“Here is the gold standard.”  If I read that pathetic claim on the back of one more book cover, I fear going on an armed rampage through the publishing houses of New York.  Has the hysteria of the world gotten so bad that we won’t give consideration to anything new unless we claim on the back cover that it is the best, most outstanding, or “the new gold standard?”  It makes you want to puke.  And damn if when I start to open Laurence Miller’s Counseling Crime Victims:  Practical Strategies for Mental Health Professionals (Springer, New York, NY, 2008) right on the back cover it claims to set the new gold standard.  I know this guy, digitally at least.  How could he allow the publisher to make such a disgusting claim?  I expect more from you Dr. Miller, except no way around it, this book is so good that it does set a new gold standard.

COunceling Crime Victims

Book review of “Counseling Crime Victims: Practical Strategies for Mental Health Professionals” by Laurence Miller.

I started on an easy saunter through this book figuring I’d skim most of it, but frankly I started finding I was making a paralinguistic cue every two or three minutes, mostly nasal hums and head shaking, as I read many phrases that explained some interesting material about crime victims.  I knew most of the stuff, but frankly I had gotten a little lazy as my familiarity was reduced by the lack of incidence in my practice.  I don’t treat that many victims except after terrorist acts.  There were sections like “PTSD in the Elderly” where I just didn’t have that many elderly clients so it was pretty new stuff, and research that explained what I practiced but never knew the science behind.  Dr. Miller is thorough as hell and after the first half hour I had figured this was a book I was going to keep permanently as a reference for speeches I give, programs I was developing, or court cases that I was hired on.  I felt like I had found a nice shiny piece of jewelry – okay, I’ll admit, a gold standard.

Dr. Miller has done all the work for you.  There are tons of research studies, tons of useful information, tons of practical advice on how to organize you approach to crime victims in crimes from sexual assault, to domestic violence, to homicides, even to terrorist acts.  He talks about what the people go through when they are a victim of a criminal act and what types of approaches work for each of the victims, at least in theory.  The section on school violence and bullying was particularly useful to me as I was busy preparing for a civil trial where the parent’s frustration with the school in not handling a bullying incident was central to the trials actions.  This was a profoundly useful book and the research really makes you stand up and shout “so that’s why we do it that way.”

If there is a criticism of this extremely thorough treatise it would have to do with style more than material.  It is the same criticism I have for most academic material that speak about therapy.  To make therapy material fully accessible to the largest number of readers, you must tell people what to say when they sit across from a patient, not just how to think about the treatment.  Actually tell them what to say.  Essential, more anecdotal stories intermixed with the research gets the obsessive minds of most therapists fantasizing about what they would say in that situation and then they start the rehearsal process for a patient in their future.  Adler, Meichenbaum, Erikson, and especially Albert Ellis integrated the narrative with research to an art form.  Dr. Miller’s book was not that type of book and Springer is not that type of publisher, but that would make it the most accessible to everyone.

Take this criticism with a grain of salt because Dr. Miller’s Counseling Crime Victimsis extremely effective just as it is, and it will occupy a central spot on my bookshelf as I expect to be referring to it a lot to remind me of what I know, what I have forgotten, and highlight some new ways to think about a doing therapy with a crime victim.  You really might want to check this book out if you have a therapy practice.  It is really a golden find, so to speak.

If you enjoyed this book review, sign up to receive updates for more posts on the latest in police psychology and stress management.

Gary S. Aumiller, Ph.D. ABPP

For books by Dr. Gary S. Aumiller got to www.myherodad.com or www.myheromom.com

Join me on Facebook or Linkedin (see sidebar)

 

He’s ranked as a Major, and serves as Deputy Chief of Police and Director of Threat Management Services at Virginia Tech University. He was hired after the awful situation when a shooter took the lives of 32 people, mostly students, before taking his own life. This is truly the dark side of what we deal with in our professions, but Virginia Tech made a bold move and hired one of the best persons in the world to make sure they avoid anything similar in the future — Gene Deisinger.

