Abstract
Background:
Opioid-related overdose deaths continue to rise with the ongoing opioid epidemic. In response, changes in the role of law enforcement officers have included being trained to administer naloxone to reverse overdoses and offering navigation and referrals to substance use treatment.
Methods:
This secondary data analysis includes qualitative data from law enforcement officers collected as part of a mixed-methods needs assessment from one Kentucky county. Law enforcement officers (n=151) responded to a confidential, online survey using Qualtrics and a subsample also completed a qualitative interview (n=6). Open-ended questions in the online survey and interviews included how the opioid epidemic has affected the individual’s profession, specifically their role in reversing overdoses and providing referrals to individuals who misuse opioids.
Results:
Law enforcement officers surveyed indicated that they have expanded their professional roles to include providing naloxone to reverse opioid overdoses and referrals. While their specific roles and duties have changed to include naloxone administration to reverse opioid overdoses and providing referrals, officers felt that this was just part of their job in responding to the needs of the community. Officers reported that they have learned how to use (99%) and carry naloxone (87%) to reverse opioid related overdoses. The majority (92%) reported providing referrals (e.g., treatment and harm reduction resources) to individuals who misuse opioids.
Conclusions:
The opioid epidemic has changed the roles of law enforcement officers, including providing naloxone to reverse overdoses and referrals for treatment. Future research should continue to explore how substance misuse in the community changes the roles of law enforcement officers and how to best train and support officers as their roles evolve in response to these changes.
Keywords: law enforcement, first responder, opioid epidemic, qualitative
Introduction
In the United States, overdose deaths continue to climb with almost 48,000 opioid-related overdose deaths in 2017 compared to 42,000 in 2016.1 Similarly, there was a 30% increase in the number of emergency department visits related to suspected opioid overdoses between 2016 and 2017.2 The rate of opioid-related deaths was 27.9 per 100,000 people in 2017 (i.e., 1,160 deaths) in Kentucky, almost double the national rate of 14.6.3 Kentucky ranked fifth overall among state rates of opioid-related overdose deaths in 2017.4 There has been national attention on using naloxone to reverse opioid-related overdoses and prevent deaths, including a report by the Surgeon General.5 The U.S. Attorney General also encouraged law enforcement agencies to train officers on how to use naloxone to reverse opioid overdoses and equip officers with the medication.6
Training Law Enforcement Officers to Reverse Overdoses
Naloxone administration training has increased law enforcement officers’ knowledge on how to reverse opioid-related overdoses.7–10 Officers reported that the training was not difficult to complete and administering naloxone in the field should not be difficult, even though law enforcement officers are not necessarily trained to assess or identify an individual’s medical needs and provide interventions to address those needs.8
Identifying an opioid-related overdose and how to administer naloxone are not the only barriers for law enforcement officers in reversing opioid-related overdoses. Until the recent surge of overdose deaths, the perception of law enforcement officers “providing overdose reversal treatment” or “providing health services” might have seemed counterintuitive, but has become a new job duty or expectation for officers. Law enforcement officers acknowledged that it was important for officers to receive naloxone administration training.8 Experiences administering naloxone to reverse an opioid-related overdose could also impact law enforcement officers’ willingness to provide this service and officers reported positive experiences when administering naloxone in the field.10
Law Enforcement Officers as Treatment Navigators
Following an overdose reversal, there is an opportunity to refer the individual to substance use treatment or harm reduction services (review of programs11). In one study, law enforcement officers, who were trained and subsequently administered naloxone in the field, made treatment referrals for overdose survivors.10 One-third of overdose survivors (n = 9) attended at least one visit to a substance use treatment program following the officer-delivered referral.10 However, in order for overdose survivors to be receptive to receiving referrals from law enforcement officers, they need to recognize that the relationship between individuals who misuse substances and law enforcement does not always have to be adversarial. Some programs are designed to make referrals during follow-ups after the overdose, during which the officers have a chance to build rapport with overdose survivors.12 Other programs allow individuals with an opioid use disorder to seek treatment referrals from law enforcement. For example, in Kentucky, the Angel Initiative allows anyone with a substance use disorder to go to a Kentucky State Police post and request substance use treatment help.13 No matter the program style, whether referrals are made in the field, during follow-ups, or when an individual seeks a treatment referral, officers need to know where resources exist in order to effectively make referrals for substance use treatment or other services.
