Beyond Betrayal: Empowering Law Enforcement Through Trust and Collective Strength

The challenges of recruitment, retention, and officer well-being are well-known in the ever-evolving landscape of law enforcement. However, beyond the visible struggles lies a profound opportunity for growth and empowerment within the ranks.

As researchers, authors, and practitioners dedicated to building the capacity of our law enforcement community, we aim to explore the experiences and perceptions of betrayal not as a crisis but as a pathway to understanding and strengthening our collective and individual capacities.

Understanding Bandura’s Agencies: A Framework for Empowerment

Central to our exploration are the concepts introduced by Albert Bandura—personal Agency, Collective Agency, and Proxy Agency—which serve as the bedrock of our approach.

1. Personal Agency refers to an individual’s capacity to act independently, make choices, and influence outcomes (Bandura, 2001). In law enforcement, this is the ability of officers to take control of their actions and decisions, even in challenging circumstances.
2. Collective Agency extends this idea to the group level, emphasizing the power of collaborative efforts and shared decision-making within teams and organizations (Bandura, 2001). For law enforcement, this involves the cohesion and unity of departments in achieving common goals and fostering a supportive environment where every officer feels valued and heard.
3. Proxy Agency recognizes that individuals often rely on others to act on their behalf, particularly when they lack the power or resources to achieve specific outcomes (Bandura, 2001). In law enforcement, this might manifest in the trust officers place in their leadership to advocate for their needs and make decisions that reflect the department’s and its members’ best interests.

By applying these concepts, we aim to create a foundation for meaningful change rooted in the lived experiences of those in the field. Our research seeks to understand how officers perceive their agency within their organizations, how they experience the support—or lack thereof—from their collective agency, and how proxy agency plays out in their interactions with leadership. This holistic approach addresses the immediate concerns of administrative betrayal. It provides a roadmap for building more robust, resilient teams, elevating them and their agency from GREAT to MAGNUS (Javidi et al., 2024).

The Value of This Research to Readers

This research is significant because it transforms how law enforcement agencies approach leadership, communication, and officer well-being.

For law enforcement professionals, understanding these dynamics is crucial for several reasons:

1. Enhancing Leadership Effectiveness: By exploring the interplay of personal, collective, and proxy Agency, leaders gain insight into how their actions (or inactions) influence the morale and cohesion of their teams (Bandura, 2001). This understanding enables leaders to support their officers better, creating environments where everyone can thrive.
2. Building Resilience and Empowerment: Recognizing their agency within the organization empowers individual officers to take proactive steps toward their well-being and career development. It also encourages them to play a more active role in shaping the culture and dynamics of their teams (Bandura, 2001).
3. Strengthening Organizational Trust: Trust is the cornerstone of any effective law enforcement agency. This research highlights how perceived betrayal—intentional or unintentional—erodes trust within a department. By addressing these issues head-on, agencies can rebuild and maintain trust internally among officers and externally with the communities they serve (Violanti & Aron, 1995).
4. Fostering a Culture of Open Communication: Ineffective communication is often at the heart of perceived administrative betrayal. By identifying where communication breakdowns occur and understanding their impact, agencies can implement strategies to improve transparency and dialogue, ensuring that officers feel informed and supported (Violanti & Paton, 2008).
5. Creating a Blueprint for Future Success: This research does more than diagnose problems; it offers actionable solutions. By integrating Bandura’s concepts into everyday practices, law enforcement agencies create cultures that prevent betrayal and promote trust, integrity, and collective strength (Bandura, 2001).

Our Commitment to Constructive Dialogue

Together, we sought to bring these voices to the forefront. In partnership with Law Enforcement Today, we surveyed 1,074 officers nationwide to gather insights, exploring their administrative support experiences and perceived betrayal’s impact on their careers and well-being.

Rather than focusing solely on the challenges, we engage in a constructive dialogue building upon our officers’ strengths and resilience. This article will unpack the data and provide actionable strategies for enhancing trust, communication, and leadership within law enforcement.

Our commitment is to offer a balanced perspective, acknowledging the complexities of leadership and the importance of effective communication. In many cases, what is perceived as betrayal may stem from well-intentioned but poorly executed strategies. By exploring these nuances, we aim to equip leaders with the insights and tools to foster a culture of trust, integrity, and collective agency within their departments (McCreary & Thompson, 2006).

