The Mental Health of Royal Canadian Mounted Police Recruits: A Comment on Past and Present Attitudes and Evidence

Given the recently released Report of the Mass Casualty Commission (MCC), which held public hearings into the Portapique mass shooting in rural Nova Scotia in April 2020, the current research on the mental health of Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) recruits is timely.

The MCC, among its many recommendations, calls for sweeping changes to the present model of RCMP training, as well as changes to the overall structure and organization of the RCMP. As the Government of Canada looks to the MCC recommendations to make decisions on the future of the RCMP, research evidence, like that contained in these three reports, can help paint a picture of the state of well-being, psychological resilience, and overall mental health of recruits as they first enter the RCMP Cadet Training Program. This knowledge will be critical for deliberations that may result in sweeping changes to the RCMP's structure, training curriculum, and overall culture.

Previous research by this group has shown that there are significantly higher rates of mental disorders (i.e., ∼50% ¹ ) and suicidality (i.e., ∼13% ² ) among serving RCMP, compared to the Canadian General Population (i.e., ∼26% and 10%, respectively). By contrast, the current findings demonstrate that, when starting the Cadet Training Program, new recruits have, in fact, a lower prevalence of anxiety, depressive, and trauma-related mental disorders (based on clinical interviews), as well as a lower history of suicidality (suicidal ideation, planning, and attempts) than that seen in the Canadian General Population.

These results call into question beliefs that the high rates of mental disorders found among RCMP are due to problematic selection biases. This belief is based on an assumption that those Canadians choosing to serve in the RCMP are more likely to suffer a history of mental disorders than the general public. These new findings illustrate that this is not the case. If anything, those joining the RCMP are overall more psychologically healthy than the general public. Prior mental health status cannot explain the significantly higher rates of psychopathology and suicidality found among serving RCMP. This research therefore challenges any notions that more rigorous psychological screening at entry would help solve the problem of high rates of mental disorders among serving RCMP. It points instead to the need for greater understanding and attention to the occupational and life stressors that occur along the career paths of RCMP, which increase their risk for developing mental health problems. A deeper understanding of these factors will help to guide decisions for ameliorating the negative effects of an RCMP career, as well as help to inform decisions about the specific changes needed in the organization, like those being recommended in the MCC report.

Our legacy in western Psychiatry and Psychology is one of failing to recognize or often discounting, the sometimes devastating effects of experiencing potentially psychologically traumatic events during the course of one's work, usually by placing the responsibility for these devastating outcomes within the individual's personal psychological makeup.

In the early 1900s, popular beliefs about mental health were that individuals with mental disorders following psychologically traumatic experiences were suffering from a personal moral or neurological deficiency that left them lacking the capacity to function as upstanding citizens. These presumed deficiencies were believed to be an individual responsibility, rather than that of an employer or the state, and were usually believed to be permanent. This attitude became highlighted during wartime, when the need to recruit men to put their lives on the line for their country, became a priority.

During the First World War, as the “shell shock” casualties mounted, development of tests to “screen out” persons likely to develop mental health symptoms, became a priority. The Woodworth test was not developed in time for use during First World War, but was accepted afterwards by the UK Surgeon General for future use, even though the test was unable to discriminate between persons who would and would not develop posttraumatic symptoms. ³ Ironically, the indiscriminate Woodworth test formed the basis for almost all later personality tests, with some of the items from the original test still in use today. ⁴ Tests such as Army Alpha and Army Beta were used to rank and classify soldiers, but also included recommendations for discharging men deemed “inferior” or “deficient” based on their performance. ⁵ There were notions that deficiencies with intelligence indicated other mental deficiencies that would increase an individual's vulnerability to developing symptoms of what we now recognize as posttraumatic stress disorder.

Ultimately, as with the Woodworth test, attempts to use Army Alpha and Army Beta to screen out men, based on potential susceptibility to posttraumatic symptoms, proved fruitless. Despite this, the popularity of Army Alpha and Army Beta paralleled that of the Woodworth test, in that they were widely used, and the content and style of their questions became foundational for subsequent intelligence tests.

Throughout the two world wars and after, highly stigmatizing beliefs concerning psychological suffering on exposure to potentially psychologically traumatic events were promulgated by well-known figures in the Western medical world, such as Lord Moran, who as a young physician served during the First World War and famously, was Winston Churchill's doctor from 1941 until Churchill's death. Moran expressed a strong belief that men who showed psychological damage while serving in the war, in the absence of physical trauma or injury, were cowards. ⁶ He also claimed that men who were psychologically healthy before the war and undamaged physically during the war, could not experience adjustment problems after the war. ⁶ The label of cowardice carried strong social, professional and personal consequences. Malingering, often considered the consequence of cowardice, was not a matter that sat lightly with medical officers, who in the Canadian army were required to attend the executions of those they had diagnosed as malingerers. ⁷ Newly trained medical personnel were taught never to tell a soldier he had shell shock, for fear that he would become “complacent” in that diagnosis. ⁶ One account in an official government history of the Canadian medical services stated that “‘shell-shock’ was a manifestation of childishness and femininity. Against such there is no remedy.” ^{7 , p. 273}

Returning to contemporary Canada and the current research studies, the results under discussion reinforce that the problems in policing, and specifically with the RCMP, lie not with the prerecruitment “character,” “personality traits” or “mental health status” of police officers, but with what we ask of them during their years of service.

Are we providing members of the RCMP with the support that they need throughout their careers? We may not yet completely understand what are the best and most effective ways to support them, to help ensure that they suffer as little as possible from the lasting effects of repeated exposures to potentially psychologically traumatic events, as they continue to serve.

Further to the MCC Report, I found little in the report that acknowledges how the 2020 Portapique mass casualty event has impacted those members of the RCMP, and other police forces, who attended and attempted to intervene in the tragic events. This leaves me concerned that the suffering of those who are required to respond, in order to serve the rest of us during such tragic and devastating events, has been overlooked. How we treat those who serve us reflects our values as a society. We could be doing better—after all, we all depend on police officers to protect and serve our communities—and potential recruits are watching and learning what they can expect from us when they choose to serve. Is it any wonder that police recruitment is falling? Would you choose to serve? Would you support your son's or daughter's choice to serve? The rewards so far seem vanishingly small relative to the pervasively perilous requirements we place on our police. They stand on guard for us—do we for them?