Purpose of the Present Study
In response to the opioid epidemic resulting in increasing numbers of overdose deaths, law enforcement officers have expanded their professional duties to include providing naloxone to reverse opioid-related overdoses and referrals for services. Research is lacking on the impact of these changes on how officers view their role in responding to the opioid epidemic. The purpose of this qualitative study is to describe law enforcement officers’ perspectives on providing: 1) naloxone to reverse opioid related overdoses and 2) referrals and navigation to substance use treatment and other community resources to individuals who misuse opioids.
Methods
Participants
Participants included law enforcement officers (n=151) who met the following inclusion criteria: 1) at least 18 years of age; 2) worked in the targeted county of the needs assessment; and 3) interacted with individuals who misuse opioids as part of their professional duties.
Procedures
Data were collected between February and June 2018 as part of an opioid misuse resource and needs assessment commissioned by city government officials for one urban county in Kentucky (methods described previously).14 The study was approved by the University of Kentucky Institutional Review Board. To assess the needs and resources in the county to address the opioid epidemic, an online survey link was emailed to a contact person at law enforcement groups working in the county, including the county sheriff department, local police department, and university police department, with the request that the survey link be distributed to staff.
Online Survey.
The online survey was administered with Qualtrics software. Participants provided their written consent to participate and were automatically directed to a separate survey link that contained the study questions. Confidentiality was protected within Qualtrics by not collecting the participant’s IP address or tracking how they received the survey link. Participants were asked to provide their field of work (i.e., law enforcement); however, to protect confidentiality their place of employment (e.g., local police department) and years of employment were not assessed. Responses that included answers to the screening questions and met the inclusion criteria were included in the analyses. Participants received a $10 Amazon electronic gift card for completing the survey.
Qualitative Interviews.
Participants were asked in the consent portion of the online survey if they would be willing to complete an interview about the impact of the opioid epidemic on their job. Of the officers (n=151) who completed the online survey, 24 indicated a willingness to participate in a qualitative interview (16%) and 6 (25%) were selected using a random number generator. In addition to randomly selecting a portion of officers who were willing to participate in an interview, interviews continued to be conducted until the researchers began to hear responses from participants that were consistent across interviews, to ensure reasonable saturation had been reached. Interviews were conducted in-person or over the phone, based on participant preference. Interviews took approximately 30 minutes. All participants agreed to have the interview recorded so that they could be transcribed. Participants received a $20 Amazon electronic gift card for completing the qualitative interview.
Measures
Screening Questions and Descriptives.
On the online survey, participants were asked screening questions verifying that the participant was at least 18 years of age, worked in the county of interest, and interacted with individuals who misuse opioids in their professional role to determine study eligibility. Participants were asked demographic questions including race, gender, and age range. Participants were asked to estimate the percentage of encounters on the job that involve someone who misused opioids, involve an overdose, and result in the individual being transported to the hospital. Participants were asked if they received training in naloxone administration, carry naloxone, and/or provide referrals or resources to individuals who misuse opioids.
Qualitative questions.
Open-ended questions in both the online survey and interviews assessed perspectives on how the opioid epidemic has affected the individual’s profession with a focus on providing naloxone to reverse opioid related overdoses and referrals to further care or services. Online survey open-ended and qualitative interview questions included “How has the increase in opioid misuse in [county] changed the way that you do your job?”. Additional qualitative interview questions included “What is the impact of the opioid epidemic on your profession or your ability to perform your job?”, and “What do you see as your professional role in addressing opioid misuse?”. A full list of open-ended questions are available elsewhere.14
Data Analysis
Descriptives.
Descriptive statistics were used to analyze demographics and quantitative questions on how law enforcement officers respond to the opioid epidemic from the online survey. Results are presented in aggregate.