A Pathway to Empowerment and Growth

Ultimately, this research is about much more than identifying issues within law enforcement. It is about harnessing the power of Personal, Collective, and Proxy Agencies to create a culture of empowerment, resilience, and trust. By understanding and addressing the factors contributing to perceived betrayal, we move toward a future where every officer feels supported, valued, and equipped to excel (Bandura, 2001).

Join us as we explore these critical issues, not as a critique but as a pathway to greater understanding and more robust, resilient law enforcement communities.

Research Methodology

The survey was distributed electronically to a selected sample of 6,000 law enforcement officers. Of the 6,000 surveys sent, 1,074 responses were received, resulting in a response rate of approximately 17.9%. This is a reasonable response rate for surveys of this nature, providing diverse responses for analysis.

Out of the 1,074 respondents, the majority, 83.6% (898 respondents), identified as male. 13.9% (149 respondents) identified as female, while 2.5% (27 respondents) chose not to share their gender. The cumulative percentages indicate that by including those who identified as female, the total reaches 97.5%, and with the inclusion of those who prefer not to share, the cumulative percentage reaches 100%.

Participants were asked whether their agency has an established wellness program. A slight majority of respondents, 51.12% (549 respondents), indicated that their agency does have a wellness program in place, while 48.04% (516 respondents) reported that their agency does not. This nearly even split suggests that wellness programs, while present in over half of the agencies, still need to be improved in many law enforcement departments. The absence of these programs could have considerable implications for officer well-being, as wellness initiatives often play a critical role in mitigating stress, improving mental health, and providing necessary support for officers in demanding roles.

They were also asked if their agency provides access to a licensed professional counselor (LPC) for mental health support. The responses reveal that only 33.15% (356 respondents) of officers have access to an LPC, while the majority, 66.85% (718 respondents), do not have such mental health resources available through their agency. This considerable lack of access to professional counseling services highlights a significant gap in mental health support within many law enforcement agencies. Given the high-stress nature of law enforcement work, the absence of licensed professionals to help officers cope with mental health challenges may negatively affect their overall well-being and job performance.

Additionally, 34.8% (374 respondents) plan to stay until full-service retirement, making this the largest group. 20.5% (220 respondents) plan to work past full-service retirement, while 17.3% (186) currently explore alternative career paths. 13.8% (148 respondents) remain undecided about their plans, and 13.6% (146 respondents) selected “Other (please specify)” to indicate a different path than the options provided. This distribution reveals that while many participants plan to retire on schedule, many are either considering extending their careers, changing paths, or still deciding their next steps.

Research Results

The central themes of Personal Agency, Collective Agency, and Proxy Agency, derived from Bandura’s framework, are relevant for understanding officer responses, especially concerning Administrative Betrayal and perceived gaps in wellness programs.

Administrative Betrayal

6.8% (73 respondents) reported never feeling betrayed, while 20.5% (220 respondents) felt betrayed rarely. A significant portion, 42.5% (456 respondents), reported feeling betrayed sometimes, with cumulative percentages reaching 69.7%. Additionally, 23.9% (257 respondents) often felt betrayed, and 6.3% (68 respondents) always felt betrayed, bringing the cumulative percentage to 100%. Key observations indicate that 42.5% of respondents experienced betrayal sometimes while combining the “often” and “always” categories shows that 30.2% of respondents frequently experienced feelings of betrayal. Only a tiny percentage (6.8%) never felt betrayed, and 20.5% felt betrayed rarely.

Based on the total sample of 1,072 respondents, the data reveals that a substantial portion of law enforcement personnel experience feelings of betrayal from their administrative leaders. Specifically, 42.5% (456 respondents) feel betrayed sometimes, and 30.2% (325 respondents) feel betrayed either often or always. Nearly three-quarters (72.7%) of respondents experience frequent betrayals within their departments. In contrast, only 6.8% (73 respondents) never feel betrayed, while 20.5% (220 respondents) report feeling betrayed rarely. These findings suggest that feelings of betrayal are widespread among law enforcement officers, with the majority indicating they have experienced this to varying degrees. This could have significant implications for morale, trust, and the overall organizational culture within law enforcement agencies. The relatively low percentage of those who never feel betrayed highlights a systemic issue that may require targeted interventions and leadership improvements.

