I Am Tired of Hearing

I Am Tired of Hearing, "We Can’t Share That Information, as They Are Not Sworn.”

By: Jim Morrissey, MA, EMT-P,
ALCO EMS Disaster and Terrorism Preparedness Coordinator,
Medical Health Operational Area Coordinator, FBI Tactical Paramedic

Intelligence related information dissemination/sharing has been identified as a major problem in effective terrorism and crime prevention, preparedness and response. The 9/11 Commission recommended that: “Information procedures should provide incentives for sharing, to restore a better balance between security and shared knowledge.”

Information sharing and dissemination has improved within the law enforcement community in the years following 9/11. There has been a shift from the old adage, “need to know”, to one of “need to share.” The problem is there is still a distrust of the non-sworn community from those that are sworn. This has to change if we want to effectively prepare for and respond to any kind of significant emergency situation whether it is man-made or naturally occurring.

There is clearly a “pecking order” in terms of intelligence information sharing and it goes something like this:
• Top Secret (there are higher clearances and “add-ons”)
• Secret
• Sworn
• Non-sworn – government
• Non-sworn – civilian

For one to have a U.S. Government Secret or Top Secret clearance requires a significant background check, many interviews, records verification and several months of detailed investigation on that individual. That makes sense to me. What is less clear is what does being “sworn” mean. According to one source, the definition or sworn is, "Bound or empowered by an oath". OK, we all take oaths; marriage, religious, healthcare and even with friends. Are some oaths more meaningful or real than another? Does being sworn imply a detailed background check? The answer is sometimes yes, and sometimes no.

I have heard many times over the years the statement something to the effect, “we can’t share that information with them because they are not sworn.” This statement, or similar, coming from both law enforcement officers and fire fighters regarding the sharing of “sensitive” information to members of the medical and health community.

For some reason I only hear this statement from those that are "sworn". I can only conclude that statement is made so one can clearly delineate those that are trustworthy of receiving sensitive information from those that are not. What other meaning could it be?

It is as if taking an oath automatically prevents a sworn individual from breaking the law, leaking sensitive information, violating some code of ethics, or some other act that would be deemed in violation of the oath they took.

One only needs to read any news paper on any given day to see this is a ridiculous assumption. There are plenty of cops, firefighters, and even solders who are busted for incredibly serious offences such as child pornography, extortion, rape and more. Lesser offences include theft, embezzlement, running gambling or prostitution rings, selling drugs; you name it, it goes on.

And as far as leaking sensitive information, come on now, we all know that anywhere up and down the chain, this is commonplace.

Don't get me wrong. I am a strong law enforcement supporter. I use to be a cop and I have been a federal law enforcement contractor for over 20 years. I hold all of the emergency response community in high regard with the premise that an individual is deemed trustworthy until proven otherwise. Even if an individual violates that trust that does not mean that the entire discipline he or she represents is suspect.

I don't like the arbitrary line of sworn vs. not. And I have to admit that those kind of statements such as, "well, they are not sworn" get under my skin. I have a higher Department of Justice security clearance than just about any cop or firefighter in the country, and I am not sworn. Doctors, nurses, pre-hospital care providers, public health officials, most emergency operations center personnel are not sworn in the same way that cops and firefighter are. Does that make them less trustworthy? I think not.

Trust can and should be built through relationships, usually developed over years and through positive interactions. Trust is something that one earns and fosters, and respects. Working in discipline specific "silos" inhibits the development of trust. The entire emergency response community needs to be more thoroughly integrated and unified. While some might argue these “silos” are actually “cylinders of excellence”, I disagree. Isolation and turf protection lead to distrust, and even distain for those not part of that group. It also sets up a “we are better than they are” mentality. Clearly, this is not helpful in a significant emergency situation that requires coordination and cooperation.

Solutions: Joint training, drills, exercises and unified planning for real events is critical for success. Large full scale exercises such as Urban Shield www.urbanshield.org , sponsored by the Alameda County Sheriff's Department support the concept of respect, team work and multi-discipline coordination. The Alameda County Sheriff’ Department has done an outstanding job in reaching out to the fire, EMS and medical/health community as equal partners. The Sheriff’s Department embraces the concept of fire, EMS and law enforcement as an “interdependent triad”; much like a three legged stool, where all pieces need to be fully engaged and integrated that will lead to success. By the way, I have never heard, “well they are not sworn”, from an Alameda County Sheriff’s Department member.
In conclusion, it is high time that this arbitrary line of sworn vs. non-sworn be replaced by cooperation, coordination, respect and a commitment to share appropriate information with the appropriate individuals and disciplines. The shift to “need to share” will lead to better planning and response for all of the emergency response disciplines.

Related Article: Banking on Defensive Tactics
There is one mantra in Law Enforcement Defensive Tactics training circles that seems to be universal. The mantra is this: “It’s not a question of if you will be involved in a serious altercation on the street but rather just a question of when.”

Related Article: Tactical Emergency Family Responses
It’s the weekend and you’re off-duty with a family at your favorite restaurant dealing with both the dessert menu and the heartburn brought on by your 15-year old daughter who thinks that getting a tattoo of her latest boyfriend’s name across her lower back would be awesome. Then as you turn and slowly shake your head you notice that the cashier is getting robbed at gunpoint.

Related Article: Getting the Point: The Knives We Carry and Why
Let’s face it, these days folding clip-on knives are as much a part of our duty uniform as ball point pens. While neither is issued both are everyday practical and useful tools on the job.

Related Article: Over Your Head D-T
You think defensive tactics are tough enough on dry land- try fighting someone in water!
Thirty five Law Enforcement Officers and associated personnel from Washington, Idaho, and Oregon recently had the opportunity to do just that and more at the 4th Annual Arrestling Officer Safety Conference in Shelton, Washington. Under the eyes and instruction from Troopers Kevin Forrester and Ryan Spurling those in attendance were taken through a series of both practical and tactical water survival drills where getting in over your head took on a whole new meaning.

Related Article: Dispatches from the Donut Wars
I know an officer who doesn’t eat right or exercise. “What?” he said folding a slice of greasy pizza and wrapping a loose strand of mozzarella round the end. “My grave stone should read: ‘Jogged, worked out, ate friggin’ Tofu: Died anyway?’

Related Article: Enhanced Active Shooter Training: Taking it Up a Notch
Since the tragedy at Columbine in 1999 most departments have initiated some form of active shooter training. We all learned from that horrible tragedy and a change had to be made in police tactics when responding to these dynamic situations. Most departments in the country don’t have SWAT teams that are readily available and most can take up to an hour to arrive on a call.

2010 NEWS
Click the community links below to read the latest in first responder news

TACTICAL LAW ENFORCEMENT

FIREFIGHTING

EMS/MEDICAL

DISASTER

HOMELAND SECURITY

SPECIAL OPERATIONS

SAR

EMERGENCY NURSING

WILDLAND FIREFIGHTING

NEWSLETTER ARCHIVES