Gary: Gene, this was a Sigma -- Deisingerbig move to Virginia from the Midwest. Where were you before?

Gene: I was the Deputy Chief of Police and managed threat management services at Iowa State University when Virginia Tech first contacted me for assistance. I had been teaching threat assessment for the past 15 years, in fact I go to teach in Australia later this summer. When Virginia Tech contacted me, I was flattered to be asked to join their team and we quickly came to an agreement.

Gary: Talk about sending a message. Hiring you was a real message to the public that they weren’t messing around. What do you think is the minimum level of training to do what you do?

Gene: I would say a decade of training and experience in threat assessment.

Gary: So what is your process in threat assessment?

Gene: We do a full contextual analysis which includes analyzing the subject of concern (personality, background, behavior, etc.), vulnerability of the target, environmental conditions, and precipitating events that can trigger an escalation of violence. We gather relevant information from a variety of sources (e.g., interviewing the subject of concern, as well as other employees or students, and review public records including the internet, etc.). We then implement a plan to mitigate risks in each of the domains of analysis, and then do ongoing monitoring and re-evaluation, and go back and start it over. It is actually a complex process with a lot of moving parts.

Gary: Whoa, I always thought of threat assessment as looking at the Menninger Triad, state of mind and…?

Gene: I think that is the mistake most people make. They consider threat assessment to be the same as forensic work of assessing individuals and dangerousness, and that is part of it, but the more important work is designing a full system and feedback loops for on-going threat assessment and management. Sometimes you do not even see the individual to assess them for the situation.

Gary: You mean indirect assessment?

Gene: If you are talking a dangerous assessment where you are looking at the current state of mental health and so forth, you may want to see the individual, but an overall threat assessment would involve assessing is this person going to react to the situation, environment and, cues from others and a whole bunch of dimensions that you don’t actually need to see the individual to assess. You may find it more useful to talk to key people in the person’s life, look at previous mental health concerns, level of education, colleagues, most recent action, any plans or fantasies of plans.

Gary: So what you are saying is that most of us see threat assessment as looking at the individual who might take an action, and you see it as much more global and contextual.

Gene: Absolutely. In addition to the characteristics of an individual that contribute to the risk, it may also come down to policies or poor management causing anger, or a political decision that angers radical groups in a country, or even a controversial medical treatment being performed and the environment being right for an action by an actor unknown at the time, such as in abortion clinics in the 70’s and 80’s. Threat assessment is much larger than just assessing an individual’s dangerousness.

Gary: Okay, where do you get the training for this?

Gene: Marisa Reddy Randazzo and I have a group called SIGMA Threat Management Associates <http://www.SigmaTMA.com>). We do training and consultation for educational institution, private corporations, governmental entities, mental health professionals and individuals. But there are many other excellent practitioners such as Reid Meloy and Kris Mohandie who have conducted research and published broadly. Start with primers from the Secret Service like the Exceptional Cases Study or Safe Schools projects. Turner and Gellis’ book is a great reference. Cawood and Corcoran have a great book that covers the process nicely. All these are references to know where you are going with this topic and begin to really understand threat assessments. We have many good resources listed on our website.

Gary: Many people don’t think of the Secret Service as doing much more than protecting the president.

Gene: They are a leader in the threat assessment field because they are analyzing and managing threats all the time. They protect persons who are high profile targets, and guns and binoculars are not enough to protect someone people want to kill. Threat assessment grew out of our desire to keep people safe and make ways to see things we were blind to with just binoculars. It’s a relatively newer part of our science and it is growing exponentially each year.

If you enjoyed this interview, sign up to receive updates for more posts on the latest in police psychology and stress management.

Gary S. Aumiller, Ph.D. ABPP

For books by Dr. Gary S. Aumiller got to www.myherodad.com or www.myheromom.com

Join me on Facebook or Linkedin (see sidebar)


Weiss

Book review of “Personality Assessment in Police Psychology.”