1. The data demonstrates that feelings of betrayal are not isolated incidents but widespread experiences for law enforcement officers, with a substantial proportion indicating that they encounter these issues frequently. The high percentages of officers reporting betrayal, particularly in lack of support, unfair treatment or micromanagement, and broken promises, point to systemic challenges within law enforcement organizations.
2. The lack of support officers feel is especially concerning, as over 90% of respondents in this category said they experience it “Often” or “Always.” This indicates that officers may feel abandoned by their administrative leaders regarding essential aspects of their work, such as mental health support, guidance during difficult situations, or backing for their decisions in the field. When officers consistently feel unsupported, it can lead to burnout, stress, and isolation, negatively impacting their performance and public safety.
3. Unfair treatment or micromanagement is another critical issue, with almost 86% of respondents feeling this way regularly. Micromanagement can lead to frustration and a loss of autonomy, which is particularly detrimental in a profession requiring quick decision-making and the ability to adapt to changing situations. When officers feel they are being unfairly treated or constantly second-guessed, it can create an environment of distrust, resentment, and disengagement. Such conditions may affect their well-being and compromise their ability to carry out their duties effectively.
4. The broken promises further compound the sense of betrayal, with nearly 91% of respondents reporting that this occurs frequently. Broken promises erode the credibility of leadership, leading officers to question the reliability of their superiors and the organization. This can have long-term consequences for the relationship between officers and their administration, as trust, once lost, is difficult to rebuild. Officers who feel consistently let down by unfulfilled commitments may lose motivation and become less invested in the organization’s success, contributing to higher turnover rates, lower morale, and decreased productivity.

These combined factors—lack of support, unfair treatment, and broken promises—suggest a leadership and cultural crisis within many law enforcement agencies. The frequent occurrence of these issues underscores a disconnect between officers and their administrative leaders, where communication and support structures fail to meet the workforce’s needs. This pervasive sense of betrayal could lead to a range of adverse outcomes, from decreased officer retention to poor mental health and decreased public trust in law enforcement agencies. Addressing these issues requires a concerted effort from leadership to rebuild trust, provide adequate support, and ensure that promises are kept and officers are treated fairly and respectfully. Without such reforms, law enforcement agencies’ long-term health and effectiveness may be at risk.

In addition, respondents were asked to assess the impact of administrative betrayal on their professional and personal lives. The results were categorized into three levels: no impact, low impact, and high impact. Of the total sample of 1,072 respondents, 64 officers (5.97%) reported no impact, while only nine (0.84%) indicated low impact. However, many respondents experienced a high impact from administrative betrayal. When combined across several categories, 295 respondents (27.52%) reported severe adverse effects, which profoundly impacted their well-being and job performance.

Notably, within the high-impact category, there were specific areas where the betrayal’s impact was particularly pronounced. For instance, 191 officers reported high impact in one category alone, underscoring the severity of the issue for a substantial portion of the workforce. The consequences of such betrayal are profound, leading to professional disengagement, emotional distress, and a loss of trust in leadership. These officers likely experience ongoing struggles in their roles, affecting their health and their teams’ functioning.

These high-impact cases are the most concerning, reflecting that over a quarter of officers experienced betrayal to such an extent that it likely influenced their emotional health, professional engagement, and overall trust in leadership. This highlights the critical need for law enforcement leadership to address the widespread and varying levels of betrayal’s impact, particularly for those officers reporting high impact, to prevent ongoing damage to morale, trust, and productivity within the department. Addressing these challenges through more effective support systems, transparency, and commitment to rebuilding trust will be crucial in reversing the negative trends caused by administrative betrayal.

Confidence in Administrative Support During Media-Heavy Events

Participants were asked to respond to the statement: “If I were to become involved in an event that drew heavy media or community attention, I am confident that my administrative leaders would be fair and supportive of me.” This question aimed to gauge officers’ trust in their administrative leaders when faced with public scrutiny.

The results showed that 16.39% of respondents (176 officers) strongly disagreed, indicating a lack of confidence in their leadership’s support during high-pressure, media-involved situations. Additionally, 14.43% (155 officers) slightly disagreed, expressing similar concerns but with less intensity. Some respondents, 17.04% (183 officers), remained neutral, neither agreeing nor disagreeing with the statement.

On the other hand, 20.67% of participants (222 officers) slightly agreed, expressing moderate confidence that their leaders would be supportive. In comparison, 31.47% (338 officers) strongly agreed, indicating high confidence in their administrative leaders during such events.

