in crisis and also as union represented what is your thinking around policies that would dictate on a certain number of hours actually be worked in these i crisis or mass demonstrations situations?

and i think to the question that was asked right before mine, sure those policies also extended folks who may be having performance related health struggles, right? right? should to be kind of limited from participating in those kinds of activities? >> that's an interesting point. i think the current model that i've seen in our region is 16 hours is the max you can work. truck drivers on i would have a maximum amount of hours that they could hide or they will falsely. police work is similar to that in that you need to be awake and, you know, sharp. 16 hours is the current model. i think mandating a reduction in that if there's a performance related issue brings in an economic element to it where specifically in our region in the suburban areas around new york city with the cost of living is very high, police officers cannot live on their

base salary and overtime is requirement. if you want to live within a two hour drive of where we work in fairfield county. so officers regularly work more than their eight hour shift they welcome it. if you're going to mandate a reduction in that you're going to put an added stress are on the person in the financial realm. so that needs to be considered there. and respond to sandy hook, and i imagine in other crises around the country like ferguson or what happened down in staten island following that you know there's a maximum amount of time we can be out there, but sometimes you can't leave. and sometimes that goes for days. following 9/11 offices were mandated 12 hour shifts every day, all days off council. that was because there was a national security issue and you just couldn't leave. nobody could but what it did to your brain, and we are seeing that now but, for public safety

reasons, you couldn't leave. so that has to be considered also. in the regular course of policing, the eight hour shift is enough, and you want to go home after that. sometimes after seeing what you see, it's tough to go home and have dinner with your family. and as dr. violanti said in discussing what you've done in your workday, you have to relive it. so we're taught to compartmentalize some of the things that we deal with but being able to open the doors of the compartment and let it out and let some steam out of the valve before it bursts is really important. but getting back to your question regarding shift time maximums, i know the pushback from the guys would be on the economic and financial part you know, our earning potential can't be limited in that way and less, you know, or performance issues so great that we're now under a fitness for duty problem.

>> i'd like to comment on shift work. i think most departments in a united states are going away from the eight hour shift and move into either a 10 or a 12 hour shifts. this brings up the issue of fatigue. if you work 12 hours on the midnight shift you really can't make sense of thinking straight. it's very difficult to make decisions. it's very difficult not to get frustrated. and get irritated by any little thing if you're up for 12 hours doing police work. additionally we found in in our research that those who worked midnight shifts have a high risk of cardiovascular disease and are more affected by stress. so that's an issue i think that's blossomed out in the united states policing. when you on a special mission like sandy hook or a flood or a hurricane, those situations even get exacerbated worse.

so i don't know how to address this problem but we do see we need more research on what the best shift is for the length of time that officers should work in a day. >> thank you. >> i was just going to say at least truckers have a national standard for how long they can work. we don't have anything like this in law enforcement. acyclic is on the discretion of most departments or most jurisdictions. again, dell in the because let's work something out that accommodates the economic news the health needs and the reality of shift work, and that's something to work towards. they have been devoting national standards for police officers don't feel that they have to fight for a certain shift level they can somebody tell this is the standard, we need to follow it. >> we already short on time so our final question will come from roberto. >> this is for dr. violanti. i'd like to hear a little more about the term the psychological autopsy that you were mentioning. >> sure.

a psychological autopsy business of a retrospective look at the be police officers life. one who performs this would go back and interview relatives friends, look at medical records, basically look at the life of the officer prior to his or her suicide. from that, through close relatives, for example, we could ask questions about mental health. we could ask questions about standardized measures. like stress for example. we could look at medical records. we could go through departments and talk to coworkers. it's a long, involved process but in the end result we pieced this together we can essentially do a retrospective picture of what this officer was like prior to his or her suicide. that's very helpful because if we did many of these we can look for patterns that are prevalent in all police suicides.

