MANAGING OF RESISTIVE BEHAVIOURTM
Managing of Resistive Behaviour (M.O.R.B.TM) has been designed to address the need for a safe and effective method of dealing with people who are displaying various levels of resistance (from passive to active). The program was developed in conjunction with front-line professionals in the healthcare, educational and security industry to mitigate the risk of civil and criminal liability. The methodology is to employ current “best practices” that can be shown to be “Court Defensible”. Stay Safe Instructional Programs (SSIP) is a wholly owned Canadian specialized training company with considerable experience and the requisite subject matter expertise.
One of the most litigated aspects has become the application (perceived or otherwise) of force and/or the use of restraints on an individual that is under our care. M.O.R.B.TM was developed specifically to identify, understand and manage “resistive” or “non-compliant” behaviour prior to it escalating to aggressive or assaultive. As a result all efforts have been employed to ensure the material is compliant, consistent and current with applicable legal authorities and acceptable standards.
The experiences and lessons learned by law enforcement as a result of litigation and legal rulings have been incorporated into the M.O.R.B.TM “Court Defensible” training programs.
The program has been designed to provide front-line staff with simple, tested and industry-specific techniques to mitigate the risk of not only injury, but just as importantly civil and/or criminal liability.
- Identify and articulate the goals for effective (tactical) communications and verbal de-escalation.
- Articulate the major elements in the process of verbal communications.
- Articulate non-verbal messages.
- Identify and describe
- obstacles to effective communications.
- methods that improve verbal communications
- “Danger cues”
- “verbal strategies” designed to enhance communications.
- “verbal phrases” that create conflict.
- what constitutes the “steps that generate voluntary cooperation”.
- what constitutes the “stages of personal preparation”.
- explore “personal preparation” principles.
- “conflict prevention” strategies.
- pre-attack indicators/threat recognition and personal safety strategies.
- what are the “stages of crisis”.
- “responses to crisis”.
- Utilize effective strategies for “questioning difficulties”.
- Utilize strategies for “setting limits”.
- Utilize effective options and strategies when “threatened”.
- Identify and articulate what constitutes
- “stress management”.
- “autonomic nervous system”.
- “effects of fear”.
- “skilful management of people”.
- Identify and perform court defensible responses with respect to the “management of resistance” as it relates to potential assaultive behaviour.
- Articulate Legal justification for the application of force or restraints by acting “In good faith”.
- To identify and perform drills with respect to the principles of increasing “reaction time”.
- To identify and perform distraction and control techniques utilizing “nerve motor points”.
- To identify and perform “personal safety responses” and “disarming techniques
As more and more professionals are placed into positions of having to apply physical intervention techniques to deal with individuals whom may be under their care, there is a need to have the ability to distinguish “Resistive” as opposed to Aggressive or Assaultive behaviour. There is a duty imposed on professionals to demonstrate a level of “standard of care” that may be impose an additional layer of responsibility. It is increasingly important for front-line professionals to not only recognize but articulate the difference between “Resistive” as opposed to Aggressive behaviour as it may be a Court or Tribunal that determines whether the actions were justified and/or defensible.
As an example, in a healthcare or educational setting, there are laws and legal authorities that specifically deal with how one may respond to “Aggressive and/or Assaultive” behaviour or actions. The challenge for many professionals has frequently been the inability to articulate the level of threat that they preceived prior to responding to the behaviour.
The Criminal Code of Canada states the following:
265. (1) A person commits an assault when
(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;
(b) he attempts or threatens, by an act or a gesture, to apply force to another person, if hehas, or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose;
(3) For the purposes of this section, no consent is obtained where the complainant submits or does not resist by reason of
(d) the exercise of authority.
As is evident the application of force and/or restraints whether for the protection of yourself or others can become a litigious matter regardless of the good intentions of the individual or organization. The federal Criminal Code, provincial Patient Restraint Minimization Act (s), Occupational Health and Safety Act (s), are but a few legal authorities that employers, institutions and employees need to be conversant with to ensure they can meet their moral and legal obligations.