While over half of the respondents (52.14%) leaned toward agreeing that their administrative leaders would be fair and supportive in media-heavy situations, a notable portion (30.82%) either strongly or slightly disagreed, indicating that a significant number of officers harbor doubts about receiving adequate leadership support in public-facing scenarios. This divide suggests that while many officers feel confident in their leadership, many remain skeptical, potentially reflecting broader concerns about administrative trust and support.

Trust in Communities to Provide Support

Participants were asked to respond to the statement: “I trust communities we serve to have my back.” This statement aimed to assess officers’ confidence in the support of the communities they serve.

The data shows that 11.82% of respondents (127 officers) strongly disagreed, expressing a lack of trust in the community’s support. An additional 16.29% (175 officers) slightly disagreed, reflecting some doubt about community support. 23.18% of respondents (249 officers) remained neutral, neither trusting nor doubting community support.

Conversely, 35.75% of participants (384 officers) slightly agreed, indicating moderate trust in the community’s backing. Finally, 12.94% (139 officers) strongly agreed, showing complete confidence in their community’s support.

While 48.69% of respondents leaned toward trusting their communities, a considerable portion (28.12%) expressed varying levels of doubt about community support. This highlights a divide in how officers perceive the relationship with the public they serve, with almost half trusting their communities. At the same time, a significant minority remains skeptical about receiving support in critical situations.

Trust in City or County Government to Provide Support

Participants were asked to respond to the statement: “I trust the city or the county government or council to support me.” This question was designed to gauge officers’ confidence in local governmental support during challenging times.

The results showed that 31.47% of respondents (338 officers) strongly disagreed, indicating a high distrust in their local government or council’s support. 25.05% (269 officers) disagreed slightly, expressing concerns but with less intensity. A portion of respondents, 21.32% (229 officers), remained neutral, neither trusting nor distrusting their local government.

On the positive side, 15.18% of participants (163 officers) slightly agreed, expressing moderate trust in their local government, while only 6.98% (75 officers) strongly agreed, showing high confidence in their government’s support.

Most officers (56.52%) expressed varying degrees of distrust in their local government or council’s support, with over 31% strongly disagreeing. The relatively small number of respondents who trust their government (22.16%) reflects a disconnect between officers and the local authorities tasked with supporting them. This points to a significant improvement in fostering trust between law enforcement and regional governance.

Trust in Organizational Leaders

Participants were asked to respond to the statement: “I trust my organization’s leaders to have my back.” This aimed to assess officers’ confidence in their organizational leadership’s support.

The data shows that 22.35% of respondents (240 officers) strongly disagreed, expressing a lack of trust in their leadership. 15.55% (167 officers) slightly disagreed, indicating some doubt about leadership support. 14.62% of respondents (157 officers) were neutral, neither trusting nor distrusting their leaders.

On the positive side, 23.84% of respondents (256 officers) slightly agreed, showing moderate trust in their leadership. Lastly, 23.65% (254 officers) strongly agreed, indicating strong confidence in organizational leaders.

There is a noticeable divide in trust toward organizational leadership, with about 38% of respondents expressing doubts or distrust, while roughly 47% reported confidence. This reflects the need for improved trust-building measures between law enforcement personnel and organizational leaders.

Trust in Peers

Participants responded to the statement: “I trust my peers to have my back.” This aimed to assess trust and support within peer relationships.

The results indicate that 2.51% of respondents (27 officers) strongly disagreed, expressing a lack of trust in their peers. Additionally, 9.59% (103 officers) slightly disagreed, showing some distrust. 12.10% (130 officers) remained neutral on the issue.

However, 35.94% (386 officers) slightly agreed, indicating moderate trust in their peers. A significant portion, 39.85% (428 officers), strongly agreed, showing high confidence in peer support.

Most officers (75.79%) trust their peers to provide support, with a substantial portion (39.85%) strongly agreeing with the statement. Only a tiny percentage expressed doubts, highlighting the generally strong peer relationships within law enforcement.

Trust in the Community

Participants were asked to respond to the statement: “I trust communities we serve to have my back.” This statement aimed to measure the perceived level of community support.