Qualitative Analysis.
Transcribed interviews and responses to the online survey open-ended questions were compiled into Microsoft Word. The open-ended survey question responses were analyzed with the qualitative interviews, because similar questions were asked on both instruments with the interview allowing for the opportunity to probe for follow-up and more in-depth answers. No identifiers were collected. Two of the study authors independently identified key themes across survey and interview responses. The authors discussed, revised, and compiled these themes into three main codes, as presented in Appendix 1, which were then applied to transcripts and survey response documents using Atlas.ti 8 software.15 The authors discussed the coded segments to determine meaning and achieve consensus. Summaries of key themes and selected quotes are presented, with quotes from surveys denoted as (S) and those from interviews as (I); however, themes/codes were not quantified.15
Results
Descriptives
Online survey participants (n=151) were primarily white (89%), male (91%), and 25–44 years of age (81%). Qualitative interview participants (n=6) were also primarily white (83%), male (83%), and 39 years of age (range 26–47).
On the online survey, law enforcement officers estimated that nearly half of the situations they encounter on the job involved someone who misused opioids (49%). They estimated that overdoses account for 43% of incidents with someone who misused opioids. Almost all online survey participants reported receiving naloxone administration training (99%) and the majority of officers carry naloxone on duty (87%).
Officers completing the online survey also reported providing referrals to individuals who misuse opioids (92%). Referrals included treatment services (83%), the local needle exchange program (41%), where to get naloxone (30%), and HIV or hepatitis C testing locations (10%).
Overdose Reversal
Many respondents received in-service training for naloxone administration and opioid overdose reversal. For one interview participant, responding to overdoses has become an increasingly large part of their job: “Ten years ago, it wasn’t an issue. Five years ago, it started to be an issue. Now, you can’t go through a shift without an overdose (I).” Another interviewed officer agreed, stating that regularly responding to overdoses “is not something that a police officer 20 years ago thought their job would be (I).”
In spite of overdose reversal becoming a routine job duty, many officers expressed frustration related to the time and resources required to respond to overdose-related calls. Furthermore, several respondents discussed discomfort with their new role of providing emergency medical care to individuals experiencing an opioid overdose. “We aren’t trained as medical professionals (S),” one officer stated. Another elaborated on their concerns:
“Do I do it [administer naloxone]? Yes, I have done it numerous times.... but I am not a medical person. What happens if they turn around and say, you should not have [administered naloxone to] this person? And I don’t know the adverse effects of it. I don’t think there are any adverse effects, I don’t know all that stuff. But that’s why you worry about it as a non-medical person (I).”
The benefits of naloxone training and access were also discussed. Officers reported they carry naloxone, not only to reverse opioid overdoses among community members, but also to keep themselves and their colleagues safe.
Another interview respondent reported the value of naloxone access:
“When you take this job, you want to help preserve life and save lives. […] I think carrying Narcan, and having it readily available in those situations where it needs to be used, it’s a positive thing (I).”
Treatment Referrals and Navigation
In order to provide resource and treatment referrals, officers need to understand the full range of community resources available, although some view jail as at least a short-term option. According to one respondent, “Jail is obviously not the only answer, but it is the only one to guarantee they don’t have access [to drugs] and [overdose] (S).” By separating the individual from negative environmental influences, incarceration was viewed as an emergency safety measure, particularly when the individual may gain access to corrections-based treatment services. As one participant stated,
“Many think jail is not helpful, but combining the ability to get them off the street and addiction services is the best thing we can do for them. Jail is often the best place to get the help needed because it forces them to stop their reckless behavior (S).”
Officers reported that they feel limited in their ability to either arrest individuals, due to perceived barriers stemming from legislative changes (e.g., Good Samaritan Laws), or to force individuals to receive further care after the overdose has been reversed. This was discussed as a source of frustration among respondents. According to one officer,
“Once we have reversed the effects of the opioids, they’re not bound, it is not mandated that they have to go to the hospital. Obviously, we will request that they do that. But we have very few options once they’re out of that overdose to make them go to the hospital (I).”
