Conduct Unbecoming: The Inexcusable Failure to Prioritize Mental Health

[PDF Attached for easier viewing]
https://pubs.porac.org/flipbook-porac/2025/08/#p=36
 
“It is a violation of this Department’s policy to engage in conduct which tends to bring the agency or its administrative officers into disrepute; or which destructively criticizes the agency or its administrative officers in the performance of their official duties; or which tends to disrupt or impair the performance of official duties and obligations of employees of the agency.”

This is the standard “conduct unbecoming” language in law enforcement policy manuals nationwide. I don’t know about you, but if a police officer gets a DUI, it does not change my view of the agency they work for. Not that such conduct is acceptable or excusable, but it doesn’t really even affect my view of that officer. It certainly does not make me think, “That police department really must be garbage” because one of their employees made a mistake, especially when in so many cases that officer is personally struggling with their mental health as a result of the sacrifice that they have made to serve and protect. This is even more obvious when the officer is suffering from the all-too-familiar combination of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and alcoholism that leads so many to make out-of-character decisions. Yet, this policy will almost certainly be deemed violated in this scenario.

Law enforcement agencies across this state are, on a daily basis, committing acts or failing to perform a duty in a way that is far more egregious. That conduct disrupts and impairs the performance of their officers in the most profound ways, none more profound than those horrific and tragic instances when an employee takes their own life. I do not write of the crisis of mental health and law enforcement. I write of the crisis of the failure of the powers that be at these agencies to learn lessons from this predictable cycle and to take appropriate action.

Studies show that approximately 35% of peace officers suffer from PTSD.¹ Close to the same number suffer from some form of depression. More than half of police officers reported that they consider quitting their job on a daily or weekly basis. Around 20% of police officers are likely alcoholics, based on self-reporting alone.² The connection between PTSD and substance abuse disorder is obvious, well-studied, and documented.³

No one reading this article will likely be very surprised by these statistics. No one with common sense would expect anything else. When you touch a hot pan with your bare hand, you’re probably going to get burned. When you expose human beings to unspeakable and repeated trauma while doing a job where their physical safety is constantly in jeopardy, where they are expected to work inhuman hours and still be able to testify in court, and where they know any actual, perceived or falsely alleged mistake will have their own employer turn against them and threaten their career (or even liberty) in the blink of an eye, their mental health will likely be compromised. Many will, understandably and unfortunately, do something to try to cope with and drown out the complex trauma.

Every agency has seen it. Every agency knows of people who are suffering within their ranks right now. Yet so many are stuck in the debunked mindset that these injuries are the officers’ “fault.” Rather than treat the medical condition as a medical condition, when the injury results in virtually inevitable misconduct, the officer is often tossed aside. In a world that sadly often comes down to a calculation regarding liability, I believe the feeling is “officer fired, and problem solved.” The problem is, it isn’t.

I have represented countless law enforcement officers suffering from these issues who have found themselves in the crosshairs of the punishment-focused approach. One former client talked to me about how his cries for help within his department were met with concerns that his struggles would make the agency look bad, and ultimately a complete lack of interest in getting him help. Another talked about the way that his agency would regularly joke about death and shooting incidents, greatly exacerbating his mental suffering surrounding these incidents. Cops are assigned to investigate and be exposed to the horrific sights and sounds of fatal traffic collisions, child pornography and homicide, and far too often they’re left on their own to figure out how to deal with it. The simple practice of checking in on the person and asking if they are “OK” was reported to me as important and in many cases completely lacking.

Ideally, of course, agencies should not be doing economic calculations when it comes to helping their people. Ideally, they should take care of the people who make this sacrifice. They should do it for no other reason than that it is the right thing to do.

Sadly, we do not live in an ideal world. But even in a world where decisions related to how to deal with mental health issues within law enforcement come down to the almighty dollar, the costs are far higher when the problems are only dealt with when they manifest in misconduct. When we place officers in these traumatic situations and do not make overt and explicit efforts to prepare them and take care of them along the way, the effects are predictable: misconduct, liability, bad publicity. The cost of dealing with all of this on the back end (lawsuits, internal investigations, arbitration, lawyers’ time) is huge.

If the goal is really to solve a problem, the only calculation that should be done is: How can we prevent or mitigate the effects of the trauma that goes hand in hand with law enforcement work?

