Testifying after an investigation: Shaping the mental health of public safety personnel
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). In this editorial, we draw on two Canadian cases to interrog...
| Published in: | International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
2022
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10294/15818 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192013643 |
| Summary: | © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). In this editorial, we draw on two Canadian cases to interrogate how mass causality events and investigations consume many responders before (e.g., public safety communicators, detachment service assistants), during (e.g., police, fire, paramedics), and after the incident (e.g., coroners, correctional workers, media coverage). Their well-being may suffer from the associated processes and outcomes. In the current article, we focus on the mass causality incident of 2020 in Nova Scotia, Canada, and the investigation following a prisoner death in 2019 in Newfoundland, Canada, to explore how testifying post-incident can be made more palatable for participating public safety personnel (PSP). Specifically, we study how testifying after an adverse event can affect PSP (e.g., recalling, vicarious trauma, triggers) and how best to mitigate the impact of testimony on PSP well-being, with a lens to psychological “recovery” or wellness. We focus here on how to support those who may have to testify in a judicial proceeding or official inquiry, given being investigated for best-intended actions can result in moral injury or a posttraumatic stress injury, both exacerbated by judicial review, charge, accusation, or inquiry. Faculty yes |
|---|