The data shows that 11.82% of respondents (127 officers) strongly disagreed, and 16.29% (175 officers) slightly disagreed, indicating skepticism about community support. 23.18% (249 officers) were neutral, while 35.75% (384) slightly agreed, showing moderate trust. Lastly, 12.94% (139 officers) strongly agreed, reflecting confidence in community backing.

Although 48.69% of respondents trust their communities, a significant portion (28.12%) harbors doubts about community support. This suggests a mixed perception of public trust and reliance on community relationships.

Trust in City or County Government Support

Participants were asked to respond to the statement: “I trust the city or county government or council to support me.” This question aimed to assess confidence in local government support.

The results showed that 31.47% of respondents (338 officers) strongly disagreed, with another 25.05% (269 officers) slightly disagreeing, indicating strong skepticism about government support. 21.32% (229 officers) were neutral, while 15.18% (163 officers) slightly agreed, and only 6.98% (75 officers) strongly agreed.

Most respondents (56.52%) expressed distrust in city or county government support. With only 22.16% indicating confidence, there appears to be a substantial disconnect between law enforcement and local governance, suggesting an area of concern for improving institutional trust and support.

Participants’ Comments

Participants submitted 310 comments highlighting various issues related to administrative betrayal, leadership, and officer well-being. A meta-analysis of these comments revealed several key themes:

1. Perception of Administrative Betrayal: Many participants reported feeling betrayed by their leadership, often citing a lack of accountability, favoritism, and inconsistent policy application. Several participants noted that this sense of betrayal demoralized them and their colleagues, eroding trust within the organization.
2. Lack of Support for Mental Health and Well-Being: Numerous participants expressed frustration with their departments’ insufficient focus on wellness programs, mental health resources, and stress management support. Many officers shared that they felt isolated, ignored, or punished for raising concerns about their mental health, further contributing to a toxic work environment.
3. Micromanagement and Poor Leadership: Participants frequently commented on micromanagement and a lack of autonomy, particularly in high-pressure roles. Some also pointed to poor leadership, including unqualified or disengaged leaders, contributing to decreased organizational morale and effectiveness.
4. Positive Peer Support: Many participants noted strong peer support within their ranks despite widespread betrayal and stress. This sense of camaraderie and collective strength among colleagues often helped mitigate some of the negative impacts of administrative shortcomings.
5. Concerns about Organizational Culture: Several participants highlighted systemic issues, such as cronyism, nepotism, and a “good old boy” system, which they believed perpetuated an unhealthy work environment. Others pointed to the disconnect between leadership and front-line officers, suggesting that leadership’s failure to address these issues has led to high turnover and burnout.
6. Leadership Improvement and Wellness Initiatives: While many participants voiced concerns about their current leadership, a smaller but notable group reported positive department changes after a shift in leadership or new wellness initiatives. These participants emphasized the importance of communication, accountability, and wellness-focused policies in creating a supportive environment.

Conclusion

The findings from this survey reveal a significant disconnect between law enforcement officers and their leadership, which manifests in feelings of Administrative Betrayal and a lack of trust. Drawing from Albert Bandura’s framework of Personal, Collective, and Proxy Agency, these feelings of betrayal indicate failures in how leadership supports, communicates with, and advocates for their officers.

Personal Agency is challenged when officers feel they need more autonomy or support from their leadership. Collective Agency, which should foster collaboration and unity, is undermined by widespread reports of broken promises and micromanagement. Finally, Proxy Agency—the trust officers place in their leaders to act on their behalf—has been critically weakened, as the data shows high dissatisfaction with administrative leaders’ support, particularly in high-stress, media-heavy events.

The absence of sufficient wellness programs and access to professional mental health services further exacerbates these feelings, signaling a systemic issue within law enforcement agencies. Over half of respondents do not have access to Licensed Professional Counselors (LPCs), reflecting a critical gap in addressing mental health challenges. This lack of support underscores the pressing need for agencies to bolster Proxy Agency by providing comprehensive wellness resources and ensuring that leadership fulfills its promises.

Despite these challenges, peer support remains a strength within the ranks, with 75.79% of respondents trusting their peers. This sense of Collective Agency at the peer level highlights the resilience and solidarity officers maintain among themselves, even when institutional support falters.

The mixed perceptions of trust in communities and local governments further suggest that external relationships also require attention. Strengthening Collective Agency means fostering internal cohesion and ensuring that law enforcement officers feel supported by their leadership and the public they serve.