Not being able to enforce hospitalization or treatment, according to another respondent, means that individuals “aren’t coming into contact with services that could potentially save their life and get clean (S).”
Because individuals have the option to refuse treatment or referrals, offers of further services may not be provided in cases where individuals are not receptive to assistance. For example, individuals’ reactions to naloxone administration may be unpredictable. According to one participant, “they can come back either really sort of pissed off that we ruined their high—and saved their life—or they can come back fighting us (I).” Alternatively, individuals may not be alert or attentive to discussing treatment options. “Most of the time,” one officer stated, “they are swept up and taken to the hospital unconscious, so it is not something we can, like, give somebody a pamphlet on, talk to somebody about (I).”
Other officers, particularly those seeming most familiar with local treatment providers, expressed the need for expanded treatment options, particularly long-term inpatient services, including extended outpatient or aftercare. “I know myself, personally, always have offered rehabilitation services,” said one officer. “But the reality is, there are very few… real good patient services for someone who just overdosed (I).” For individuals without health insurance or with public health insurance, options are limited, further contributing to a continuing support for incarceration as a solution. “Sometimes,” said one participant, “the only option is to make the arrest, where we know that person is going to be safe or in a place where they are going to be able to receive medical care (I).”
Many officers mentioned incorporating discussions of treatment readiness, provider options, or service navigation with individuals who misuse opioids, while acknowledging the struggle of breaking the chronic and relapsing cycle of substance use disorders. One participant stated, “They know it will kill them but they can’t kick it (S).” Some officers persist: “If they are receptive to talking to us, we will give them a referral every single time (I).” Officers viewed discussions about treatment as important, despite being outside of their traditional scope of work. According to one officer,
“[Individuals who misuse opioids] are usually at that lowest point when I encounter them, and a lot of times, that lowest point can draw some change, change a life, change a mind or change a habit out of somebody, so me being well-educated at that point in time and being able to talk about those resources and opportunities, I think it would probably be good (I).”
Officers reported using their knowledge of available resources and experience as a benefit:
“Sometimes they have tried multiple times and it doesn’t work, they are kind of defeated… for those that say… ‘I tried a bunch of times and it didn’t work,’ I can give them that list [of local treatment options] and say, well, have you tried this specific place? (I)”
Many officers embraced their role in assisting individuals who misuse opioids with navigating treatment options, accepting that motivation plays a pivotal part, and that not every treatment attempt will end in continued sobriety.
“We don’t have anything against incarcerating someone over and over again, I don’t think people should have a stigma against putting people in rehab over and over again. It can be cumulative. It can take six or seven times before it sets in for someone (I).”
Shifting Role Expectations
Participant perspectives reflected a shifting understanding of the role of law enforcement officers in assisting individuals who misuse opioids. Participants discussed the need for coordinated efforts and cooperation among law enforcement, treatment providers, public health agencies, and communities. This belief further indicates a nuanced understanding of opioid misuse as a behavioral disorder and a public health concern, influenced at the individual level by a myriad of environmental factors.
Despite the shift in perspectives on the role of law enforcement officers to respond to rising rates of opioid misuse, participants expressed continuing commitment to their professional responsibilities. “I perform my job today with the same dedication as I did when I signed up,” stated one officer. “[Opioid misuse] hasn’t changed the way I do my job, it has changed the needs of the people I serve (S).” This orientation towards service, for some respondents, has evolved in the face of changing public need, reflecting shifting role expectations:
“You know, when I first came out of the academy… I wanted to be the hero, wanted to save the world. Put all the bad guys in jail. But now if you put all the bad guys in jail, that is a Band-Aid on the problem. …My job as a police officer, is to get them help, not just say, hey, you overdosed, now we are gonna lock you up. How can we get you help and let’s try and keep you from doing this again (I).”