and psychological autopsies are performed quite frankly on suicide deaths. generally in the legal profession to determine whether not a death was a suicide or not. we call them the equivocal deaths, and i think this would be very useful research to look at, to tease out exactly what led the officer to this suicide. >> thank you very much, and thank all the panelists are it's been very informative. please join in thanking them for their testimony today. [applause] >> were going to take a very brief break five minutes, just been to transition between panels and then we will resume. thank you. [inaudible conversations] >> coming up, capital is chief

and the head of the national law enforcement officers memorial fund craig floyd talk about officer safety. >> [inaudible conversations] >> we are at the one minute warning. and before we get started let me thank everybody for the patients with our technological bridges but, you know, what they say when you fall off the horse need to get right back up once we'll couldn't straddle the foreskin of this and we'll start off with skype and i think we've got it all fixed so bear with us and i will now turn it over to the co-chair for the next panel. >> good morning again. our second panel is dealing with -- officer safety and we're going to start out this panel

with dr. alexander eastman was a lieutenant and deputy medical director with the dallas police department, and he's participating with us via skype. so welcome doctor eastman, and let's go to via skype. >> thank you very much. i will want to tell you how much i appreciate the invitation and opportunity to present to you all today. attacks a unique opportunity subcommittee of from vacation here in utah and a to thank the men and women of the park city, utah police department, chief carpenter for all their support in getting the technological aspects of this sorted out. or that serve as a lieutenant assigned to our squad you. half-asleep medical often directed -- this has involved a number of law enforcement operations from operational

medicine to guiding chief brown honor most recent people response to an additional work with the dallas police departed i served a similar role with university of texas but in addition underpricing trauma surgeon, board certified in general surgery with added qualification and surgical critical care. i served as the chief of trauma surgery at the trauma center at parkland an an assistant professor of surgery at the university of texas southwestern medical center. in this role i perform direct patient care, teaching, research and lead more than 1000 employees to purchase the india, service line at parkland memorial hospital. for the last decade visit any of our personal and professional cause, has been -- trauma surgery, public health and law enforcement. i come to you from those three perspectives this morning. my first recordation for the task force is that hemorrhage control training has to be a core law enforcement skills across the united states. this bike improvements in

equipment, tactics and trauma care long for remains one of our country's most dangerous occupations. over the last decade or so there's been some increased interest in translating lessons learned from the battlefield the medical lessons learned into civilian law enforcement to it's obvious we as law-enforcement officers are not at war but we are not on the battlefield by some the techniques that a continued through iraq and afghanistan can be easily applied to law enforcement officers. in fact, some of these technics translate very well into what has come to be known as save our own program. from the committee policing perspective there's no finer example of a police department engage in the committee when law-enforcement officer applies his own equippage is a the life of a civilian. in november 2015 the costly superconductive departmentwide deployment of a town officer to program the these kits contain a special operation forces target, why, a module vantage and a

packet of quick clot combat cause but in just 14 months of police officers have saved 12 lives, including two of our own. the state needs have been in addition these technics eventually to be safe in all police settings and at the campus of the university of texas recently consumer program mandatory. this is an inexpensive kit, most of the timeless the $50 the ultimate insurance policy saved the life of one of our police officers been injured in the line of duty. but it can also be turn outward. that leads to my second recommendation to the task force which is that the lessons learned and that that described in a document known as the hartford consensus be embraced as national policy. the hartford consensus was developed and designed from a group draw together by the american college of surgeons and the federal. of investigation, it included dhs, fema the attorney general

of the taken the american college of emergency physicians and several policing agencies. basically what this describe was these hemorrhage control techniques are not just for officer safety, therefore committee safety. as we teach our officers how to perform hemorrhage control, how to save each other we enable them to turn those skills outward in the event of an active shooter or intentional as casually event. as a continuing participant in the hartford consensus i i was please reference the major city chiefs association in its and its continuing and ongoing work in that group. in a late 2014 survey of the major cities chiefs association members, 42 of 70 member agencies have ever been some sort of hemorrhage control training program and equipped their officers. these 42 programs have trained and equipped nearly 200,000 american law enforcement officers and now provide this hemorrhage control coverage to more than 65 million americans in their community. it is an awesome, awesome accomplishment over a very short

