Fix Policing 1: Stop Policing Mental Health
More cities are shifting to a 'non-police response' for non-threatening mental health and homelessness issues.
Police officers are trained in high speed driving. And the safe use of lethal weapons. Police officers don’t typically receive a lot of training in how to respond with care, particular when mental health or homelessness issues are involved.
But we’re learning that the best response to managing mental health and homelessness issues is to respond with care.
Safer alternative response
More and more cities have been using safer alternative responses for non-threatening calls related to mental health and homelessness.
Rather than a police response, crisis teams of social workers and outreach staff are sent. These teams are trained in working with people living on the street. Or people experiencing episodes of mental illness.
It’s a different type of training, and frankly, better suited to dealing with the situation at hand. If an individual is a threat to themselves or others, police are part of the response.
Cities at the forefront
Eugene, Oregon is seen as the pioneer in alternative response with its CAHOOTS (Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets) program. For over 30 years, CAHOOTS has sent crisis workers and medics to handle non-violent situations involving mental health, homelessness and substance abuse. Operating on a small fraction of the city’s public safety budget, CAHOOTS resolves nearly 20% of all emergency calls without involving the police.
Denver launched its STAR (Support Team Assisted Response) program in 2020. San Francisco and Austin, Texas have also adopted non-police responses.
Canada is seeing a shift toward non-police crisis responses. The Toronto Community Crisis Service dispatches unarmed crisis workers to non-violent mental health emergencies. The service, designed to reduce police involvement, responded to over 2,000 calls in its first six months.
In Vancouver, the Car 87 program pairs a plain clothes police officer with a mental health nurse to respond to mental health-related calls. While still involving police, the presence of a health professional helps de-escalate situations and ensures that individuals receive appropriate care.
Ottawa is the latest city to launch a non-police response. It’s ANCHOR program (Alternative Neighbourhood Community Response) launched in mid-August.
Cheaper and more effective
The call for safer, more effective responses to mental health and homelessness crises has grown louder in recent years. Traditional police interventions can escalate tensions and even lead to tragic outcomes. Cities are exploring non-police responses that offer compassionate care and reduce the burden on law enforcement.
One of the biggest advantages of non-police responses is their cost-effectiveness.
Traditional police responses are expensive, requiring multiple officers, vehicles, and often leading to costly legal settlements when situations go wrong.
CAHOOTS runs on about US$2.1m annually, while the Eugene Police Department’s budget exceeds $70m. Despite its smaller budget, CAHOOTS handles a significant portion of the city’s emergency calls, freeing up police resources for situations where they are truly needed.
In San Francisco, city officials redirected $120 million from the police budget over two years to fund social services, including non-police crisis teams.
Still not widely used
More cities could benefit from a non-police response. There has been resistance from police unions, who see these programs as a threat to jobs and funding.
The deep-seated belief in police as the default responders to all emergencies makes it challenging to shift public opinion and political will.
Who pays?
Alternative responses work. They provide a broader approach to public safety, addressing root causes rather than relying solely on the criminal justice toolkit available to law enforcement. And they are more cost effective than a police response.
The only real debate now is “who pays for it?”
The case can be made that, with a safer alternative response program, cities are relieving the police of certain duties and so funds should move out the police budget to pay for that response.
Police services will argue that any freed-up resources could be redeployed to other policing jobs.
It’s a political choice. Are City Councils willing to take on the powerful police lobby to fund alternative responses, or do they prefer to keep police budgets intact for use on other public safety priorities?
Non-police response works. And it’s a lot cheaper. It’s just a case of how cities will figure out how to pay for them.