Ultimately, addressing these issues will require concerted efforts from law enforcement leadership to rebuild trust, provide tangible support, and reinforce the role of Collective Agency within departments. By doing so, agencies can reduce feelings of betrayal, improve officer morale and well-being, and foster a more resilient, empowered workforce.

Pragmatic Recommendations

1. Strengthen Wellness Programs: Given that nearly half of the surveyed agencies lack wellness programs, leadership should prioritize establishing and enhancing comprehensive wellness initiatives. These programs should include access to Licensed Professional Counselors (LPCs) and other mental health resources. By supporting Personal Agency, officers can take control of their well-being, knowing the department provides the tools and resources necessary for their mental and emotional health.
2. Improve Leadership Transparency and Accountability: To rebuild trust in Proxy Agency, administrative leaders must be transparent in their decision-making processes and consistently fulfill their promises. Developing a formal system of checks and accountability helps ensure promises are kept, reducing the likelihood of officers feeling betrayed. This would enhance leadership credibility and foster a more collaborative relationship between officers and their administration.
3. Enhance Open Communication Channels: Effective communication is crucial to avoiding perceived betrayal. Establishing regular, structured dialogue between leadership and rank-and-file officers—such as conversations in briefings or feedback forums—creates a more open, transparent environment. Collective Agency can be reinforced by allowing officers to voice their concerns and participate in decision-making processes that affect the organization.
4. Address Micromanagement and Foster Autonomy: The data shows that micromanagement is a significant issue, leading to frustration and disengagement among officers. Leaders should work on empowering officers by delegating decision-making authority and allowing them the autonomy to act in the field. This would enhance Personal Agency, encouraging officers to take the initiative and responsibility for their actions while feeling supported by their leadership.
5. Build Trust with External Communities: Strengthening relationships with the community is essential for officers to feel supported by the public. Agencies should invest in community engagement programs that foster mutual trust and understanding between officers and the communities they serve. This would enhance Collective Agency at a broader societal level, ensuring officers know they are not isolated in their work but are part of a more extensive, supportive network.
6. Create Leadership Training Programs Focused on Agency Development: Leadership training should incorporate Bandura’s Personal, Collective, and Proxy Agency framework to ensure leaders are equipped with the tools to foster agency at every level of their teams. This would involve training leaders to recognize and address perceived betrayal, create a culture of trust, and enhance their officers’ personal and collective empowerment.

Supplemental Strategies for Implementation

While this article’s recommendations provide a robust framework for addressing trust and empowerment within law enforcement, implementing these changes requires careful consideration of real-world challenges and the inclusion of diverse perspectives. The following strategies offer additional guidance to support the transition from theory to practice.

1. Understanding Leadership Challenges: Law enforcement leadership often faces competing demands, including budget limitations, political pressures, and balancing public scrutiny with officer welfare. Engaging leaders in open dialogue about their constraints and providing leadership training focusing on Bandura’s Agency framework can help bridge the gap between rank-and-file officers and administration. Programs promoting transparency and accountability can rebuild Proxy Agency and strengthen relationships.
2. Addressing Implementation Barriers: Resistance to change, budget constraints, and cultural inertia can all hinder progress. To overcome these barriers, agencies might consider phased implementation of wellness programs and leadership initiatives. Starting with pilot programs, partnering with external mental health organizations, or securing grants for officer wellness can make these initiatives more achievable. Moreover, evidence of successful outcomes from similar agencies could ease the transition.
3. Engaging External Stakeholders: Building trust with external stakeholders such as community leaders, the media, and local government officials is vital. Regular, transparent communication with these groups helps bridge the gap between public perception and internal officer trust. Agencies should actively engage community stakeholders through public forums, outreach programs, and joint initiatives to ensure officers and their communities feel connected and mutually supportive.
4. Learning from Case Studies: Case studies from other law enforcement agencies that successfully implement wellness programs or improve trust in leadership can provide valuable insights. For instance, agencies that have developed robust peer support systems or adopted transparent communication strategies may offer models others can follow. Departments can tailor solutions to their needs by analyzing their successes and challenges.
5. Creating a Roadmap for Long-Term Change: A structured roadmap highlighting short-term and long-term goals is crucial for sustained change. In the short term, departments focus on improving internal communication and wellness access, while long-term goals include comprehensive leadership reform and community engagement. This roadmap ensures that both leadership and officers have clear benchmarks for progress and accountability.
6. Strengthening Peer Support Networks: Given the strong sense of Collective Agency among peers, formalizing peer support networks can help officers manage stress and feelings of betrayal. Agencies should invest in training peer mentors, creating support groups, and encouraging informal mentorship to provide a buffer when administrative trust is low. Peer-driven support can reinforce a positive organizational culture from within.