period of time. certainly commissioner ramsey as the outgoing president and general stevens as executor should be in great credit to push that forward. my third recommendation is probably my most important one, and that is to develop the ability to track instead law enforcement officer injuries. as a trauma surgeon at an academic level one trauma center, part of my mission is to further the scientific study of improving the care of the injured patient. we review a vast amount of data in order to make our job better and to make us better at doing it every day. presently there is no system in the united states to track law enforcement officer injuries. while many point to the fbi database, the information gained a silly to focus on law enforcement. how far the suspect was from the ceiling, was a day night, with the when it will prove best? the database simply lacks the grinder detailed that we need to give the topic of law enforcement injuries some in depth study.

a robust database of this nature analyzed by medical providers and scientists involved in law enforcement would allow for recommendation in tactics, training, equipment, medical care, and even policies and procedures that are grounded in that interface the dimension between scientific evidence, that's medical practice, and sound policing. our lesser condition and bald the institution of a nationwide peer review system to help us when things don't go exactly as we planned. repairs are made in medicine that patients often pay the ultimate price. yet when this happens doctors nurses, technicians medical students, residents said together having this intensive study in a process known as peer review. they peer review model has been applied in commercial aviation answer other high-risk sectors with great success. in an essay that offered end up saving our own through peer review, a prescription for improved law enforcement office

80 that appeared in the publication from the cops office american policing in 2022, we described the idea of applying peer review principles to the nation's law enforcement officers. arising from this publication a national new miss database and reporting system is currently being deployed by the police foundation. this should help improve officer safety and should begin to help us change the practice taken into place at risk-to review our mistakes and is found, protected fashion. we have to begin to take a hard look and learn from those times when things don't go exactly as planned. we do need some national protection because there needs to be protection from legal discovered on a nationwide level to allow this peer review process to continue. this is what happens in medicine, and trust become if you make a mistake there's still plenty of malpractice claims that can be brought against you but it allows for a frank and honesthonest discussion. so to summarize what they give you again my for recommendations. first, ensure hemorrhage control

training and the provision of hemorrhage control equipment is required at every u.s. law enforcement agency. next embraced the recommendations of hartford consensus as national policy to improve our communities safety from active shooter and intentional mass casually event. third, develop and implement a national comprehensive database for law enforcement officer injuries and treatment. and, finally facilitate legislative protections and national policy to develop a robust peer review management program and united states law enforcement. it is a pledge and the colleges are both as a law-enforcement officer and a caregiver of law enforcement officers. i am humbled and learn to been given this opportunity to represent both of those groups today. the interface between medicine public health and law enforcement has great potential not just as a source for many novel officer safety programs but to harness those programs and transform them into true community policing resources. my most sincere thanks to the

task was to commissioner ramsey, chairwoman robinson, to the president putting his group together for the opportunity to speak to you this morning. >> i hope you can stay with us for the question period. our next witness will be jane castor who is the chief in tampa, florida. thanks for being with us. >> good morning. thank you, commissioner ramsey, professor robinson, director davis and members of the task force on 21st century policing for allowing me to be a part of this process. as you state i'm jane castor and i'm of the chief of police for the tampa police department. when we talk of reducing the number of officer deaths we begin with a focus on training officer safety methods and equipment we provide to our officers. all of these are necessary elements of save policing but i believe they just scrape the surface of the conversation that is needed to make our officers truly safer out on the street.

from where i stand there are three key points that has law enforcement leaders we should focus upon. real-time information for officers responding to in progress calls, community relationships, an officer wellness. with a proliferation of cell phones information is moving at lightning speed. the effect is that officers are arriving on scene much quicker while the offense is in progress. while this increases the chances of apprehension, it also places officers in increasingly dangerous situations. to enhance officer safety, we must put information in our offices hands at comparative speeds. we've been able to do this at the tampa police department in part to a software solution that we helped develop the it provides officers with real-time actionable data on suspects zone activities, hotspots, alerts and bulletins without delay. we also monitor social media for information that may assist responding officers in staying safe as they come upon seems.

