Linda Taylor

This article addresses data privacy issues as they relate to multi-system collaborations for pre-arrest deflection into treatment and services for those suffering from a substance use disorder. The authors explore how the United States’ data privacy regulations pose barriers to collaboration and care coordination, as well as how data privacy regulations affect researchers’ ability to evaluate the impact of interventions intentioned to facilitate access to care. Fortunately, this regulatory landscape is evolving to strike a balance between protecting health information and sharing it for research, evaluation, and operations, including comments on the newly proposed federal administrative rule that will shape the future of deflection and health access in the United States.

This report describes findings from a multi-site evaluation of law enforcement deflection. The authors describe how six programs were implemented and identify key program facilitators and barriers. The authors conducted outcome analyses of two programs which included the A Way Out Program in Lake County, Illinois.

The U.S. overdose crisis has motivated police departments to enact policies allowing officers to directly deflect individuals to substance use disorder treatment and other services shown to reduce recidivism and subsequent overdose risk, as well as refer people who voluntarily present at police facilities with a desire for treatment. As a new way of operating, and one that relies on an officer’s use of discretion for successful implementation, the practice benefits from guidance through written directives, training, and supervisory support. However, there is little information on the establishment, content, and execution of police department deflection policies, which hampers the implementation and dissemination of this promising practice. We analyzed 16 policies of Illinois police department deflection programs. Using content analysis methodology, we coded the policies for language and terminology, as well as program components and procedures. We aimed to examine how the policies were written, as well as the content intending to guide officers in their work. We found the policies and programs had notable differences in length, detail, terminology, and reading level. Only one policy mentioned the use of any type of addiction treatment medication, many used stigmatizing language (e.g., “abuse” and “addict”), and few mentioned “harm reduction” or training in the practice of deflection. Many policies restricted participation in deflection (i.e., no minors, outstanding warrants, current withdrawal symptoms), and critically, a majority of policies allowed police officers to exclude people from participation based on their own judgment. We recommend police departments consider the readability of their policies and reduce barriers to deflection program participation to engage a larger pool of citizens in need of substance use disorder treatment. Since there is limited research on police policies generally, and the field of deflection is relatively new, this study offers insight into the content of different department policies and more specifically, how officers are directed to operate deflection programs.