To illustrate the model and the potential real-world complexity of applying these principles, let’s consider a hypothetical case:

Officer Jeffers, a patrol sergeant, has privately been struggling with symptoms of post-traumatic stress compounded by substance use. Two years earlier, his department lost two officers to suicide, one of whom was Officer Jeffers’ partner.

In response to these losses, department leadership secured funding for a comprehensive suicide prevention program founded on the principle that suicide is preventable. The program emphasizes that suicide awareness and frequent risk screening are best practices for prevention.

The department established an officer wellness division with this grant, providing regular mental wellness check-ups using research-backed screening measures. They also contracted with five community providers to streamline access to mental health support for officers identified as being at risk for suicide.

Analysis: A response like this is typical in departments that experience suicide loss. On paper, the program appears robust and supportive, often championed by well-meaning leaders who want to protect their teams. If Officer Jeffers were real, he might report in our survey that his department is one of the 51% with a wellness program and one of the 33% with access to multiple therapists. By these metrics, this department would look like a shining example of one that values officer wellness. However, a deeper look at specific metrics raises essential questions:

1. Messaging: How do officers perceive the program’s core principles, such as the idea that suicide is preventable or that regular screening is the best method for prevention?
2. Utilization: How often do officers voluntarily use services, including mental wellness screenings?
3. Cultural Competence: How many officers maintain active relationships with the therapists connected to the program?

Our data suggests that perceptions of betrayal and lack of support are systemic issues in law enforcement. Let us examine this case through the lens of our model.

Personal Agency:

Well-being programs like this can unintentionally undermine personal agency. Mandatory screenings and suicide assessments by outside entities that officers don’t trust may erode personal agency rather than support it.

A parallel exists in the military. Licensed mental health providers assess troops for both wellness and fitness for duty. Some military psychologists, known as “wizards,” make service members “disappear” from the military if deemed unfit for duty. This dynamic creates suspicion and distrust rather than fostering neutral, supportive relationships.

In law enforcement, officers may enter relationships with licensed providers with similar mistrust, particularly if they fear professional consequences for acknowledging mental health struggles. They may compartmentalize their pain, appearing fully functional on the job while suffering off duty. Repeatedly compelling officers to claim they are well when they do not drive them further from seeking support.

Another dimension of personal agency involves messaging. For decades, funding has supported suicide awareness programs, but officers impacted by suicide face hard truths. For example, constant exposure to suicide statistics might reinforce the perception that suicide is inevitable—a dangerous mindset that undermines personal agency.

Well-meaning messages about suicide prevention can fall flat with officers who couldn’t prevent the suicide of a colleague. Many officers express guilt after a peer’s suicide, feeling responsible for missing the warning signs. Training them to recognize these signs may intensify their guilt, contributing to their emotional distress.

No one, not even psychologists, can predict suicide with certainty. Officer Jeffers might ask himself gut-wrenching questions like: “How did I not see my partner’s struggle? Didn’t she trust me enough to share what she was going through? I would have done anything to help her.”

In truth, prevention strategies need to build interpersonal trust and reduce stigma, creating an environment where officers feel safe addressing their problems with a supportive community. Technology-enabled peak performance and wellness platforms by MGNUSWorx can assist in building a culture of trust and habit-building skills to inspire and transcend (Javidi et al., 2024).

Collective Agency:

Collective agency refers to shared decision-making, cohesion, and trust within the department. Many departments react to suicide by seeking guidance from mental health providers, often relying on “experts” unfamiliar with the culture of law enforcement.

Leaders, though well-intentioned, may implement nationally recognized, research-backed programs designed for civilian populations, not police officers. While these programs look good on paper, they can erode collective agency by failing to resonate with the officers they aim to serve. Officers may not buy into these programs if they perceive them as a fear-based response from leadership rather than a thoughtful, supportive initiative.

Proxy Agency:

Proxy agency refers to the trust officers place in their leadership to advocate for their needs and those who are extensions of that trust—such as licensed mental health providers.

