ABSTRACT
The term critical incident used in the context of emergency services has been defined in a number of ways since it first came into vogue in the early 1990s. Rather than insisting on a universally agreed upon meaning, law enforcement experts have actually stressed the importance of maintaining a flexible definition because of the wide variation in officer responses to duty-related events (Bohl, 1995; Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI], 1996). Thus, while definitions vary, it is generally understood that line-of-duty events, which for officers are “outside the range of normal activity” (Paton & Violanti, 1996, p. 183) or involve serious threat or loss (Gentz, 1990), are considered critical incidents. For some experts, it is the officer’s reaction rather than event characteristics themselves that makes an incident critical (Fay, 2000; Mitchell & Everly, 2001). This mirrors the American Psychiatric Association’s criteria of an event eliciting an intense emotional reaction in the exposed individual in order for it to be considered “traumatic” in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV-TR, 2000). However, unlike the now controversial restrictions imposed by the DSM-IV’s PTSD Criterion A2 (Kilpatrick, Resnick, & Acierno, 2009; Weathers & Keane, 2007), critical reactions to police incidents have been characterized in such vague, broad terms as “strong emotional reactions” (Mitchell, 1983), an overwhelming of coping mechanisms (Mitchell & Everly, 2001), or a “psychological crisis” (Fay, 2000). Regardless, certain police encounters are routinely categorized as critical incidents, or as incidents more likely to cause a critical response. These include such potentially traumatic events as line-of-duty deaths or serious injuries, shooting incidents, and child deaths or significant injuries (DSM-IV PTSD, Criterion A; Mitchell & Everly, 2001; Paton & Violanti, 1996). In addition, some psychologists identify stressful situations such as facing legal charges or the threat of dismissal, or experiencing intense media or public scrutiny as potential critical incidents (Fay, 2000; Gentz, 1990; Mitchell & Bray, 1990). This inclusion of both stressful and traumatic events under the heading of critical incidents has been criticized as an “overstatement” that leads to the excessive use and support of certain debriefing interventions (Stuhlmiller & Dunning, 2000).
