 |
|
Welcome to our mid-summer newsletter. I hope that you are enjoying the season, staying cool, and able to take some time off at some point. We recently brought everyone on our team together for our annual CRA Associates Case Conference, which gives us all a chance over a two-day period to meet and discuss our casework and new developments in the field - and to generally just learn from each other. It's a very rewarding (and fun) time for us.
In this newsletter, I want to introduce our newest associate, Dr. Heather McElroy, who will be addressing one of her many specialties: the Psychological Fitness for Duty Exam. This is a critical topic, as there may be some misunderstanding at times as to how this may differ from our core service of threat assessment.
But first let me introduce Heather for those who have not yet had a chance to work with her. Heather has a great deal of experience in
threat assessment, fitness for duty evaluations and crisis negotiations
, primarily through her work
as Vice President and managing partner of Stone McElroy Associates, one of CRA's strategic partners. In addition to this work, she is a Board-Certified Police and Public
Safety Psychologist, a sworn Reserve Police Officer, and past
chair of the International Association of Chiefs of Police Psychological Services Section. Needless to say, Heather brings a wealth of experience to CRA and has been a great addition to our team.
I hope that you find these newsletters informative. As always, please feel free to contact us at any time - and to suggest any subjects that you would like for us to cover.
Marc McElhaney, Ph.D.
CEO & Director of Professional Services
|
What is a Psychological Fitness for Duty (and when is it appropriate)?
The most effective means by which to manage an employee's behavioral problems is through a swift response, whether that be communication with your threat management team if you have concerns about safety, and/or through disciplinary actions if
policies have been violated. However, there are times in which the
 |
|
|
Heather McElroy
|
organizati
on may de
termine that there is evidence to suggest that the employee could be suffe
rin
g from the effects of a mental impairme
nt. Further, the organization may
then decide, bas
ed on a review of the available options, to have the employee underg
o a psychological
fitness for duty evaluation (FFDE).
What is a FFDE? A psychological FFDE is a formal, specialized examination of an employee that results from (1) objective evidence
that the employee may be unable to safely or
effectively perform a defined job and (2) a reasonable
basis for believing that the cause may be attributable to a psychological impairment.
The central purpose of an FFDE is to determine whether the employee can safely and effectively perform his or her essential job functions. The examiner will interview the employee, administer relevant tests, consider all available data from the company (and perhaps other collateral sources), and will make his or her decision in concert with their understanding of the employee's assigned job duties. This is a process that seeks a medical diagnosis, unlike threat assessment, which is not a medically diagnostic process and which looks specifically at the risk of harm. Psychological FFDE is a very specialized type of psychological evaluation and should only be conducted by someone with expertise in that area.
The examiner will generally come to one of 3 conclusions: 1) the employee is fit to return to work without accommodations, 2) the employee is not currently fit to return to work, or 3) the employee can return but under certain conditions or accommodations. Typically, the examiner can then assist the employer with developing and implementing a return to work plan that requires the employee to undergo appropriate treatment to restore or maintain their psychological fitness.
When deciding whether or not to conduct an FFDE, both the employer and examiner should take into account its potential usefulness and appropriateness given the specific circumstances, and the employer should consider whether other remedies (e.g., education, training, discipline, physical FFDE) might be more appropriate or useful instead of, or in addition to, a psychological FFDE. A psychological fitness for duty is often NOT recommended in the case that an employee has violated policy and has not indicated that they are experiencing a psychological issue. It is also not recommended as a means by which to "get rid of" an employee, but should rather act as a means by which to gather additional information to determine if and how the employee might be able to be restored to fitness, as a potential opportunity to salvage an otherwis
e good employee.
If the employee is found to be unfit, then he or she is generally placed on a disability status until their condition is medically or psychologically treated, to the point that they recover their ability to carry out their job duties. Unfortunately, there are some cases where an employee is not able to be accommodated and may not be likely to improve sufficiently (i.e., someone who has suffered a head injury and is exhibiting permanent and significant memory impairment). In those cases, the employer may want to work closely with their psychological consultant to determine how to best navigate the next steps.
If you have concerns about an employee or are wondering if a psychological fitness for duty is the most appropriate option, consulting with your threat assessment team and your psychological consultant should be the first step. As with all decisions involving a poten
tial risk, this should be carefully considered and managed in concert with your human resource, legal and security teams.
Heather McElroy, Ph.D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