Wellness programs are often underutilized because of cultural and trust gaps between officers and clinicians. Officers may be wary of engaging with them due to the dual roles of mental health providers in law enforcement (both support and assessment).

Key questions must be asked:

• How do officers view the therapists connected to the program?
• How does leadership demonstrate trust in these therapists?
• Does leadership model vulnerability by seeking mental health support themselves?

Leaders who show vulnerability create proxy agency. When leaders fail to model vulnerability, they send an unspoken message that seeking help is “not for us.” This can result in wellness programs that, though impressive on paper, remain underutilized and leave the department at greater risk for further suicide losses.

Limitations and Path Forward for Future Research

1. Sample Representation: While the survey included responses from 1,074 officers, representing a reasonable sample size, the study’s findings may only partially capture the diversity of experiences across various law enforcement agencies in different geographical and organizational contexts. Future research could focus on expanding the sample size and ensuring a more balanced representation, including higher participation from female officers and those in underrepresented areas.
2. Self-Reported Data: The reliance on self-reported data introduces the potential for bias, as respondents may interpret questions differently or feel pressured to respond in socially desirable ways. Future research could benefit from combining quantitative survey data with qualitative methods, such as in-depth interviews or focus groups, to better understand officers’ lived experiences of administrative betrayal.
3. Longitudinal Studies on Officer Well-Being: The study simultaneously offers a snapshot of officers’ perceptions. Future research could employ longitudinal methods to track changes in officer well-being, trust in leadership, and organizational culture over time. This would help determine the long-term effects of administrative betrayal and whether implementing targeted interventions improves trust and agency.
4. Examination of External Factors: Future studies could explore the role of external factors—such as societal pressures, media scrutiny, and political influences—on officers’ perceptions of betrayal. Understanding how these external pressures intersect with internal organizational dynamics could provide a more comprehensive view of officers’ challenges and inform the development of more holistic solutions.
5. Focus on Leadership’s Perspective: While this research emphasizes officers’ perceptions, future studies could incorporate the perspectives of law enforcement leadership to understand their challenges and constraints in providing adequate support. Bridging this gap could foster a more collaborative approach to resolving trust, communication, and well-being issues in law enforcement organizations.
6. Impact of Wellness Programs: The current research points to the importance of wellness programs, but there is a need for more in-depth exploration into the specific elements of these programs that most effectively address issues of betrayal, stress, and mental health. Future research should assess the impact of different wellness interventions and identify best practices for supporting officers’ cognitive and emotional well-being.
   

   ---

   About the Authors:

   Shauna “DOC” Springer Ph.D. – Chief Clinical Advisor and author of Relentless Courage, is one of the nation’s leading authorities on trauma, close relationships, suicide prevention, and initiatives that impact the military and veteran community. She is the Chief Psychologist for Stella Center, where she helps advance innovative treatments for psychological trauma.

   Brian Ellis – Chief Experience Officer at the National Command & Staff College, retired police lieutenant, author, and crisis management expert with over 25 years of experience. He led tactical teams and SWAT units, earning multiple commendations for his service. As a speaker, coach, and trainer, Brian collaborates with the National Command & Staff College and MAGNUSWorx, focusing on leadership, team performance, and resilience.

   Mitch Javidi, Ph. D., Theorist, Human Behaviorist, and originator of MAGNUS OVEA—GREAT TO MAGNUS, is the founder of the National Command & Staff College. He is a seasoned peak performance and human behaviorist with over 35 years of hands-on experience across diverse industries, including Academia, Military, Public Safety, Government, Pharma, and Technology.

   ---

References:

Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1-26.

Kavidi, M., & Ellis, B. (2024). The Theory of MAGNUS OVEA: A General Theory of Human Performance and Wellbeing. Readiness Network Publishing, Inc.

Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad Leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters. Harvard Business Review Press.

McCreary, D. R., & Thompson, M. M. (2006). Stress in law enforcement: The impact of work-related and organizational factors. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33(4), 439-462.

Violanti, J. M., & Aron, F. (1995). Police stressors: Variations in perception among police personnel. Journal of Criminal Justice, 23(3), 287-294.

Violanti, J. M., & Paton, D. (Eds.). (2008). Police trauma: Psychological aftermath of civilian combat. Charles C Thomas Publisher.

Continue Reading

Source: www.lawofficer.com