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to describe law enforcement officers’ perspectives on how the expectation that they should have a role in preventing opioid overdose deaths has changed their job responsibilities. Law enforcement officers are expanding their traditional duties to include providing naloxone to reverse opioid overdoses and are providing referrals to individuals who experience an overdose. Officers reported that almost half of their calls involve someone who misuses opioids and many incidents involve an overdose. Almost all officers are trained to administer naloxone to reverse opioid overdoses and carry naloxone while on duty. There is some discrepancy between the percentage of officers trained to administer naloxone and who carry the medication, possibly due to some officers working in the community and others working in stations. One officer reported, “I work in [police station], so it is available to us, but I do not have it at my work station (I).” Officers reported that it was rare to respond to an overdose 10–20 years ago, but that demands have shifted and they cannot go through a shift now without an overdose call. The observed change in role and law enforcement officers’ perspective of their role is consistent with the literature.16–18 A study from 1995 showed that officers found crime-fighting activities most satisfying and for which they had the most support.18 In the following 20 years, there was a shift where officers reported that their desired role should encompass both law enforcement and being a social worker.17 Law enforcement officers who embraced that their role expanded beyond policing to encompass providing referrals to health and social services were more likely to make those referrals.16
Law enforcement officers had mixed perspectives on providing naloxone to reverse overdoses. Some officers reported satisfaction with being able to provide life-saving medication and intervention for individuals experiencing an opioid overdose. This is consistent with studies showing that officers can be trained to effectively administer naloxone in response to opioid overdoses.7–10 Officers also valued having naloxone available in case they or another officer were exposed to an opioid in the field, even though evidence suggests that the risk of exposure for first responders is low.19 Despite naloxone administration training some officers were concerned about delivering a medical intervention to community members. Some of the concerns centered on not being trained as a medical professional or having a full understanding of potential adverse effects. Naloxone is safe to administer, even if an individual is not experiencing an opioid overdose, and does not have abuse potential. While the specific naloxone training officers in this study received is not known, these concerns highlight opportunities to improve training for officers around how and when to use naloxone, potential risks or side effects, and legal protections. Educating officers on their personal risks when dealing with individuals who misuse opioids may also reduce safety concerns.
Following an opioid overdose reversal or when interacting with community members who misuse opioids, law enforcement officers are providing referrals to substance use treatment and other resources, instead of just relying on a criminal justice-focused approach to addressing opioid misuse. The overwhelming majority of officers reported providing referrals or resources. Officers viewed providing referrals and treatment navigation as part of their changing role to respond to needs in the community, however, and reported that their knowledge of available resources helps them connect with individuals and provide options they may not have considered previously. Officers also reported referring individuals to harm reduction services, which can bring them into contact with the service delivery system even if they are not yet ready for treatment. Other community programs support the role of officers providing treatment navigation.10–13 Officers understood the relapsing nature of substance use disorders, that it might take more than one try for an individual to stop misusing opioids following treatment, and considered that when encouraging individuals to seek treatment, even if previous attempts have failed. Officers stated that society does not hesitate to incarcerate individuals more than once so substance use treatment should not be viewed differently, which could be used in education for law enforcement officers who may see the same individuals with substance use disorders more than once. Although some officers acknowledged that jail can remove individuals from their environment and the ability to use drugs, many officers in the current sample increasingly saw that putting people in jail or responding to the opioid epidemic purely with the criminal justice system is not effective. They viewed that their role needs to include not just enforcing laws but also providing for the needs of community members.
In an effort to prevent opioid-related overdose deaths, research has investigated encounters with the service delivery system that may be an opportunity to intervene and prevent future fatal overdoses. One study showed that individuals who experienced a non-fatal overdose, injection-related infection, opioid detox, or release from incarceration had a 68-fold increase in experiencing a fatal opioid overdose.20 Each of these service delivery encounters could be an opportunity to intervene with individuals who misuse opioids. Officers in the present study generally reported openness to expand their role in the community and shift from purely law enforcement to also being a point of contact with the service delivery system.
