Why De-Funding the Police Doesn't Mean Being Anti-Cop

I feel the need to share my thoughts on de-funding the police. Not just to defend my title, since so many right now are sneering when they say "social workers," but just because it needs to be said. My professional experiences have influenced my opinion so much on this topic, and I think they're worth your consideration, too.

I work with police officers pretty regularly in my career. First this was in child welfare, then as part of juvenile probation, and now as a therapist in a medical clinic. I've worked with cops when people were suicidal, needed to be detained, and when we had reason to think someone would become violent. In all these cases, I've been very glad they were there. I felt safer, and I felt my client was safer, with an officer nearby.

Because, as I imagined the scenario playing out, a cop could wrestle someone to the ground before they tackled me. They could place handcuffs on someone before they used those hands to slice their wrists. They could find someone who ran out the door saying they were going to overdose on meth.

I care about all my clients, and police officers have allowed me to sleep at night. I can feel confident, as a social worker and therapist, in saying police officers are a necessary part of society.

BUT, there are a few commonalities to all the situations I've been in involving police. In most of them, I or another therapist was there. We had rapport with those clients. We could stand with the client and buffer the shock and trauma response.

There's hasn't been enough conversation about trauma in the public discourse surrounding police so far. Too many kids grew up seeing police on a regular basis, and not in a friendly way. Maybe they were dragged kicking and screaming by a police officer who came to remove them from their parents' house. Or maybe they grew up with nightly visits from the police after neighbors heard sounds of glass breaking and furniture toppling.

Poverty. Trauma. THESE should be the key talking points when you discuss the police. Because you know what happens when those kids grow up, having believed all their lives that police are the bad guys? When they hear about these so-called "helpers," and think about the cops who were there on the worst nights of their lives, not to help, but to break their world in half?

Their fight-or-flight response kicks into high gear at the sight of them. I've seen it: their faces go blank as their mind races with thoughts of which direction to run, where to hide, and even how to fight. They already have a fully-formed plan when I tell them: "They're not here for you. You haven't done anything wrong."

Then, and only then, do they realize they haven't done anything wrong.

I get it: sometimes people do bad things, and police are needed. Just like when a social worker needs police backup to remove children from an abusive home. But there's a crucial difference between police showing up on their own and showing up with a social worker or therapist to be the buffer. To explain what's happening and provide a framework.

"You can do x, but I will have to call the police." "The police are here, and they're going to handcuff you, and then x will happen." You'd be shocked what a difference it makes to simply provide narration. It keeps someone caught in the freeze-fight-or-flight mode from slipping into do-whatever-it-takes-to-survive mode, which is either violence or running away.

When that happens, you know what comes next. You've seen it all over the news, time and time again.

And if you're tempted to shrug all this off because criminals deserve whatever is coming to them, consider the fact that nearly all criminals are victims of trauma, meaning they have a strong fight-or-flight response.

For a different type of example, consider the fact that police are our only constantly available on-call resource. As a social worker, you might have reason to suspect things aren't going well for a family. You may want to check on things. The cops are your only option.

And when they show up to check on them, they have all the tact of a wrecking ball. I'm sorry (not really), but police officers just don't have the training a social worker does. They aren't trained in trauma-informed language. If you need a welfare check because you suspect a child is being neglected, you can bet that cop will start the conversation with, "Are you taking proper care of your children?"

How do you think that parent will respond?

And the thing is, it's not fair to expect police officers to be trained in trauma-informed language. Maybe diffusing emotionally-charged situations is part of their day-to-day job, but should it be? Who decided that was a good idea?

So many people are sneering and scoffing at the idea of social workers in place of cops. But I honestly don't understand what's so radical about it. For starters, there are already social workers accompanying cops in a number of situations. There have been ongoing movements to add social workers to police encounters for years. This isn't anything new.

There's a growing belief that the de-fund the police movement was devised as some sort of punishment for police brutality. That it means doing away with police entirely. That it's anti-cop.

Why do people believe that? It's the same reason people are polarized over so many other political issues these days: scare tactics and fear mongering.

You may have heard cries like, "If we de-fund the police, your children will be sold into slavery! Your grandparents will be mugged in broad daylight!" You might have also read articles (absent of sources or proof, by the way) exclaiming that to be in favor of de-funding the police means hating police, being ungrateful for them, or even wishing them dead.

No one-I repeat-NO ONE is advocating for absence of police. No one is saying any of those other things. These manipulation tactics are cruel and dangerous. They're devised by people who seek to widen the gap between left and right. They profit off it.

Rather than no police, the movement is about smarter use of police. Because at the end of the day, it just doesn't make sense to use cops for everything. It's an unfair expectation for the cops, and it's unfair for the mentally ill, disabled, and/or traumatized people who need more than a pair of handcuffs.

As a suggestion, learn to recognize propaganda and emotionally manipulative click-baity headlines. Read articles and commentaries that engage your brain rather than toy with your emotions.

Keep in mind who the police exist for in the first place. The cops and the vulnerable need us to work toward a solution, not a senseless battle consisting of hyped-up finger-pointing. The police are there for a reason. Most of the time, they want to help, too.

Let's try a more balanced perspective of re-defining the police. Make the police officers just one part of a larger, multidisciplinary response. Not all (arguable, not even most) people who require police response fit neatly into a box labeled "criminal," so why should its response team fit neatly into a box labeled "police," all with more or less the same training?

Let's learn to open our minds and learn from each other. Then, let's take our resources away from a system that doesn't meet the needs of our world today, and put it toward one that does.