I have to admit, I had no intention of reading this book in one sitting, in fact, I was only really going to read about half of the essays in this collection of essays.  I have to admit I was invited to write a chapter in this book but really couldn’t write on the topic assigned.  And may I tell you, I also need to admit I have known this editor since he was a grad student and I even know personally he is a very good golfer besides editing a book, so I am sort of attached to this young man.    I do not have to admit that the topic was not remotely interesting to me when I heard of the book originally, but I became completely engaged in it after reading only the first essay, and in fact, ended up reading the whole damn thing.  This book is definitely something to keep around awhile.

When you start reading Personality Assessment in Police Psychology: A 21st Century Perspective  (Charles C Thomas Pub Ltd  June 14, 2010,  Peter A. Weiss, Editor), you are hit in the face with a history of the personality testing in law enforcement written by Peter Weiss, the editor, and Robin Inwald.  Gee, I think I’ve heard her name before.  The history section held a lot of surprises for me.  Some of the names of the early pioneers like Joe Fabricatore and Jim Shaw were people I met originally when I came to join the organizations in the field, and people that accepted me with open arms.  I didn’t realize they were so impactful and important in building the profession.  The history of the Society for Police and Criminal Psychology, the APA Division 18 and the IACP Police Psych Services Section all had one or two things that I didn’t know about.  But the real history that surprised me was the history of personality testing for Law Enforcement populations.  Some of this history was downright enlightening, and the presentation was very good, and more than that, it was written in a style that made sense on the first read through which is often difficult when writing history.  That is worth the price of admission, but there is so much more here.

In the articles, you hear various professionals in our field give their view of certain tests, or processes, and at the end, some unusual situations where personality testing was important in police psychology.    For example, John (Jack) Jones wrote a brilliant piece on integrity testing in pre-offer that was a combination of history, education and a how-to article.  It was well-written for the consumer and gave practical advice.  It promoted a bifurcated model of testing with testing for issues like integrity and conscientiousness pre-offer, and testing for pathology post-conditional offer.  It was excellent and got me thinking about specifics of the whole pre-offer-post offer paradigm that is out-front since the ADA laws.

Then there was Mike Aamodt’s article on the meta-analysis of the various types of testing for Law Enforcement candidates.  Now I will preface this by saying Mike Aamodt is one of the best presenters I have ever seen in police psychology, and his research makes some of the most sense of anyone I have ever read in all police psychology.  He has a way about him that makes the most intricate principles simple, the most esoteric ideas commonplace, and the most convoluted concepts sequential.  He starts off his article by saying we are not predicting whether a person is good on the job, we are predicting supervisors ratings when the person is on the job – right to the root of what is going on.  Then he goes on to show evidence that psychologists are not good at connecting pathology predictions from a test to supervisors’ ratings of job performance.  Further stating that even with predictors of normal personality, only a few scales have significant level of predictive significance, for example the tolerance scale on the CPI is a good predictor of supervisor ratings.  Mike Aamodt is a brilliant man and his inclusion in this wonderful collection of essays was very important.

There are other essays by authors like Eric Ostrov on using multiple sources of information, JoAnne Brewster, Philip Wickline and Mike Stoloff on the use of the Rorschach in personality testing with Law Enforcement screenings,  Cary Rostov and Bob Davis on the M-Pulse, Gerald Serafino on fundamental issues, and of course Peter Weiss’ own father, the ex-editor of the Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, William Weiss.

Faults with the book?  Damn, I can’t think of many.  The essays cover the topic well, they are interesting, there is some new stuff here, and where needed they are well researched.  If there is s a fault, I would suggest the history article has some bias toward telling history with a little angle, but this is not a big thing.  This is a good book with a lot of good information.

So, try to get a copy of Personality Assessment in Police Psychology: A 21st Century Perspective.   You will find it worth your time and no matter what level you are at you will learn a lot.   It is a wonderful reference to add to your library.