The first step, just like with PTSD and alcoholism, ironically, is to acknowledge the problem. Law enforcement, in general, still has a culture problem as it relates to these issues. I want to be precise and balanced here: not every agency is guilty of this. Some are certainly far worse than others, while some are far better. However, for the most part, a major cultural shift is necessary. Most still seem to act upon the harmful and inaccurate mindset that mental/emotional struggles are a controllable weakness that can be overcome with enough willpower. Many still promote or perpetuate an attitude from the top down that makes those struggling apprehensive to seek help. Many have reported to me that they were told quite explicitly not to report. This is a problem.

Once the problem is acknowledged, the next step — and this is vital — is to engage professionals to develop a comprehensive program within the department. The goal must be to develop the best possible science-based, long-term program for law enforcement mental health. This goes back to the principle of cause and effect. Mental health and other experienced professionals must be involved to help come up with a robust and comprehensive program to be implemented at every agency. In other words, knowing what we know, what is the best way to mitigate the occurrence, severity and effect of trauma? Again, some agencies and leaders are asking these questions. Some smaller number are following through. Some are not even at step one.

In my non-expert view, but in consultation with experts in the field, this would mean that as soon as a new officer is hired, they are in contact with people and other services that are designed to usher them through the trauma they will experience. In fact, some agencies are laudably starting before hiring and even before the commencement of the academy. There are resiliency trainings offered at this stage. There are mental health professionals available to check in with trainees throughout the academy process. Future officers who have this experience not only develop skills early on to cope with trauma, but learn not to buy in to an existing stigma about mental health maintenance and treatment. This then becomes a habit and custom that ideally lasts their entire career and life.

Even the hiring process is a crucial component. Does the new officer or lateral hire truly embrace your agency’s focus on mental health, peer support and active participation in these things? Have you conveyed to them your expectations and the importance of this to you? Are you confident they will promote and not detract from this culture? As time goes on, this investment in hiring people with the right attitude while instilling your dedication to their mental health will inevitably pay dividends, both to the bottom line and from a moral perspective.

It is not enough to supply employees with a pamphlet about an EAP and remind them that they can call the number here if they have any issues. Successful mental health programs involve people who meet with officers on a regular basis to check in on them, provide therapy, etc. The check-in happens for everyone, regularly, no matter what. There are absolutely zero negative repercussions for officers who report that they are not OK. This program may also include any other forms of known successful approaches to stop these mental health issues from developing or being exacerbated, including things as simple as a good gym facility with reasonable time to use it. Maybe yoga. Maybe meditation.

The officers also share the onus of embracing the right culture. When it’s time to get together and support each other and talk, it cannot be high school anymore. You cannot have people giggling and making fun of those who want to take advantage of a meditation room or a wellness exercise. We all need to grow up. Everyone needs to get over the immature and dangerous attitude toward this life-threatening illness. Those who have lost a co-worker and friend as a result of mental health struggles will beg you not to perpetuate that culture.

In my view, there is no bigger threat to the profession than this, and at least not one that we have some control over. Trends regarding the way society views the police, funds the police and even actively tries to harm officers will fluctuate. There will always, tragically, be deaths and injuries in the line of duty that we cannot prevent. But nothing pervades, persists and harms law enforcement more than what happens from the inside out.

Is it “unbecoming of an officer” to put your life on the line for years, to be subjected to dead bodies over and over again, and then try to medicate with alcohol and have the resultant disease affect work or personal behavior? I think not. But if it is, then it is exponentially more “unbecoming” to treat those injured officers the way that many agencies are, when these things are completely predictable but not being adequately addressed. Stop ignoring the problem. This is something that must be tackled with urgency, a substantial dedication of resources and empathy along the way.

If you are a law enforcement officer experiencing mental health issues and need help, please don’t suffer alone. There are resources available, including the 24/7 CopLine (800-COPLINE) and the First Responder Support Network (frsn.org).

If you are suffering with any injuries, whether physical or mental-health-related, and have legal questions, RLS has put together a team of some of the best attorneys in the state in the areas of workers’ compensation and personal injury. They are available to you as a resource to help you navigate those areas, and there is no cost for an initial consultation. Go to rlslawyers.com/contact.

About the Author

Andrew M. Ganz is a partner and trial attorney in the RLS Legal Defense Practice Group. He defends public-sector employees in criminal matters, administrative investigations, critical incident investigations and disciplinary appeals. He also represents public-sector employees in disciplinary actions and related litigation. Prior to joining RLS, Andrew worked as a prosecutor for over 13 years, during which time he handled virtually every type of criminal matter.

1. stellamentalhealth.com/resources/10111/police-trauma-syndrome--mental-health-of-law-enforcement
2. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6561398
3. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6561398

Andrew M. Ganz
Partner
San Francisco, CA