A unique review of rejected police candidates: psychiatric and psychologic aspects.

Screening of applicants for civil service positions, particularly those where public safety is at issue, is a delicate. onerous, and necessary task. On the one hand, extreme concern is directed at the stability of those authorized to use guns and to exercise power or force; on the other, doubts frequently have been raised about arbitrary, dishonest, or manipulated rejection of applicants for government positions. The civil service systems evolved partially to correct the latter abuses. This article describes a system that has evolved to balance conflicting needs. To my knowledge, it is unique in the United States and therefore may serve as a prototype, if in fact the procedures described are shown to be of merit. Two earlier papers have discussed the initiation of this program in New Jersey .1.2 While the attributes of an ideal policeman may be arguable. certain personality traits may be recognized as potentially troublesome in police effectiveness. A variety of publications have dealt with the problems of police effectiveness or particular problems confronting police officers.:l-10 Few applicants demonstrate the gross pathology exhibited by psychotic, severely neurotic, brain-damaged or retarded persons; personality disturbances and behavior problems including drug and alcohol abuse are common. More broadly, marked immaturity, poorly controlled aggressiveness, unmodulated hostility, inappropriate biases, and unacceptable behavior problems or defective past functioning, including inadequate function in related paramilitary or military work, are clearly related to potential performance. However, reliance on evaluation of potential adverse traits as a basis for rejection for employment in the public sector has been the source of much conflict. The fact that there is room for legitimate disagreement or differences of opinion also should be stressed. New Jersey is a state in which numerous public positions on a local level are governed by civil service law. The vast majority of jurisdictions (at least two-thirds) appoint police officers according to such procedures. An even higher proportion of actual appointments (at least 90 percent) is controlled by such law, as all the major cities with their large number of appointments conform to such policies. Those that do not are usually small towns in which appointments are made through whatever system the local authorities wish to adopt. When a public authority is under civil service law, it may create guidelines for appointment that conform to state rules. Applicants may be rejected for poor work record, fraudulent application, criminal record,