Police Fitness for Duty After a Critical Incident
Officer T, a 12-year veteran, is referred for a fitness-for-duty evaluation after a fatal shooting. He has three weeks of insomnia, hypervigilance, and intrusive images; he avoids the range and says he cannot return to patrol. His supervisor wants a 'diagnosis and prognosis' and asks whether he can be returned to full duty. You are a contracted psychologist; the department will receive the report. Officer T asks you not to disclose his marital problems and alcohol use (four to six beers nightly). He has no prior disciplinary record and strong peer support. The union representative attends. The department asks you to administer the MMPI-3 and a PTSD checklist, and to state whether he is 'fit for duty.'
1. What is the difference between a fitness-for-duty evaluation and a clinical or treatment evaluation, and what role issues arise?
Read the worked answer
A fitness-for-duty evaluation is administrative and employer-referred. Its purpose is to determine whether the officer can safely and reliably perform the essential functions of the job, with or without reasonable accommodation, not to provide treatment or a comprehensive therapeutic diagnosis. The psychologist is not the officer's therapist, confidentiality is limited, and the report goes to the department. Informed consent must explain these limits before testing.
Role issues include avoiding dual roles, limiting disclosure to job-relevant information, and maintaining independence from the department's desired outcome. The union representative's presence should be clarified, and the officer should know what will be reported. I would obtain collateral from supervisors and records, review the critical incident, and assess functional capacities such as sleep, arousal, avoidance, decision-making, and firearm readiness. I would not promise the officer that marital problems will remain confidential if they materially affect fitness, but I would disclose only what is necessary. The report should distinguish clinical findings from administrative fitness conclusions.
2. What data would you gather and how would you address the request for a 'diagnosis and prognosis'?
Read the worked answer
I would conduct a clinical interview focused on the critical incident, sleep, arousal, avoidance, alcohol use, suicidal ideation, and functional impairment. I would administer the MMPI-3 and a validated PTSD measure, review department records and any prior evaluations, and obtain collateral from a supervisor and, with consent, a treating clinician. I would assess firearm comfort and range avoidance as job-relevant functional data. Three weeks after a fatal shooting, acute stress symptoms are common and may not yet meet criteria for PTSD; premature diagnosis could be unfair and inaccurate.
I would provide a diagnostic impression if the data support one, but I would frame prognosis cautiously. The report can say that the officer currently has clinically significant acute stress symptoms that impair his capacity to return to patrol, that these symptoms may improve with treatment, and that re-evaluation in several weeks is warranted. I would not offer a definitive long-term prognosis from a single evaluation. I would recommend treatment and temporary restricted duty rather than declaring him permanently unfit.
3. Draft the bottom-line recommendation and explain how you would handle the officer's request for confidentiality about alcohol and marital problems.
Read the worked answer
The bottom-line recommendation should be functional and time-limited: Officer T is not currently fit for full patrol duty because of acute stress symptoms, sleep disruption, hypervigilance, and avoidance of firearm training; he is fit for administrative or restricted duty with treatment and reassessment. I would specify the conditions-engagement in treatment, alcohol monitoring if indicated, and a re-evaluation before return to firearms or patrol-rather than issuing a permanent label.
At the outset I would explain that I cannot promise blanket confidentiality. Marital problems alone are not necessarily job-relevant and need not be disclosed in detail. Alcohol use of four to six beers nightly may affect sleep, mood, and safety with a firearm, so it is relevant to fitness; I would report the functional concern, not gratuitous personal details. I would consult the relevant ethics code and legal standards, document the rationale, and give the officer a chance to correct or contextualize the information. The department should receive a concise, job-focused report that protects privacy as much as the assessment allows.