•  
  •  
 

Emory International Law Review

Michael Harel

Abstract

Policing people with mental illness (PWMI) presents a persistent global challenge. Although PWMI do not have a greater propensity for violence, they are disproportionately killed during police encounters. Using Australia as a case study, this Comment argues that use-of-force laws are inadequate in these situations because they defer excessively to officer discretion—failing to account for how officers often escalate encounters with PWMI by neglecting appropriate crisis-response tactics or by misperceiving PWMI behavior as violent, even when that behavior reflects mental health symptoms rather than actual threats. Current legal standards often excuse such perceptions, but properly trained officers should be expected to recognize and respond to these encounters differently.

While progressive reforms, such as co-responder models and enhanced officer training, have been adopted in some jurisdictions, they have proven insufficient in the absence of enforceable legal duties. In federal systems like Australia and the United States, reform is further complicated by the challenge of standardizing crisis-response practices across jurisdictions.

This Comment proposes that disability law—specifically, the legal duty to provide reasonable accommodations—offers a promising and enforceable framework to address these accountability gaps and incentivize improved police training and crisis response practices. Through an analysis of the Australian and U.S. legal systems, and an assessment of international disability law, this Comment argues for the development of an international model framework. To address the systemic misinterpretation of PWMI behavior by law enforcement, it further recommends that courts evaluate the reasonableness of accommodations during on-the-street arrests from the perspective of a reasonably trained officer in de-escalation and mental health response.

Download

Share

COinS