JCPSLP Vol 21 No 1 2019

The role of speech-language pathologists in the justice system

Creating communication accessible frontline police services Georgia Burn, Hilary Johnson, Barb Solarsh, Denise West, Katie Lyon, and Mark Nichols

The aim of this research was to determine the current knowledge of uniform police at one 24-hour police station regarding people with communication disabilities, in order to implement effective communication strategies, and award the Communication Access Symbol. Twenty-nine frontline uniform police from one police station responded to a paper-based survey that probed the frequency of their interactions with people with a communication disability and their knowledge of communication strategies. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data were analysed thematically. Results indicated that although the majority of respondents were experienced police who frequently faced difficulties in interactions, they had limited communication strategies and had received little or no training in using visual supports. The results from the survey informed the communication strategies that speech language pathologists will employ to address the barriers police face in initial interactions with community members with communication disabilities. C ommunication is fundamental to effective access to justice. As 1.2 million Australians are estimated to have communication disabilities, defined as the limited ability to understand or be understood (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2017), these people are multiply disadvantaged when interacting with the justice system (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2013). People with developmental communication disabilities (King & Murphy, 2014; Snow, Bagley, & White, 2018) or acquired communication disabilities (Morris, Ferguson, & Worrall, 2014) experience negative social attitudes and marginalisation in society, with these aspects magnified when attempting to engage with the justice system. People with communication disabilities frequently encounter the criminal justice system as victims (Bornman, 2017; Bornman, White, Johnson, & Bryen, 2016; Bryen, Carey, & Frantz, 2009) or as offenders (Parsons & Sherwood,

2016a, 2016b). People with intellectual disability are overrepresented (Jacobson, 2008) in the justice system, and this may be in part due to difficulties with comprehension, expression, reading and/or understanding documentation (Parsons & Sherwood, 2016b). People with complex communication needs (who may use augmentative and alternative communication [AAC] aids) are an identified vulnerable population, who experience multiple victimisation and who underreport crime (Bryen, Carey, & Frantz, 2009). In addition, people without disabilities but who are from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds (CALD) too may experience communication difficulties and consequent barriers in accessing policing services and legal information (Victorian Law Foundation, 2016). The Australian Human Rights Commission (2014) stresses the importance of improving the “initial interaction” with the justice system, which for many community members, is with the police. Police confidence, their knowledge and skills can have a direct and significant impact on a person’s trajectory (or lack thereof) into the justice system (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2014; Modell & Mak, 2008; Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission, 2014a). There is currently an expectation of police to understand and identify people with a range of communication disabilities and difficulties, implement reasonable adjustments, and respond appropriately, in the absence of adequate training or qualification (Henshaw & Thomas, 2012; Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission, 2014a). This presents a number of challenges for police; however, the extent of this challenge is unknown, as limited data exists regarding the frequency of police interactions with people with a communication disabilities (Victoria Police 2017). Consequently, the focus of this study is to investigate the frequency and communication accessibility of policing services for people with communication disabilities. The authors also recognise that people may experience communication difficulties without having a disability, and may also benefit from interventions resulting from this study. To date, fragmented communication strategies with speech-language pathologist (SLP) involvement have been trialled to support police interactions with varying levels of success. Strategies have included: communication and disability training for police (Viljoen, Bornman, Wiles, & Tönsing, 2017); implementation of specific vocabulary sets for people with complex communication needs to talk about abuse and neglect in order to independently report crime (Collier, McGhie- Richmond, & Odette, 2006; Weston,

KEYWORDS AUGMENTATIVE AND ALTERNATIVE COMMUNICATION COMMUNICATION ACCESS COMMUNICATION DISABILITY JUSTICE POLICE THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN PEER- REVIEWED

Georgia Burn (top), Hilary

Johnson (centre) and Barb Solarsh

19

JCPSLP Volume 21, Number 1 2019

www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au