There are study limitations that should be noted. First, participants self-selected to participate and, as such, the sample is not random. Second, the number of individuals who received the survey link is not known, because organizations distributed the link to their staff, and we were unable to determine a response rate. Third, the sample in this study was relatively homogenous, with the majority of respondents being white, male, and working in one metro city. This is similar to the population of law enforcement officers employed by the county, who are also mostly white (88%) and male (91%).21 These factors may limit the generalizability to other samples. Fourth, exposure to opioid-related incidents, length of employment in law enforcement, or job description (e.g., officer rank, job post) were not collected, so results could not be compared based on these variables. Fifth, the specific curriculum with which officers are trained on how to administer naloxone, identify an overdose, and refer individuals for further care is not known. Despite these limitations, this study provides insights into how the opioid epidemic has changed the roles of law enforcement officers in responding to community opioid misuse.
Conclusion
Officers recognized how the opioid epidemic has changed their professional role and most officers felt positively toward these changes, and that it is part of the job to adapt their roles to community needs. Some officers reported concerns with providing medications or were not providing referrals, in part due to the perception that individuals were not open to receiving referrals. Future research should continue to explore how community substance misuse changes the roles of law enforcement officers. Additionally, interactions with law enforcement officers are a point of contact with the service delivery system and research should investigate how officers could provide interventions to reduce substance misuse, as well as how to best train and support officers as their roles change.
Acknowledgments
Source of Funding:
This research and the preparation of this manuscript were supported by a contract with the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Department of Social Services and a training grant from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) T32DA035200.
Appendix 1.
| Code Name | Description | Illustrative Quotes |
|---|---|---|
| Overdose Reversal | Any mention by law enforcement of the action of reversing overdoses, including training, availability of resources, frequency, or first-hand experience | “I think it has forced law enforcement, first responders to do things like carry Narcan and be trained on how to administer Narcan. That is not something that a police officer 20 years ago thought their job would be… having some kind of drug to block opioid receptors, an officer would probably never have imagined having to carry that around.” “We usually get a call that someone has either passed out, or someone is clearly overdosing and someone with them is calling us. A lot of it depends on if we bring them back with Narcan, they can come back either really sort of pissed off that we ruined their high—and saved their life—or they can come back fighting us. It’s honestly just unexpected scenarios every time.” “We are quicker than the fire department, because we are mobile, so that is probably one of their biggest reasons we have [naloxone], we get there quicker. But I am not a medical person. What happens if they turn around and say, you should not have Narcan’d this person. And I don’t know the adverse effects of it, I don’t think there are any adverse effects, I don’t know all that stuff. But that’s why you worry about it as a non-medical person.” “Responding to constant overdoses for the same individuals multiple times, is difficult to handle. Also handling of narcotics of any type has become a enormous danger in every day work which creates a higher concern for the first responders to overdose inadvertently.” “I think it’s a lifesaving drug, I am horrified that the drug companies have made it more expensive. When we started using it, it was like $12 a shot, now it’s gone up because of demand. But that’s pretty ridiculous. It does save lives. And it’s easy to use.” |
| Treatment Navigation | Any mention by law enforcement of the action of offering referrals or service recommendations to individuals who use opioids, or of barriers to performing this action, including lack of available or accessible treatment options | “I have seen there are not enough places for them to medically detox which deters them from trying.” “After interviewing suspects I always speak with them about their addiction. They know it will kill them but they can’t kick it. We attempt to refer them to treatment facilities or get the courts to order treatment but it’s always a shame to learn later that they have OD’d and passed away; especially when you’ve sat down with them and spoken with them, one on one.” “You know, when I first came out of the academy, I wanted to just put everybody in jail. That is part of, I wanted to be the hero, wanted to save the world. Put all the bad guys in jail. But now if you put all the bad guys in jail, that is a Band-Aid on the problem. I don’t like the Band-Aids. I want to keep them out, trust me, there are people that deserve to be in jail, but my job as a police officer, is to get them help, not just say, hey, you