If you enjoyed this book review, sign up to receive updates for more posts on the latest in police psychology and stress management.

Gary S. Aumiller, Ph.D. ABPP

For books by Dr. Gary S. Aumiller got to www.myherodad.com or www.myheromom.com

Join me on facebook or linkedin (see sidebar)

Hunting the American Terrorist

Hunting the American Terrorist

I was particularly interested in the lone terrorist because I was in Phoenix this January visiting friends when Jared Loughner shot and killed six people, injuring 19, in nearby Tucson.  There has to be a way for mental health professionals to see this coming.   I wanted to look into the phenomenon of the lone terrorist for this blog and decided to start with a person who is part of The Society and has defined the lone terrorist, Dr. Kathleen Puckett. Here are some interview questions I asked.

Gary:  How did you get into this study of the lone terrorist?

Kathleen:  I was working for the FBI and they had hit a dead end with trying to locate the Unabomber so they decided to give up on the profilers and called my partner and I in to start a new task force and take a fresh look at the situation.  The Unabomber went underground for almost six years and didn’t kill anyone so he was not fitting the patterns of a serial killer.  The people working on the case said he was either in prison or dead, but then he showed up again.

Gary:  That sounds like a pretty daunting task.  How did you approach the project at that point?

Kathleen:  We figured that everything they were doing up to that point was leading them no place so we had to go in and do things differently.  We got carte blanche from the Director of the FBI, and we went back and looked at all the scenes, all the victims and everyone involved.  What we realized were the victims were totally unrelated and symbolic of something or some institution.

Gary:     The Unabomber was given up by his brother, was your investigation successful?

Kathleen:  We had thousands of leads that we were looking into and Kaczynski was on the list.  We would have gotten to him, it just steered us there quicker when we got the leads from his relative.  As soon as we saw the writings, it just popped in us.

Gary:  What else did you do to study the lone terrorist?  I saw you on a TV show for McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing?   Did you study others?

Kathleen:  I took to studying the ten biggest lone terrorists in the past years.  Kaczynski, McVeigh and Nichols, Eric Robert Rudolph…

Gary:  The Olympic Bomber?

Kathleen:  Yes.  And a number of other facilities for abortions in the south.  I studied the lone terrorists and found some very common attributes.  First, all had desired to leave a mark on the earth.  They wanted to make an impact.  Their victims were symbolic, not individuals to them. None really resisted arrest, yet they did work for escape.

Gary:  McVeigh was driving away in a car without a license plate?

Kathleen:  But he was driving away.  He would have escaped and probably killed again if the cop didn’t see he lacked a license plate.  He wanted the death penalty.   He didn’t care what the victims thought about the bombing, in fact told them to “get over it” instead of showing empathy.

Gary:  Real psychopathic response.

Kathleen:  More than psychopathic.  The lone terrorist has no social connections.  Not like Bin Laden who is the most well known terrorist with a purpose, these people have no social connections.  In fact, many of them were turned down by radical right wing groups because the groups felt they were crazy.  I remember McVeigh was look for friends and tried to join with the Michigan Militia and they thought he was too nuts and didn’t want to have anything to do with him.

Gary:  Interesting.  So these people are really disconnected?  What about the Arizona killer, Loughner?  He was disconnected from everyone.

Kathleen:  But he had a definite target person and he believed the government was controlling the world through the use of grammar.  Notice he was found incompetent to stand trial.  The lone terrorists tend to be able to help in their defense.  They may be crazy, but they are competent and there is sort of a logic to their thinking.  It is a small distinction, but one that need to be made.  Loughner actually knew who his target was in advance.  The lone terrorist doesn’t care who his target is as long as they are symbolic.

Gary:  And what about school shooters.  Can they be seen as lone terrorists?

Kathleen:  Most school shooters identify their targets and even know some of them, so they really don’t fit this pattern.

Gary:  Wow.  It is a whole new way of thinking about terrorism.  I understand you went to an auction of the Unabomber stuff?