with that in mind i would make to recommendations. they should be a dedication to the research into the of solutions to mind law enforcement databases for information that will not only reduce and solve crime but help keep all of our officers a. this cannot be a one time in denver, but rather a continual process. -- one time endeavor. we must publicize best practices and use of social media currently there is no better way to connect with the citizens that we serve. in law enforcement we're only a strong as our relationships with the community. if they trust us they will call us when something is amiss in the neighborhood. so the question that takes to be answered is how do we build that trust. it begins with understanding ourselves and the citizens that we serve. to this and every law enforcement officer should be mandated to complete a course entitled fair and impartial policing the institution of a good has biases and that it is

critical for officers to recognize this and every attempt to set them aside when serving the public. a result will be twofold. officers will develop positive relationships with citizens, and they would be safer in their day-to-day activities. we've spent years building relationships of trust with our community, and i want to highlight quickly just a few programs that have contributed significant to those positive relationships. in 2013 we opened a safe haven for kits and historically high crime neighborhood where no strategy had worked for the preceding decade. wants this afterschool program was launched, crime dropped significantly by the neighborhood could see the officers cared and that's what made the difference. in addition, our squad are required to have front porch will cost twice we can high crime areas or a citizen such a big these interactions allow citizens to personally connect with an officer patrolling the neighborhoods. these initiatives couple with

daily practice of our golden rule, but i do is treated with dignity and respect, create trust which is the foundation of our positive relationship with citizens. one of my favorite sayings is the upside is you get to see things that nobody else gets to see. the downside is you have to see things that nobody should have to see. most officers respond to the situations in the same way. they attempt to bury the memory and move on. at the law enforcement executive, i always felt we failed our offices by not confronting head on the trauma they experienced throughout their careers. to address these issues we started the first responders retreat, a weeklong in house training involving educating others on the physiological and emotional effects of trauma and emd our sessions but many of the officers have described as is a life-saving experience. the underlying nation of laws force that hasn't changed since

the principles of law enforcement were offered in 1829. what has evolved of the task law enforcement law enforcement has become responsible for performingperformedby the service continued to be cut, officers have become the de facto mental health practitioner, social workers and the frontline dealing with those often with substance abuse in addition they have a high level of frustration and anger from citizens for their inability to solve these issues. we simply can't do it alone. these issues require societal solutions. as a whole ugly please officer do an amazing job with a multitude of issues that are called upon to handle, most of which have no clear-cut solution. of course, this is not to say we are always correct, but we must be very careful to avoid holding officers gamble for the inappropriate actions of a few. citizens should feel free to critique and criticize officers and we must be open and accepting of the criticism. however, it should be based in

fact. thankfully the average citizen has no idea what's involved in the with the criminal element. this means were doing our job well. at the same time we are creating a disconnect. it's impossible for citizens to not what challenges and officer must face on a daily basis. as a result, every agency should have a robust citizens academy where the community can learn firsthand how officers are trained, the need for specific equipment and how it is used to we have a ride along as there's nothing more enlightening and walking in officers choose for an evening. lastly i would like to publicly thank director comey for the thoughtful way to which he opened the door for discussion on police and race relations. as stated previously law enforcement must be held accountable. as we continue to discuss the role that law enforcement plays, there must be meaningful and frank discussions about crime in america. we can only grieve that past inequalities can societal

depression and economic disadvantages contribute to crime and disorder. law enforcement did not create these situations, but we can be an important part of the solutions. we must all be willing to work together to make the necessary improvements which will lead to safer communities and the safer working environment for our officers. it is my hope that the door director comey crack is not slammed shut, but opened wide so everyone can be seen and heard. thank you. >> thank you so much chief castor. our next witness is jerry jennings was the sheriff in orange county florida tickets might have some florida representation in such bad weather in washington. >> let me begin by saying good morning to commissioner ramsey and professor robinson, and all members of the task force. it is indeed a privilege for me to be here and to provide testimony in the area of officer safety. as i provide testimony today, i