overdosed, now we are gonna lock you up. How can we get you help and let’s try and keep you from doing this again. I don’t want to come see you three and four times a week.” “For me with the police department specifically, if we had more training, when we’re at overdose scenes for instance, being able to discuss more of the educational portion, what this disease is, as far as being a disease of addiction, having resources outside of just, hey, here is some information about a Suboxone clinic or a medically-assisted treatment clinic, because we do have those, I guess just having other avenues to work through, I don’t know what those solutions are right now, I guess there are a lot of folks working to get there. I think that could be really important. Just because a lot of times, when an addict goes to medically assisted treatment, they maybe are not at that point when I usually encounter them. They are usually at that lowest point when I encounter them, and a lot of times, that lowest point can draw some change, change a life, change a mind or change a habit out of somebody, so me being well-educated at that point in time and being able to talk about those resources and opportunities, I think it would probably be good.” “I have talked to people, asked them if they tried certain treatment programs, they say they have just Medicaid, and they won’t take it.” “And we try to keep a list of any kind of rehabilitation facilities, things of that nature. That way when we do encounter people, we ask them all the time if they want to get some help, they say yeah, I’d love to get some help. Sometimes, they legitimately don’t know where…sometimes they have tried multiple times and it doesn’t work, they are kind of defeated. And, then other times you have those that are at the stage where they don’t care to get help, and that may be not a person you are able to reach, but for those that say, I’d love to, or I tried a bunch of times and it didn’t work, I can give them that list and say, well have you tried this specific place? Because I have seen similar results that they have had, they have done some good things for some other people.” |
| Role Shift: Other | Any more general discussion of law enforcement about their changing professional roles in context of the recent rise in opioid use | “I don’t see any impact negatively or positively in doing my job, it’s kind of what you sign up for in law enforcement, you are going to encounter those situations, typically they are bad ones, not all the time, but that is the majority of what you do. Whatever I am doing at the time, that is what is most important to me. Whether it’s a traffic accident or a theft report or an opioid overdose, that’s what’s most important at the time. Whatever is in front of me, that’s where my time and resources need to be focused, that is the way I approach it.” “I don’t know if it’s changed the way I have done [my job]. I know the legislature has tried to curb the stigma against addicts, like the laws against charging someone with drug paraphernalia, the Good Samaritan Laws. The reality is, from what anybody says, there were not cops foaming at the mouth waiting to put people in jail because they had a needle in their pocket, you know, because they were hooked, that wasn’t the truth. That’s not what was happening. The majority of those charges against users that they were complaining about were from other unrelated arrests not when they were in crisis or overdosing. So, what you did, there were options for police officers to at least take some enforcement action, get them in a safe place, get stabilized, and sometimes jail was a good option for that.” “The opioid epidemic has given me the opportunity to check my compassion levels and remind myself that people suffering from addiction are not human beings with lesser value than others. This has carried over into other types of calls for service I respond to.” “I perform my job today with the same dedication as I did when I signed up. I am an agent of the government and I’ll do what the people and general order require me to do. It hasn’t changed the way I do my job, it has changed the needs of the people I serve.” “Law enforcement alone can not fix the problem of abuse. All too often family members of opiate abusers identify law enforcement as having the responsibility of rectifying an addiction that has been ignored or coddled by the addicts loved ones. Often the addict refuses the assistance from law enforcement to get help and refuses to cooperate with investigators. The misuse of opiates is a disease and for law enforcement to address this issue, we need cooperation from the community to identify who the subjects are that are not only abusing the substance but also who is taking advantage of their addiction and selling/providing the substance to the addicted subject. The misuse of opiates is indiscriminate and crosses all socioeconomic, age and racial profiles across our community.” |
Footnotes
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect those of the funding agency. The funding organization had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure Statement: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
- 1.National Institute on Drug Abuse. Overdose Death Rates. National Institute on Drug Abuse. https://www.drugabuse.gov/related-topics/trends-statistics/overdose-death-rates. Published 2019. Accessed August 12, 2019.