Kathleen:  Yea.  He was ordered to give restitution to his victims so they auction off his stuff online.  Do you realize the hooded sweatshirt and sunglasses are now at $20,000 and the auction isn’t over yet?  I guess people collect all kinds of things.

Gary:  Could be a museum of the macabre, also.  Kathleen, where can people get more information on this fascinating distinction?  You have a book somewhere, right?

Kathleen:  Yes.  It’s called Hunting the American Terrorist: The FBI’s War on Homegrown Terror.   I wrote it with Terry Turchie  in 2007.  It is published by History Publishing Company and it is in digital format also.

Gary:  Thank you very much Kathleen.”

If you enjoyed this interview, sign up to receive updates for more posts on the latest in police psychology and stress management.

Gary S. Aumiller, Ph.D.  ABPP

For books by Dr. Gary Aumiller go to www.myherodad.com or www.myheromom.com

 

Rostow

Book review of “A Handbook for Psychological Fitness-for-Duty Evaluations in Law Enforcement.”

Cary Rostow asked me to review his book and I thought “no problem.”  It was a supposedly a Handbook on Fitness for Duty Examinations.  So I figured it would be a short, little boring thing with a lot of statistics, but I will slog through it and write something inane up for the membership.  Now I know realize this book is a terrible task.  It is about the most thorough treatise on a subject I could ever imagine.  Rostow and Davis went into such painstaking detail to cover every possible area on the subject of Fitness for Duty Examinations and then some.  I found myself getting angry at them that I had to read so much, and at the same time they brought the subject to life in a way that few could.  I had to read large sections at a time because I couldn’t put it down.  Handbook my arse – a handbook is supposed to be a short little “how to” thing that comes with your fancy-dansy cappuccino maker.  What kind of time do they think I have for these book reviews?

For example, the first section on the history of policing and police psychology.  Why would anyone include something like this in a handbook on Fitness for Duty Examinations?  It was fascinating to hear about the police movements in this country and the different stages of police reform.  And about police psychology and….okay, I couldn’t put it down!  But why include something so interesting in a book intended to be dry and hard to read.  I just don’t understand it.  Have they no respect for how busy I am?

They talk about developing a Fitness for Duty System, and making decision on how a Fitness for Duty will be performed.  They give the reasons why to do a Fitness for Duty and the misuses.  They go through the reasons for a fitness for duty examination, the types of recommendations, types of test, predictive validity – the stuff of handbooks, except give this one 5 stars for thoroughness in each of these areas.  Then they get really interesting again going into the fitness for duty in forensic situations such as dealing with HIPAA laws, expert witnessing, the Family Medical Leave Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act and the American with Disabilities Act.  These chapters are really good and bring the understanding about what employment law is all about.  Throughout the book they give examples of Fitness for Duty cases that will make you read them a couple of times because you have to think about them.  I didn’t want to think reading a handbook, but this book really got me.  Attach the “whosit” to the “whatsit,” turn button “A” and steam the milk for the cappuccino. That’s what I wanted.  What is this thinking stuff?

But the area where they shine the most is in the conclusions and reflections.  It is a short little chapter at the end, but it is loaded with thought provoking information.  It is really a great overview of future directions with the insight of people at the top of the field.

So, if you want to ruin about 3 days of your life reading a “handbook” that reads surprisingly interesting, pick up A Handbook for Psychological Fitness for Duty Examinations in Law Enforcement by Cary D. Rostow, Ph.D. and Robert D. Davis, Ph.D.  The publisher is The Hawthorne Press but it should be published by Gideon and sit in every “hotel room” where psychologists practice.

I think I’ll go make a cappuccino now!

If you enjoyed this book review, sign up to receive updates for more posts on the latest in police psychology.

Gary S. Aumiller, Ph.D. ABPP

For books by Dr. Gary Aumiller go to  www.myherodad.com  or  www.myheromom.com