believe that it is necessary to establish the perspective from which i speak. this is my 34th year as a law enforcement officer working in metropolitan orlando. as a chief executive i've experienced line of duty deaths my officers or deputies nine times. in fact this past february 11 it marked the one year anniversary of the death of on my deputies, jonathan scott pyne, was shot and killed by a burglary suspect one year ago. he left behind a wife and three children under the age of seven. in may of this year just and will be added to the list of more than 20,000 names under national law enforcement memorial. the first step in improving officer safety and wellness is to understand the range and scope of hazards police base in the line of duty. according to the officer down memorial page, as of the 18th, line of duty deaths are down 7%

in 2015. with auto related deaths remain about the same as last year. thus far in 2015 officer deaths by gunfire are also drinking downward. that is good news considering the trend from last year. preliminary data indicates at 126 law-enforcement officers died in the line of duty in 2014. a 24% increase from 2013 when 102 officers were killed. in 2014, 50 officers died by gunfire. this was a 56% increase over the 32 firearms related deaths in 2013. on average, over the last decade, there have been approximately 59,000 assaults against law enforcement officers each year, resulting in approximately 15,000 injuries. i share the summers because the conversation should not only be about those who have died but

must also focus on those who live and what can be done to prevent injury to officers. i subscribe to a profession edict that there's no substitute for training and experience. and striving for optimum officer safety. the use of simulation technology should be seriously considered in modern-day police training. we should and there's our officers in training that realistically depicts what they are likely going to experienced in real world situations. my agency, the orange county sheriff's office in partnership with valencia college recently intimated a simulation training program. deputies and officers use similar firearms in animated centers that require them to make split-second decisions. it is recommended agencies conduct high liability training several times each year for all officers and invite representatives from the media to experience simulation

turning. perhaps this would give both immediate and members of the public a better perspective on the complexity of the split-second decision-making by law enforcement officers. the number of officers who die in the line of duty has not been below 100 since 1944. and police related accidents is the major cause. the below 100 campaign is being embraced by many law enforcement agencies throughout the nation, and is based on the principles of wearing your seatbelt and ballistic vest focusing on what's important and remembering that complacency kills. in addition to driver training it is recommended that is agencies replace their fleet of vehicles, serious consideration should be given to the purchase of vehicles with elysian avoidance technology such as backing sensors, cameras and lame directional indicator to since the events of september 11, our nation has

remained under the threat of domestic terrorism. according to the fbi sovereign citizens pose a growing domestic threat to law enforcement. the core belief of sovereigns is the u.s. government has no authority over them. this movement is alive and flourishing throughout our nation. in fact, just two weeks ago several of my deputies encountered an armed sovereign who shot at them without provocation i might add. he was subsequently mortally wounded when the deputies returned gunfire. research done by the university of maryland determined sob are descendents also be a threat to police. for these reasons it is recommended that more first response training be provided on the topic of domestic terrorism and in particular, the sovereign citizens movement. in summary, the recommendations are develop training that are it's realistic to include

simulation technology, conduct high liability training several times each year for all officers, to build trust, invite me to participation in simulation training. conduct below 100 training. invest in new view collision avoidance technology an increase first response training on domestic air, specifically the sovereign citizens movement. thank you. >> thank you sheriff. then our final witness for this bill is craig floyd who is chairman and ceo of the national law enforcement memorial foundation. well,. >> thank you, and let me say that in more than 30 years as ceo of the national law enforcement officers memorial fund, i've never witnessed more focus, attention, concern about the issue of officer safety and wellness, and i want to applaud this task force, president

obama, attorney general holder and so many others. i look down this road here good friend carol stevens across, you all have been very concerned about this issue for a long time, and i thank you for featuring the attention on it today. i want to put this issue in some perspective. the distinguished panelists before me have done some of that. .. died from other causes. 840 of them by the way from heart attacks, job related harte attacks. over the last decade we