- 2.Vivolo-Kantor AM, Seth P, Gladden RM, Mattson CL, Baldwin GT, Kite-Powell A, Coletta MA. Vital signs: trends in emergency department visits for suspected opioid overdoses – United States, July 2016 – September 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(9):279–285. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6709e1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.National Institute on Drug Abuse. Kentucky opioid summary: opioid-involved overdose deaths. National Institute on Drug Abuse. https://www.drugabuse.gov/opioid-summaries-by-state/kentucky-opioid-summary. Published 2019. Accessed on 8/12/2019. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Hedegaard H, Miniño AM, Warner M. Drug overdose deaths in the United States, 1999–2017. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2018. NCHS Data Brief, no 329. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Adams J Surgeon General’s Advisory on Naloxone and Opioid Overdose. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General. https://www.surgeongeneral.gov/priorities/opioid-overdose-prevention/naloxone-advisory.html. Published 2018. Accessed August 12, 2019.
- 6.Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs. Attorney General Holder Announces Plans for Federal Law Enforcement Personnel to Begin Carrying Naloxone. Department of Justice. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-holder-announces-plans-federal-law-enforcement-personnel-begin-carrying. Updated Sept 15, 2014. Accessed August 12, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Crocker A, Bloodworth L, Ballou J, Liles AM, Fleming L. First Responder knowledge, perception and confidence in administering naloxone: Impact of a pharmacist-provided educational program in rural Mississippi. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2003;59(4S): S117–S121.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.japh.2019.04.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Ray B, O’Donnell D, Kahre K. Police officer attitudes toward intranasal naloxone training. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2015;146:107–110. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.10.026 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Saucier CD, Zaller N, Macmadu A, Green TC. An Initial evaluation of law enforcement overdose training in Rhode Island. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2016;162:211–218. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.03.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Wagner KD, Bovet LJ, Haynes B, Joshua A, Davidson PJ. Training law enforcement to respond to opioid overdose with naloxone: Impact on knowledge, attitudes, and interactions with community members. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2016;165:22–28. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.05.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Bagley SM, Schoenberger SF, Waye KM, Walley AY. A scoping review of post opioid-overdose interventions. Prev Med. 2019;128. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.105813 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Paul L Meeting opioid users where they are: a service referral approach to law enforcement. N C Med J. 2018;79(3):172–173. doi: 10.18043/ncm.79.3.172 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Kentucky State Police. Angel initiative. Kentucky State Police. https://kentuckystatepolice.org/angel-initiative/. Accessed August 12, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Pike E, Staton M, Webster JM, McCarthy E, Tillson M. Opioid misuse resource and needs assessment for Fayette County, Kentucky. https://www.lexingtonky.gov/sites/default/files/organization-page/2018-09/2018%20OpioidNeedsAssessment-FINAL.pdf. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Department of Social Services. Published 2018. Accessed August 12, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Creswell JW, Poth CN. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches, fourth edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2018. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Cepeda JA, Strathdee SA, Arredondo J, Mittal ML, Rocha T, Morales M, et al. Assessing police officers’ attitudes and legal knowledge on behaviors that impact HIV transmission among people who inject drugs. Int J Drug Policy. 2017;50:56–63. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.09.009 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Huey L, Ricciardelli R. ‘This isn’t what I signed up for’: When police officer role expectations conflict with the reality of general police duty work in remote communities. Int J Police Sci Manag. 2015;17(3):194–203. doi: 10.1177/1461355715603590 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Perrott SB, Taylor DM. Crime fighting, law enforcement and service provider role orientations in community-based police officers. Am J Police. 1995;14(3/4):173–195. doi: 10.1108/07358549510112009 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 19.American College of Medical Toxicology. ACMT and AACT Position Statement: Preventing Occupational Fentanyl and Fentanyl Analog Exposure to Emergency Responders. American College of Medical Toxicology. https://www.acmt.net/_Library/Positions/Fentanyl_PPE_Emergency_Responders_.pdf. Accessed February 28, 2020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Larochelle MR, Bernstein R, Bernson D, Land T, Stopka TJ, Rose AJ, et al. Touchpoints – Opportunities to predict and prevent opioid overdose: A cohort study. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2019;204. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2019.06.039 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government. Police personnel data: Employee demographics. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government. https://www.lexingtonky.gov/police-personnel. Published 2019. Accessed August 12, 2019. [Google Scholar]